Tree Ordering | LSAT Logic Games 

That's exactly it. It's kinda like you're in a big dark room at the beginning of LSAT prep, but slowly light bulbs turn on one at a time and everything just becomes clear.

How'd it go??

@@brandonsavin13 I got 145.

@@jasonlou2013S That's about where I'm practice testing right now. Did you take it again?

@brandonsavin13 Nope. My family just came to the state so I need to work and help them now. I will take lsat again in the future.

Sure, I think the confusion is just the two different tasks. When the path between two letters involves left AND right turns, then the two letters have no relationship in the game. Either one could be ahead or behind of the other. When the path between two letters ONLY involves going left or going right, then they do have a definite ordering relationship. In Q2, we were saying, "Since K and G are connected by a zig-zag path, they have no relationship, so either one could be ahead or behind the other, so it doesn't HAVE to be true that K is before G. (It COULD be true, but it doesn't HAVE to be). In Q4, we are saying, "Since J and G are connected by a zig-zag path, they have no relationship, so either one could be ahead of or behind the other, so it COULD be true that J is earlier than G (it COULD be true, but it doesn't HAVE to be)." Q2 was asking what MUST BE TRUE, and zig-zag buddies don't have any must be true relationship. Either one can be ahead of or behind the other. Q4 was asking what COULD BE TRUE, and zig-zag buddies can be ahead of or behind the other. Either way is possible.

@@LSATLab You're the best. Thank you for detailed response!

Indeed. We'll be producing one LG and one RC video each week for the next 12 weeks.

@@LSATLab ok my test is in January, bless y'all!!

@@LSATLab It appears that there may not be 12 more LG’s.

Correct, if they never said "each slot/position has at least one player/element", then you'd have distribution possibilities like 0-0-0-0-7. But in this video, it wasn't assumed that each player/element goes at least once. It was actually specified on screen "each element is assigned to exactly one position", and "each position has at least one element". He was using player and element interchangeably, so that may have gotten confusing.

Everyone is different. I know someone who scored a 180 on her first practice test. For her, the answer would be yes. I know someone else who spent two years studying for the LSAT. For her, the answer would be no. If you're studying almost every day for the next 15 days, you can probably pull your score up at least 5 points from where it is now.

@@LSATLab I am getting only 40-45 raw score in lsat mock tests

Good luck on your exam.

Hi, happy to help! At 15:34, we're looking at a Substitution question. The reason we put L in one is because the strategy on Substitution questions relies on creating counterexamples. Notice the rule being substituted is the rule that puts F before L. What we're trying to do at that point in the video is check to see whether answer choice (C) guarantees the original rule. If we can create a counterexample, then the answer choice does not guarantee the rule and we can eliminate the answer choice. So by showing that L could be first, we establish that answer choice (C) does not have the same impact as the original rule.

@@therealsherminator that makes so much sense! Thank you for taking the time to reply 🙏🏼

@@NP-zd6um Why would K have to come before F if F is second? Without the original rule, L could be first. Since L cannot be first with the original rule, answer choice (C) permits a hypothetical the original rules do not.

@@NP-zd6um Remember, the rule that F comes before J and L is the rule being substituted. It doesn't exist for this question.

Oh, I see someone else had this question, and it's been answered. Nevermind!

This is still mind-boggling. A tutor taught me to test the answer choice out by testing the opposite to challenge it and if it forces that rule by not being able to successfully complete it, then it's correct. But If it works out, then it's wrong. Therefore, when I tested the opposite of answer choice A by putting Fiesta before Kangaroo, I was able to do FKJHLG which worked. So, that is why I eliminated it. Now, I'm just confused.

@@thevanessakay Substitution questions are asking, "which of these NEW rules could be swapped for this OLD rule, such that we'd have the exact same game?" Answers are wrong if either of these things apply: 1. there's a scenario that was LEGAL under the Old rule but is ILLEGAL under the New rule 2. there's a scenario that was ILLEGAL under the Old rule but is LEGAL under the New rule So choice (C) is wrong for reason #2. Consider this scenario L F K J H G This is ILLEGAL under the Old rule (which said that F must be earlier than J and L) but it's LEGAL under the New rule (which just says that F must be 1 or 2).

@@LSATLab Gotcha! Thanks.

I think you're asking about question 4, right? The question tells us that L is earlier than K. That means that L is earlier than K, J, H, and G. That forces F to go first and L to go second.

Matt Sherman Amazing, thank you!