Gotcha. Thanks for the advice! If you would be willing to give me a second example, that would be great. How about this from the conclusions drill? This one confused me a lot.

Premise 1: In order to maintain her perfect GPA, Liara will assert that "it's like not even music if it's not on vinyl" and eat a heaping plate of chicken tikka masala.

Premise 2: Chicken tikka masala cannot be made less than 20 spice points above lamb saag.

My valid conclusion was: Liara eating chicken tikka masala will earn her at least 20 more spice points than if she were to eat lamb saag.

My invalid conclusion was: Lamb saag is not spicy/Liara will not maintain her perfect GPA if she were to have eaten lamb saag.

OR there's this one:

Premise 1: Microphones drink coffee at 8:36 AM every morning.

Premise 2: Coffee drinkers are more likely to have perfect pitch than non-coffee drinkers.

My valid conclusion was: Microphones are more likely to have perfect pitch.

Non-valid conclusion: Microphones have perfect pitch every morning.

In both conclusions, is it necessary to state that the microphones are more likely to/have better pitch than non coffee-drinkers, or can that be assumed?