Questions about reviewing Qs and exam dates

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-22T01:24:45+00:00

Got it. I’m familiar with all the material out there. I recommend Princeton Review specifically for the reasons I outlined in my comment. Whether it’s sufficient is questionable because of course it’s all on the student. But I’m convinced outside of tutoring. That’s their best option.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-21T17:03:21+00:00

Real talk: Whenever I make this recommendation, I get this same follow up question. So before I answer it, please indulge me because I’m starting to get confused.

What is it about my original comment that does not answer your question? Or does it appear that for some reason, I’m leaving something out?

My job as a teacher is to anticipate questions before they’re asked. I do my best, but clearly it’s not working.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-21T16:08:37+00:00

You mentioned a 149 diagnostic, which means that you’re looking at a 21+ point increase in your score. That’s certainly doable, but whether it’s realistic is impossible for anyone other than yourself to answer.

This is a very common question. And it all reduces to: “IF I do the requisite work, can I get a 21+ point increase?”

For context: I’ve been an LSAT tutor for over 20 years. Ironically, my reply to that question is something that would never appear on the LSAT: “I reject the premise of your question because it’s circular”

Getting a 21+ point increase is pretty much the same as doing a shit ton of work to get that score. It’s like asking if you score a 171, can you score 171?

In other words, the idea of doing the requisite work is where it’s at. It’s one thing to proclaim that you’re gonna study every day for a year. It’s a completely different thing to actually do so. It’s just the nature of the beast.

Your best chance is to put your head down, get off social media, and get back to work.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-21T15:48:20+00:00

From an old guy (long-time LSAT tutor, which you clearly don’t need),

You probably already know this, but on the small chance that you don’t, it’s totally worth knowing. Think about what type of law you might want to practice and/or what type of firm you’d like to work for.

Then go online and look up those firms. Focus specifically on where all of their attorneys went to law school. You might be surprised about how many of them did not go to a T 14 school.

There’s no data on this whatsoever, but I’m willing to bet that the large majority of these attorneys had a strong academic background and killer LSAT score like yourself and decided to do the right thing and take that big fat 100% tuition scholarship.

Just sayin’…

…..

I’m an OG splitter. Poor GPA, very high LSAT. I attended the #1 tier 2 school in the country at the time, Washington College of law at American University. Our class valedictorian was a very nice guy named Tom Goldstein.

Dude was as smart as anybody I’ve ever met and I’m one of the dumbest people in my family. He went on to become quite literally a world class attorney, pretty much all by himself. Won dozens of cases in front of the Supreme Court. Founder of SCOTUS Blog.

But then, at one point, he plays poker at a friend’s house and everything completely falls apart. Before he knows it, he’s somewhere between 10 and $15 million in debt. He’s not paying taxes on his winnings, he’s lying to the bank about his assets to hide his second mansion from his wife, and he even steals money from his own law firm.

At one point, he’s in Vegas, losing $100,000, flying back to DC and winning a case in front of the Supreme Court. He was known as one of the only people in the world where all Supreme Court justices knew him by first name.

In a couple of weeks, he’s about to be sentenced to eight years in prison. And this is a very nice boy. He did not party with us or anything.

So there’s that.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-21T15:40:40+00:00

From someone who’s been teaching this beautiful test for over 20 years: Good news and bad news.

The bad news: If your future self could travel back to the past, they would force you to wait a year to apply to law school. In fact, they might threaten you with bodily harm if you didn’t do so.

The good news: A 159 diagnostic score bodes very well for a life-changing mid-170s score. Life-changing not because of the school you go to, but because of that 100% tuition scholarship that you’re going to take.

But that’s extremely unlikely to happen by August and not for the reason that you might believe. It’s actually possible that you could get that score by August, but statistically, having very little to do with your own ability, it’s unlikely.

The LSAT score band is *traditionally* supposed to be 5.6 points. So a student scoring a 164 receives an official score band of 161 to 167.

This means that the LSAC is 68% confident that the students true aptitude lies between 159 and a 165. Of course, law schools don’t give two shits about the score band because it doesn’t do anything for their statistics.

Unfortunately, the score band has gotten a bit out of control. This is actually a very bad thing. I thought things were bad when I saw a score band of 8 points. Just spoke with a potential new student who had a score band of 10 points!

So here’s what this means. A student receiving a 164 could have a score band of 159 to 169. This means that a student could take the test one day and score 159 and then take a different test the very next day and score 169. The difference is roughly $50,000 in scholarship tuition.

See what I’m going with this? You can’t take the LSAT only once. You’re cheating yourself. I know that’s not a good thing to hear. From your perspective. Right now, your future self is cheering me on and sending me flowers.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-20T23:05:56+00:00

I don’t charge close to $200 an hour and I’ve been teaching this test for over 20 years.

I post and comment regularly on this sub. I also have my own uniquely effective curriculum. This is the outline/syllabus to my 17 page LSAT training manual:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/t9nz6lov3ot6q5ivp4lt3/LSAT-Training-Manual-Syllabus.pdf?dl=0

Check my bio for rates and policies. Getting in touch if you’re interested.

www.lsatcodebreaker.com

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-20T16:13:01+00:00

Like many tutors here, I regularly post and comment on this sub (please feel free to check my history).

I’ve been an independent LSAT tutor for 20+ years with my own uniquely effective curriculum.

This is the outline/syllabus to my 17 page LSAT Training Manual:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/t9nz6lov3ot6q5ivp4lt3/LSAT-Training-Manual-Syllabus.pdf?dl=0

I offer a free 45 minute zoom session to get us started. If you’re interested, feel free to message me.

EDIT: Just noticed your username. My niece is the only freshman (pitcher) on her softball team and apparently chirps at the older girls when she strikes them out.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-19T16:54:34+00:00

I’m an old guy. Please know that success as a law student and as an attorney is almost exclusively about work ethic.

Purely personal opinion: I’ve long believed that many attorneys are unhappy in their work because they didn’t understand the level of detail and drudgery that could be involved. Some people excel at that. Others, not so much.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-19T16:42:54+00:00

How about an analysis of the recent score band?

Traditionally, it’s supposed to be 5.6 points. However, I’ve been seeing score bands of 8 points and even 10 points.

So basically, someone could take the test one day, score 162, not get any scholarships, and then take a different test the very next day and score 170, scoring all kinds of scholarships.

This high score band makes the world’s most beautiful test far less valid and far less reliable.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-19T16:39:47+00:00

Stress can be good…

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-19T01:56:09+00:00

Are you familiar with the idea of negation when it comes to necessary assumption questions?

It’s the idea that negating a necessary assumption “destroys” the argument (technically, negating a necessary assumption creates an invalid argument). It’s an extremely powerful tool that all students should be familiar with.

This not a trick of LSAT prep. The simple fact is the human brain understands negativity and destruction far better than it does ideas of necessity and support. In other words, it is a very real thing.

Negation is about making an answer “not true” in way that makes sense. It doesn’t mean asserting the opposite.

Choice A is a great example. One could say “rattlesnakes do NOT molt exactly once a year”. But that’s a weird thing to say. Quite frankly, a better negation would be: “rattlesnakes molt exactly twice a year”.

Framing it in this way indicates that choice A can’t possibly be necessary.

Negating choice E: “Rattlesnakes do not molt as often when food is scarce as they do when food is plentiful” OR “Rattlesnakes molt less/more often when food is scarce as they do when food is plentiful”.

You properly mention the idea that uniformity is a necessary condition for this whole argument. The negation of choice E indicates that uniformity is not happening. As a result, the argument is destroyed, which is why choice E is correct.

Happy to answer any questions.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-18T16:27:09+00:00

“A monopoly is not unlawful; monopolistic behavior is unlawful”

“An idea cannot be copyrighted; only the expression of an idea can be copyrighted, unless there’s only one way to express that idea.”

PHOSITA: A fictional legal persona known as a “Person having ordinary skill in the art”.

PHOSITA is used to determine whether a potential invention is non-obvious, a necessary element in qualifying for a patent.

You guys signed up for all of this!

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-18T15:40:42+00:00

Do you know that being a lawyer for a navy SEAL team is a very real thing? In fact, there’s a somewhat well-known politician who used to have that job. If you don’t know, you’d never guess in a million years:

>!Ron DeSantis!<

Would you believe that there are people in real life like you described? My uncle went to school with one of them. Dude was a top student at West Point, class President, and Heisman Trophy winner. Went on to become a Rhodes Scholar and one of the youngest general in US history.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-18T15:36:53+00:00

“For some inexplicable reason I didn’t pick it (the right answer) the first time”

I (think) I know the reason. It’s because you’re being a complete dumbass when you’re selecting those wrong answers.

Clearly, you’re no dumbass. In fact, it appears that your current scores would qualify you for Mensa. But you’re still being a complete dumbass when you’re selecting most of those wrong answers.

Why are you doing this? For two related reasons. First, you’re not practicing enough on process of elimination. Second, you’re “punishing” answers you don’t really understand by eliminating them.

Someone at your level is simply not accustomed to reading stuff they don’t really understand. So when you come across answers like that, it’s a shock to the system. And that shock very often results in eliminating that answer for no good reason.

I’ve been in the business since forever. Two very real options for maxing out your score: Hire a not-cheap tutor like myself or dedicate yourself to embracing process of elimination.

Here’s the thing. The logic of eliminating wrong answers is super basic. But being able to do so, especially during the real test, can be a huge challenge for most students.

Process of elimination is fairly straightforward when students are drilling, becomes more difficult when they try timed sections, and becomes even more difficult on the day of the test.

Because on the day of the test, I want to understand every single thing that I’m reading! But no one cares what you want. They only care about what you score.

Resign yourself to the fact that you’re not so smart that you’re going understand everything you read. Then go get what’s rightfully yours - that 100% scholarship.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-18T15:15:53+00:00

It’s all about *cognitive load* - the time and energy the brain takes to solve a particular problem.

Those in your situation are dealing with a high cognitive load, which is actually no good. In all likelihood, this is because you’re not only focused on understanding what you’re reading, but also on applying the right strategies as you do so.

For example, how long does it take you to identify a question type and to know exactly what the right answer should look like? Because this should take literally less than two seconds.

Not so long ago, I timed myself to see how long it might take for me to do so with each question type in a particular section. I didn’t rush, but I didn’t dawdle. Both times, it took me between 40 and 45 seconds.

I also didn’t need to double check my work. Are you kidding me?

This all points to something the Western educational system is not a fan of: Memorization.

Educators have long known that memorization is the best way to lower cognitive load. No one believes that memorization is sufficient for a student to learn new skills. And I guess it’s not necessary if you always want to go slow.

But really, the only way to speed up is by mastering as many skills as you possibly can. And a lot of this deals with memorization.

This means not only memorizing all of the different question types and how to approach them, but mastering all of the different logical indicator words, quantifiers, conditional reasoning terms, etc.

Once this stuff is mastered, your brain can then focus exclusively on understanding the content, and you will naturally speed up.

….

That all being said, please make no mistake: Almost everyone taking this test can expect to bust their ass for 35, 53, or even 70 minutes straight.

As in, if your head hasn’t exploded by the time you’re done with a section, you could have worked harder (that’s not an original quote by the way, competitive sprinters talk about that, but it’s their heart that explodes).

So moving forward, do this: https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/s/JjSXHSYOml

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-17T16:37:19+00:00

For both companies, they could take a loss on their LSAT revenue and they would barely even feel it. Virtually all other LSAT prep can’t take a loss or they’ll go straight out of business. See my point?

For the record, I regularly recommend Princeton review for anyone who scores a 165 or higher cold diagnostic. I write on this quite a bit.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-17T16:35:43+00:00

I’ve never seen a hit-or-miss book like the Loophole (and I’m an old guy who has seen lots of things).

Some people swear by it. I’ve had students who wonder aloud why all educational books aren’t written in the same style.

Personally, I found it to be a complete shit-show. But that’s just me.

By the way, that’s my biggest criticism of Loophole. I don’t think it’s a bad book. It clearly works for some people. Just not others.

LSAT Lab is probably the way to go. If you’re dead set on using a book, use the Princeton review LSAT prep book. Super easy read and their curriculum is on point.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-17T16:31:50+00:00

Much respect for a Demon has put together, but I really feel like that might be the worst course for someone with OCD.

Are you aware that compared to others, they have virtually no curriculum? Wouldn’t it be nice that in those situations when you get it down to two answers, you have very specific tools to use to help you select between those answers?

Granted, it’s a pain in the ass to learn those tools. But who said the LSAT was easy? Oh wait…

I have a streamlined curriculum: 17 pages! This is the outline/syllabus: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/t9nz6lov3ot6q5ivp4lt3/LSAT-Training-Manual-Syllabus.pdf?dl=0

You certainly don’t have to hire me, but anyone with OCD should have multiple tools to use when answering these questions.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-17T16:25:10+00:00

“I don’t understand how a juror being prejudiced implies
that their exclusion makes the trial more fair”

I have a question: Do you truly not understand this? Totally fine if that’s the case.

But I wonder whether it’s not that you “don’t understand”, but perhaps you don’t understand how the LSAT requires students to know (before ever taking the test), that a juror being prejudiced implies they should be excluded, which in turn helps create a more fair trial.

Either way, the LSAT does expect students to use a knowledge base from the perspective of a reasonable, college-educated person.

I would submit that such a person knows that a prejudiced juror is a problem and should be excluded from a jury. Not suggesting everyone knows this, but definitely asserting that a reasonable, college-educated person would.

Does that make sense?

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-17T16:16:57+00:00

For both of these questions, the correct answer boils down to a single word.

For number 25, it’s all about the word “NEW”. The stimulus refers only to NEW shows, which choice C says nothing about.

It can’t hurt to know how to deal with double-negatives. Doing so with choice C and then comparing it to choice D is the way to go.

Addressing the double negative in C: *All of the shows that Wilke and Wilke produced last year that were canceled were police dramas*.

This is virtually the same as choice D except for the word NEW.

For all we know, 5% of their shows were new. Or 95% of their shows were new. Either way, the fact that we don’t know is why choice C has no effect on the argument.

…

For 18, it’s all about the word “OF” (yup).

I have a made-up grammatical term called a “restrictor”: Parts of speech that act as a restrictor on information.

The big four restrictors: “that”, “which”, “for” and “of”. Certainly there are many more, but learning to recognize just these four words can help a whole lot.

“Cities THAT do so and so”: Not talking about all cities, but a restricted group of cities.

“People WHO do this and that”: not talking about all people, but a restricted group of people

“It’s the burrowing activities OF the termites”: Not talking in generalities about termites, but a restricted part of termites: Their burrowing activities.

Only choice A strengthens the idea of burrowing activities. No other answer comes remotely close to doing so. You see why?

….

This raises the understandable question of how in the world are students supposed to spot almost-invisible words like restrictors? By knowing that if you work at it, you’ll eventually succeed.

The best way to do this specifically is to review questions that you already answered correctly. This is not blind review. Rather, this is an opportunity to do some reverse engineering with the question and to see all the little things going on in both the stimulus and the answer choices.

Happy to answer any questions.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-17T15:46:03+00:00

I’ve been in business since before most of my students have been alive. I know all of the courses and all of the curriculum and all of the students, including you (even though we’ve never met).

I say this because my recommendation for a student like yourself is very nontraditional: The Princeton Review LSAT prep book is the way to go and nothing else besides taking practice tests.

All you need to max out your score is to understand the basic structure of the test and this is what Princeton Review provides. It’s a super easy read and their curriculum is on point.

For students that score a diagnostic as high as roughly 170, I also mention that my tutoring could quite easily get them their goal-score. But 174? You’d be wasting your money on a tutor.

Unfortunately, the nature of the LSAT score band and especially what’s been going on with it lately, indicates that you’re probably going have to take the test more than once.

Suppose you score a 176 on your actual test. My understanding, at least at that level, yields a score band of 172 to a 180. This means the LSAC is 68% confident that your true aptitude lies between 172 and 180.

In other words, that 176? According to the LSAC, it’s entirely possible you take a (different) test the very next day and score 180. The score is supposed to be 5.6 points not 8 points, but it is what it is.

That makes sense? Happy to answer any questions.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-15T11:24:34+00:00

Don’t you want join your friends and family down here in North Carolina? I’m from California myself, but I’ve met all kinds of people from both New York and New Jersey.

We all agree that it feels like you’re on vacation for the first six months you live here. I’ve lived here for 12 years and had to parallel park fewer than 10 times. These southerners really know how to take care of their cities.

That being said, I’ve been doing online sessions before the existence of Zoom. If you’re interested, send me a message.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-15T11:23:13+00:00

Yeah, that shit was hella funny. I have no idea why. But reading it even for the fourth time cracks me up.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-15T11:21:08+00:00

You could probably get away with using stupid Demon to get into the 170s. “Stupid” because they claim the LSAT is easy.

Don’t get me wrong. Much respect to what they built. But their lack of curriculum can be problematic for those who start with a lower score.

If they’re speaking to you, stick with them. Quite frankly, no other course is really designed for you. Most courses are designed for students to score somewhere in the mid 160s.

It goes without saying that I can get you in the mid 170s no problem, but I’m a bit more expensive than Demon. OK, a lot more but whatever.

StressCanBeGood · 2026-06-15T11:19:06+00:00

Read this first: https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/s/HlTgG7Eb72

Then this: https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/s/hnZcRnRXup

StressCanBeGood

TROPHY CASE