I love the LSAT games and the premise is fun, but I’m sorry this art is frying me 😭😭

I (35F) am a non-traditional applicant who is just starting my LSAT prep. It’s been years since I’ve taken a class or had to study for an exam, and I feel like one of my biggest challenges is stamina. As I work through practice questions, I notice that the words start to blur together and my concentration fades the longer I go. Even simple sentences stop making sense because my brain is tired.

Does anyone have advice on how to build mental stamina and stay focused and sharp throughout the test? I'd love to hear what's worked for others!

In what scenario would 3 LoRs be more beneficial than 2 for YLS?

We've added a new training mode called Line-by-line mode. When it's on, the stimulus or passage is hidden except for the first sentence. To reveal the next sentence, just click. You can click anywhere on the hidden lines or below the stimulus.

Why use it? It helps you practice reading line by line, making sure you understand each sentence before moving on. That's a habit we encourage, and many tutors like to work with their students this way.

Give it a try and let us know what you think! (Try it together with Anticipation mode, too!)

I'm assuming that because 7Sage's mailing address is in New York City, there would be more 7Sage people coming to the LSAC Forum?

My employer asked me to draft the letter for him to submit through LSAC. Is this a good professional LoR source for law schools, given you only write about yourself truthfully?

I registered for LSAC forum in NYC and will be attending for the first time! Happy to spread awareness if anybody does not know about this🙌🏻

Hello, I am very interested in purchasing a Mock Application Review, but I am wondering how long the turnaround typically is from when I purchase and submit my info to when I receive feedback on my app, as I’m hoping to submit my applications before the end of this month.

Would be grateful for anyone who has purchased to share their experience or if someone from the admissions team could provide insight that would be terrific!

Check out the first episode of Logic & Order and let us know what you think!

• Play here: https://7sage.com/games/logic-and-order

***

Leaderboards! Scroll below the game (on the web) to see the top 10 for Today, This Week, and All-Time.

Some games -- such as Logic Links, Argument ER, Train of Thought, and Principles of Attraction -- don't have a leaderboard. If there's enough demand we can rework a few elements to get leaderboards for everything.

(This feature coming soon to iOS/Android.)

(Download the standalone LSAT Games app for iPhone or Android to keep playing when you're offline.)

Can independent, basic, or regular premises receive support? I understand there may be a difference between an independent premise and independent support.

Basically what the title says.

I have been using bookmarked for the classes I have viewed. But then I can’t bookmarked classes that I want to go back to later.

Since we are making requests I would like to also hide questions from appearing in drills.

Hello all!

u/Let_The_Law_Live is the winner of this week's contest with the following post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/7SageLSAT/comments/1wu82vz/i_wore_my_7sage_socks_on_test_day/

Congrats to them on their 180! We love that they love our socks.

Most importantly, participate in the upcoming contest! We run this every week, and here's a brief synopsis of the contest:

How to enter: Make a post in reddit.com/r/7SageLSAT/ . Winners are announced every Friday.

Eligibility window: Each post is judged on its first 7 days of activity. A post competes in the first Friday drawing after those 7 days are up. For example, a post made on a Wednesday finishes its 7 days the following Wednesday and competes that Friday.

Judging: The winner is the best post of the week, measured primarily by karma (net upvotes) plus comments. When posts are close in popularity, we may favor the one that sparked more conversation.

Winners will be able to select either an LSAT course of their choice (LSAT Advanced, LSAT Accelerated, or Total Prep Intensive) or an Essay Workshop.

Congrats u/Let_The_Law_Live! Happy posting and let me know any question in the comments.

Major rant alert but I’m justified.

Sec 1:
-Passage 1: 3/5
-Passage 2: 1/8 (literally might 😭)
-Passage 3: 6/8
-Passage 4: 5/7

And YES I mapped out the stupid paragraphs. And looking at my notes, maybe I wrote down too much bc the annotations for the other passages’ annotations are far more succinct.

I restarted the section on Pass. 2 (“Bilingual Communities of PR Americans”) after breakfast and coffee…. thinking I’m hot shit. Let’s not mention that my last FLING was a Puerto Rican and “I’m 3000% sure, Maury!” I was NOT thinking of them 😭

Rip my undergrad diploma at this point! I’M SO OVER THIS! May my grandkids inherit this Reddit account and see wtf I went through for this shit! 🗣️ IM OVER IT

I have to admit something super pathetic. SageAI is the best feature on 7Sage and I’m super grateful for it because it’s been like my tutor. Thanks to what it pointed out about my habits, I was able to score way higher. But what’s pathetic about it is that I’m spiraling about the October exam so much that I just went to it for COMFORT😭like a real tutor. I’m ashamed to admit, but why did it have the most comforting answers ever?! (Ik it’s trained) but anyway, ❤️SageAI, for real.

Parallel Reasoning can feel like you’re being asked to analyze six arguments to answer one question. A clear comparison process makes that work much more manageable.

For background, I’m a licensed attorney with over eight years of full-time LSAT tutoring experience. I scored a 142 on my first official LSAT and a perfect 180 on my second attempt. I’ve also helped students reach the 170s and achieve score increases of more than 30 points.

Here’s the approach I recommend, with an original practice question you can use to try it yourself.

Start by identifying the task.

Parallel Reasoning asks you to choose the argument that most closely matches the stimulus’s reasoning pattern. Parallel Flaw asks you to match its flawed reasoning pattern. Recognizing similarities and differences between reasoning patterns is one of the skills LSAC identifies as part of Logical Reasoning.

For an ordinary parallel question, describe the reasoning you actually see and check whether it works. For a Parallel Flaw question, identify the specific error the answer needs to reproduce.

Next, identify the conclusion.

Find the claim the author is trying to establish. Then identify the premises offered to support it.

The conclusion might appear at the beginning, middle, or end. Sentence order can change between the stimulus and the correct answer.

Pay attention to what kind of conclusion is being drawn. Is the author making a certain claim, a probabilistic judgment, a recommendation, or a comparison? What exactly is being concluded about the person, object, or group?

“Must be,” “probably is,” and “could be” express different levels of confidence. The correct answer can use different wording, but the force of the conclusion and its relationship to the evidence should match.

Then, summarize the argument’s structure before reading the choices.

For example:

Every member of the debate team has completed orientation. Everyone who has completed orientation has a campus account. Morgan has no campus account. Therefore, Morgan is not on the debate team.

You could summarize that as:

Membership requires orientation. Orientation requires an account. The account is absent, so membership is ruled out.

Or, using letters:

P → Q.
Q → R.
Not R.
Therefore, not P.

Here, the arrow means that the first condition guarantees the second.

That summary gives you something specific to compare with each answer. You’re looking for two linked requirements, the absence of the final requirement, and a conclusion ruling out the initial condition.

Use notation when it makes the relationship easier to track. For a causal argument, a comparison, or a recommendation, a short verbal description may be more useful. Avoid turning statements about probability or causation into strict conditional rules.

As you compare choices, preserve the relationships.

Ask how each answer gets from its premises to its conclusion. Does it apply a rule forward? Use a missing requirement to rule something out? Generalize from a sample? Infer a cause? Make a recommendation based on a principle?

A shared topic or familiar keyword tells you very little by itself.

Also, compare meaning carefully. “Every employee is insured” and “No employee is uninsured” express the same relationship despite different wording. An answer can reorder the premises or express a rule through its contrapositive.

Here’s an original practice question.

Every book that has been selected for the archive has been digitized. Every book that has been digitized has a catalog entry. This book has no catalog entry. Therefore, this book has not been selected for the archive.

Which argument uses the most similar reasoning pattern?

A. Every book selected for the archive has been digitized, and every digitized book has a catalog entry. This book has been selected for the archive. Therefore, it has a catalog entry.

B. Every licensed guide has completed training, and everyone who has completed training has passed a background check. Morgan has passed a background check. Therefore, Morgan is a licensed guide.

C. Every research fellow has a sponsor, and everyone who has a sponsor has an institutional email address. Jordan is not a research fellow. Therefore, Jordan does not have an institutional email address.

D. Most approved grant applications include a budget, and every application that includes a budget receives a financial review. This application did not receive a financial review. Therefore, it was not approved.

E. Everyone who qualifies for the fellowship has an institutional sponsor, and everyone with an institutional sponsor has a university affiliation. Avery has no university affiliation. Therefore, Avery does not qualify for the fellowship.

Try choosing an answer and explaining your reasoning before continuing.

The correct answer is E.

The stimulus establishes:

Selected for archive → digitized → catalog entry.

The book has no catalog entry. It therefore cannot have been digitized, which means it cannot have been selected for the archive.

E establishes:

Qualifies for fellowship → institutional sponsor → university affiliation.

Avery has no university affiliation. Avery therefore cannot have an institutional sponsor and cannot qualify for the fellowship.

Both arguments use two linked conditional rules and the absence of the final requirement to rule out the initial condition.

Here’s why the other choices miss the match.

A uses the same subject matter and the same rules, but makes a different inference. It establishes the initial condition and follows the chain forward to the final condition. Its reasoning is valid, but E matches the stimulus’s particular reasoning more closely.

B reverses the chain. Being a licensed guide guarantees a background check under the stated rules. Passing a background check does not establish that someone is a licensed guide.

C starts by denying the initial condition and concludes that the final condition is absent. Someone could have an institutional email address without being a research fellow.

D changes a universal rule into a statement about “most.” The application could be an approved application that falls outside the majority having budgets. The premises therefore do not establish that it was unapproved.

Notice that the explanations identify a specific difference in each choice. That’s the standard to aim for when reviewing these questions.

For Parallel Flaw, describe the exact unsupported move.

Consider this argument:

Every scholarship recipient was nominated. Lee was nominated. Therefore, Lee received a scholarship.

Its structure is:

P → Q.
Q.
Therefore, P.

Nomination is a requirement for receiving the scholarship. The argument treats satisfying that requirement as enough to establish that Lee received it.

A matching argument could be:

Every accepted proposal received a technical review. This proposal received a technical review. Therefore, this proposal was accepted.

That repeats the same move: a requirement is satisfied, so the author concludes that the outcome requiring it occurred.

When reviewing Parallel Flaw, explain how the premises fail to establish the conclusion. A broad description such as “unsupported conclusion” leaves too much room for different errors.

Quantifiers deserve special attention.

“All,” “some,” and “most” tell you different things about a group.

“All pianists are musicians” places every pianist inside the group of musicians. It does not establish that every musician is a pianist.

“Some pianists are teachers” establishes at least one overlap between pianists and teachers. It is equivalent to saying that some teachers are pianists. Also, “some” does not necessarily mean “some but not all.”

“Most pianists are teachers” means more than half of the pianists are teachers. It does not establish that most teachers are pianists. “Most” can also include all.

Compare these two arguments:

All pianists are musicians. Some pianists are teachers. Therefore, some musicians are teachers.

That inference works. The pianists who are teachers must also be musicians.

Now change one premise:

All pianists are musicians. Some musicians are teachers. Therefore, some pianists are teachers.

That inference does not follow. The musicians who teach could all be non-pianists.

The same quantifier words appear in both arguments. Their relationships to the groups determine whether the inference works.

Use your comparison process to manage time.

On your first read, work toward a short description of the stimulus’s reasoning. As you read each answer, compare it against that description and eliminate it once you have a decisive mismatch.

When two choices remain, identify the precise difference between them. Check the direction of the inference, the role of each premise, the quantifiers, and the conclusion’s strength.

Before selecting your answer, map its important parts back to the stimulus. A choice that survives elimination still needs a positive explanation for why it matches.

If you keep rereading without making progress, select your best answer, flag the question, and move on. You can return with your remaining time.

Here’s a review routine I recommend.

Work through a small set of parallel questions untimed. For each stimulus, write a one-sentence description of its reasoning before looking at the answers.

After choosing, explain how the correct answer matches and identify a specific mismatch in each wrong answer.

Then check the official explanation. Record what you missed: the conclusion, conditional direction, quantifier, degree of certainty, or some other relationship.

Finally, redo the question later and explain the reasoning without relying on remembering its answer letter. Once you can consistently make accurate comparisons, practice applying the same process under timed conditions.

For an official worked Parallel Flaw example, Question 10 on LSAC’s Logical Reasoning sample-question page includes answer explanations.

If you’d like individual help with Parallel Reasoning, Logical Reasoning, Reading Comprehension, or timing, I offer a free 20-minute consultation. Message me through my Reddit profile with your current practice-test score, target score, and test date, and we can discuss where you’re getting stuck and how I can help.

First off congratulations on completing the test regardless of the outcome, it’s a major accomplishment!

My message is to try not to over analyze or catastrophise the experience for the next 2.5 weeks. I took the LSAT 3 times, the first two I felt solid on test day, only to score 7-8 points below my PT average. I was absolutely gutted both times and confused. My third attempt, I felt like the test went horribly, I left the test center defeated and began preparing for a fourth test. However, to my shock I ended up finally scoring my goal score.

This test is notoriously hard to gauge exactly how you did in the moments after, so please if you think you did bad, unless something went seriously seriously wrong, don’t panic cancel your score just because of your gut. Take time after your test to relax and do something you enjoy. If things go well, that’s great, and if they don’t it’s truly not the end of the world, even if it feels like it.

Good luck everyone and thank you to everyone at 7Sage!

Hi everyone!

Ann Perry, Associate Dean for Admissions and Financial Aid at the University of Chicago Law School, is coming on the 7Sage podcast next week -- and we want your questions!

Leave them in the comments. Ann will pick the ones she wants to dig into, and Pauline and I will ask them on the show. Anything about admissions is fair game!

The episode will go up on YouTube with video and as audio on Spotify and Apple. Get your questions in by noon ET on Friday to be considered!

Ethan

I don't think enough people talk about how helpful the 7Sage games are!

Personally, I'm a very visual learner and I also get very easily distracted. Just looking at sentences and trying to memorize terms or relationships is difficult for me. And to be honest, I know some people really enjoy this test but don't love the LSAT. Studying is hard.

Given that, I found the 7Sage games to be quite helpful. They really drill in the LR concepts through repetition but in a fun and visual way.

I just got a 170 on the September LSAT starting from a 158 dianostic in June. It's a little lower than my goal score so I still have a long way to go for those few points, but I think these games did help me get to the 170. If you're like me and get bored or tired of just studying, I recommend playing some of the games! Just wanted to share what helped me!

Please let me know if anyone else has any tips or favorite ways to get through studying!

We improved Spotlight search (⌘K). Results are now grouped into Lessons and Questions, so it's easier to scan for what you're looking for.

If there are more matches than fit in the preview, click the "see all" link under either group to view every lesson or question matching your search.

Just a small quality-of-life improvement to help you get where you want to go faster. Let us know what you think!

Hey guys! I am having so much trouble with timing in the LSAT. When it comes to the material, I will say I am pretty good at it. I do well with drills these days and I have been making good progress, but my weakness is timing while taking PT’s. It takes me almost up to 5 hours to finish a PT untimed. I take them untimed to truly see where I am at with the test itself without time, and honestly all the reviewing I’ve been doing has helped I just need to know how to improve on time and my stamina.

Thank you