LSAT GAMES deductions, quirks, concepts + translating prompt langauge to symbols and rules Flashcards
(108 cards)
ALL GAMES: what approach is worth playing? Consider strong vs weak determination, consider whether a 1A quadrant of a Power Or would crash (TTN is better than Power Or only if 1A would crash!!)
Note on scenarios: Remember you can have PLACEMENT BASED SCENARIOS (more common, uses specific sequencing slots or group names), or RULE STYLE SCENARIOS (less common, used maybe for unnamed groups, w/o specific slots or group names, like PT 55 Opening & Final Arguments)
Approaches to Consider
- Sequencing Blocks - VAST MAJORITY are of Sequencing Blocks ARE worthy of scenarios – different types:
AM…B block x 4 scenarios shifting AM to the right w/ B on shrinking bracket on right - 6 slots
FH/HF…KL/LK..J block x 3 scenarios shifting FH/HF to the right with rest on bracket on right - 7 slots
F_V block x 4 scenarios - 6 slots
3 entities SS block (where S is a repeating entity and this block contains ALL the Ss – key) x 4 scenarios - 5 slots
4 entities rule says slot 2 and 4 must be same, LMNO are entities: just play 4 scenarios rotating each entity through 2 and 4 - 6 slots
3 entities on 1-2 split - play 3 scenarios rotating the 3 entities through –note the 1-2 split can be subtle, raise eyebrow if you see a “doubled up” same place type slot, it could be part of a 1-2 split (PT 44 Historical Records game)
- Vertical Blocks in Association Games - Vertical Blocks (not Not Blocks, but regular Vertical Blocks) in Grouping and Std Grid can also be worthy of scenarios - WE LOVE BLOCKS
- Games with Unnamed categories - Start Plunking Work of an entity, ask what SOMEONE HAS TO HAVE, look at entities which are used in multiple rule, and pick one to plunk- it will look scary and wide open at first! But remember you can get things going by plunking down some information from rules that say “exactly one has XXX” or even information from numeric distribution into any category you want! Do that plunking work and THEN think about scenarios and how rules interact. E.g. PT 62 stained glass windows – first plunk GP in “first” window bc you know SOMEONE has a GP. That results in ~Y in the “first” window. But you KNOW SOMEONE has a Y and it’s not the “first”, so plunk Y into “second” window.
-
If you have a sequencing game with only ellipses rules (ie no if-then, etc), is it worth playing scenarios, or just do limited ends w/o scenarios? Base this decision on the longest single branch of that rule (or if it is just one branchless chain, base it on that chain) – if that branch or chain alone includes 2/3 or more of the total game entities, it is worth playing scenarios based on the placement of an entity from that branch. If <2/3, just do limited ends w/o scenarios. (see image in opposite slide: left chain is NOT worth scenarios bc longest branch is 4/8 = 1/2 (tie between RTVY RTVS and RTVQ). right chain IS worth scenarios bc longest branch is 4/6 = 2/3.)…but
- If you DO play scenarios on an entity or block from that branch, which to play with? play it out with the **most limited** entity or block on that branch because the the more limits it has, the more it will push around, e.g. in PT 29 g4 Piano Classes, play out K in spots 2 and 3
- Is it worth playing 2 scenarios with an if-then rule: trig true & trig false? Yes, if trigger places 1/2 of all entities (including itself) **see exception below on one-half rule**
- Is it worth playing 3 scenarios with two if-then rules: trig true, trig true, neither? Yes, if both triggers place 1/2 of all entities (including itself) **see exception below on one-half rule**
- Worth playing 4 scenarios as Power-Ors? Weak “ors” are fine to make a power or! But pick “ors” that pushes other stuff! Take a minute to visualize/preview to confirm that the two “ors” you select are the ones that push around the most stuff possible. Sometimes it is not clear until you follow the snowball.
- When is a trig-trig-neither approach more efficient than a Power-Or? Ask yourself, would the 1A power-or quadrant (both triggers true at the same time) scenario crash? If it would indeed crash ( i.e. the two triggers are mutually exclusive) TTN is more efficient. If 1A wouldn’t crash, Power Or is better and more efficient. If you do TTN when Power Or is better, you may have trouble with questions (May 2020 flex Academic Society)
- Is it worth playing two scenarios based on Strong Cell? Most limited single cell based on…
- numeric ranges in row/column of that cell
- stuff already present in row/column of that cell
- affected by the most rules
- Is it worth playing scenarios based on Distribution Scenarios (e.g. PT 42 Botanists Chemists Zoologists)?
Note: Association Grouping games will very often be played simply based on different scenarios using difft BLOCK PLACEMENTS, no power or necessary, simple block placements
**exception** sometimes a trigger that places fewer than one-half the total entities is STILL worth playing out for trig true trig false, or trig trig neither…for example
- Pregroup if there is a pre-group cut in a game that will force other stuff to fall into place (in-or-out, or 2 group), or
-
Overfill: See attached - if there are some placeholders already partially filling up categories e.g. pg 71 Benz Lexus where game of 7 becomes game of 4 after placing S/F in Benz and S/F + M/V in Lexus Since max in a group is 4 in that game, the Nlexus–>Jlexus is strong playable trigger because it fills up Lexus even though it only involves 2 entities (less than 1/2 total).
* Note on Strong Trigger Rule of Thumb denominator*: when evaluating if a trigger is strong or weak (i.e. the one-half and 2/3 rules of thumb below), your “denominator” of that little rule of thumb calc must account for repeating entities, e.g. in Furniture PT 56, you will have 6 placements with 4 entities so a strong trigger would actually need to place 3 things, not just 2. So your threshold would be higher. On the other hand, if you have pregroups, or partially filled up categories, a trigger placing FEWER than the threshold can still be strong. So your threshold would be lower. The 1/2 and 2/3 rules are not exact.
Note from May LSAT Flex (rare) – prompt did not help much but Questions did!! sometimes there ARE no good scenarios to play based on the prompt info alone, so don’t hesitate too long, trust yourself. This is especially likely if you can see from the questions ahead that there are a lot of IF TYPE questions (i.e. the Qs will give more info to help build scenarios) or ACCEPTABLE type questions (i.e. the ACs will just need to be run thru all the rules, no scenario needed. See PT May 2020 Flex Festival

Sequencing chain: in a sequencing chain with ZERO triggers, a single branch that does not include 2/3 or more of all the entities in the game (including itself) is considered WEAK. We would not play out scenarios based on the placement of an entity in that weak branch (except Power-Ors, see below)
If-then trigger: If a trigger does not place 1/2 or more of all the entities in the game (including itself) that is is considered a weak trigger
Thinking of playing out trigtrue-trig false? Make sure trigger is strong
Thinking of playing out trig-trig-neither? Make sure both triggers are strong
Thinking of playing out Power-Or? It is fine if weak trigger is one or more of the “ors” (quadrant)

ALL GAMES - BAD HABIT when component of placeholder triggers stuff NOT in placeholder
Look out for situations where you have pos to negative but with more than one result! Your “neither” scenario may have a placeholder O/M but if you get a questions asking about if M is in, that Neither scenario does not reflect that M pushes P out!

ALL GAMES - assembly line work – which rules first?! – leave the non-snowball-causers for last!
If you have chain and branch, DO ASSEMBLY LINE ONE BRANCH AT A TIME
Entity places near middle of sequence? Likely that other entities can only go before and even other entities can go after, and if neither, you can use placeholders to rep pairs…Do not be afraid to split the bracket instead of having overarching bracket.
Assembly line work is more efficient when you first apply rules that seem to fit nicely into the diagram. Sometimes, a complicated rule will take up a lot of space on the diagram or on a bracket, so starting with that piece can be effective. Some rules involve entities that are neither in the other rules nor limited on the diagram. Such rules are unlikely to result in immediate changes to the diagram, so you may save those rules for the end of your assembly line work
ALL GAMES Non-Obvious possible Power-OR rules in games (5 types)
- “not” sequencing rule is an OR rule in a SEQUENCING SAME PLACE game bc it will involve smth before OR same place rel to smth else
- Triggers!: Trigger true OR Trigger false
- If and Only If, and its CONTRA
- Blocks that can only go in 2 places (i.e. block length + 1 = total spaces available) (or single entity can go in only 2 spaces but forces stuff)
- SPECIFIC Numeric Distrib (not generic) that only has 2 possibilities (i.e. 1 2 4 and 1 3 3)…but note the Botanist Chem Zool game had all 4 scenarios via numeric distribs
Don’t forget that Blocks That Can Only Go in Two Places also would include INDIVIDUAL ENTITIES THAT CAN ONLY GO IN TWO PLACES (see bicycle game, PT 64 q 13-18, that used Power Or with YS in two spots, or the simple T in two spots H1 and H2)
*pick powerful ors that force stuff, or pick ors that eliminate complicated rules with subscripts and tildes*
Note you can get rid of complicated rules by doing a Power Or on it! Ex
Ov–> ~Ky and ~Ov (from ambassador PT 64 game)
ALL GAMES - rep entities If you have repeating entities, what is one critical thought you should have?
What is my numeric distribution? How many possibilities? Can be non-generic (i.e. associated w/ specific entities) or generic
“Unless either” looks like what?
“Unless neither” looks like what?
“Unless both” looks like what?
“Unless not both” look like what?
*note there are sort of two ways to write Neither in the Trigger–works best if you write is like tilded version of Either in Result but more intuitive the second way*
note PT 31 CDs game is the hardest chaining and branching game
“Unless either…” becomes “if not either…” aka “if neither” which puts trigger branch together
“Unless neither…” becomes “if either…” which splits trigger into branches
“Unless both…” becomes “if not both…” which splits trigger into branches
“Unless not both” becomes “if both…” which puts trigger branch together
Basically, a “not” puts stuff back together or makes it a branch
remember “not either” is “neither” but it’s not simply putting a tilde on EITHER. “not both” is not simply putting a tilde on BOTH
Buyers Trade (like) Nobody Buys Everything branch trigger
Buyers Really (like) Buffalo Nickels branch results

ALL GAMES: IF-THEN: EITHER L or S BUT NOT BOTH in RESULTS - how to symbolize:
If Mathematics is offered, then EITHER literature OR sociology is offered, BUT NOT BOTH
*the BUT NOT BOTH is very significant here. On the other hand, if we had *or both* we could ignore it.*
And remember, it matters whether you are in results or trigger.
see pg 46 of lesson book
See attached. Don’t forget to add the “but not both” arrrow. It’s a little tricky because when we symbolize regular “either” in the results it is just one arrow.
key: But Not Both, or And Not Both are clues that an extra rule or extra branch should be written when translating rules into symbolized If-Then statements. Different than Sequencing statements.
But EITHER OR/BUT NOT BOTH is a different animal and creates a second arrow in the results. It’s like the “either” we use in non-LSAT world.
When you take the contrapositive of the whole thing it becomes a trigger with Neither on top and Both on bottom.

Symbolizing Not Both, Either in trigger and results
Symbolizing Both, Neither in trigger and results
*note that adding a BUT NOT BOTH to EITHER is a different animal and will create a second arrow*
*can ignore OR BOTH*
See attached. Also note that while Both and Neither make simple intuitive sense, remember that Not Both and Either can be less intuitive.
Memorize: Not Both = AT LEAST ONE IS NOT
Memorize: Either = AT LEAST ONE IS
ALL GAMES Rule that goes pos to neg, or neg to pos… “Placeholder” deduction from rules that switch signs (A–>~B, or ~F–>H e.g.)
NOTE on efficiency: best to wait on doing this Placeholder step UNTIL you have placed your “what’s left” entities on the bracket. After placing your “what’s left” entities on the bracket, THEN do the Placeholder step on the entities on the bracket. This makes the Placeholder step easier because you are using fewer entities.
NOTE on combo of neg to pos and pos to neg: if you have a selection if-then rule like “must take W or G, but not both” symbolized like W–>~G–>W (i.e. if and only if) that is basically a combination of a pos to neg rule AND a neg to pos rule, so you end up with W/G “in” and W/G “out”! (see attached)

PLACEHOLDERS with WHAT’S LEFT
From a two entity rule that switches signs, you can take that rule, and its contrapositive, and know that AT LEAST one of the results terms will fall in the category that has the same sign as the signs of the two results (see attached)
(note if you have a pre-grouped game that you have CUT, don’t do a placeholder based on entities from different pre-groups ie different sides of the CUT)
If you are doing “What’s Left” work on your remaining entities, often whe are working on the Neither Scenario of the Trig-Trig-Neither scenario, first look back at your if-then diagrams.
If any of the remaining entities have a relationship with other remaining entities that SWITCHES signs (e.g. A–>~B), even if there are intermediate entities (you CAN jump!), you can make that a PLACEHOLDER comprising the TWO RESULTS TERMS from that relationship and its contrapostive.
Just remember
- Not to use an entity on more than one placeholder,
- Include its sister placeholder in the bracket (not just assume it is in the other category, because the sister can be in either the bracket or the other)
- Look for smaller intermediate rules
NOTE on combo of neg to pos and pos to neg: if you have a selection if-then rule like “must take W or G, but not both” symbolized like W–>~G–>W (i.e. if and only if) that is basically a combination of a pos to neg rule AND a neg to pos rule, so you end up with W/G “in” and W/G “out”!

T) ALL GAMES - symbolize…how to symbolize the results of “if the stand carries watermelons, it carries figs or tangerines or both“…the trigger is easy to symbolize, but how to symbolize the results?
Be careful! This is not a “both in the results” aka branch results situation…
The language X or Y or both is an EITHER so it’s an EITHER in the results and Either i not branched in the results, and you symbolize:
W –> (F/T) aka “either F or T” (or both but we don’t say “or both” that bc redundant, the word either in LSAT includes or both)
See Pt 36 fruit game!
Also notice, in scenario 1, where ~T is trigger (circled in green) that ~T does NOT necessarily also trigger the ~(F/T) aka “neither F nor T” (aka ~F and ~T) therefore ~W…because ~(F/T) means NEITHER F nor T and you only know that F is out at this point
Be careful: “either” when negated (and negation is you do when you take contrapositive of a rule) is NEITHER ARE…it is not EITHER ARE NOT

ALL GAMES - negating vs. polar opposite Difference between Negating (making negative) and Polar Opposite?
Negative of Both is Not Both and vice versa
Polar Opposite of Both is Neither and vice versa
Negative of Either is Neither and vice versa
Polar Opposite of Either is Not Both and vice versa
Most efficient thought for…
Either Jon or Sara Jon/Sara
If not Jon then Sara ~Jon –> Sara
At least one of Jon and Sara IS
Most efficient:
At least one IS
*Note that a quirk of LSAT is that EITHER OR means at least one*
*OR in normal life would be EITHER OR BUT NOT BOTH on LSAT*
Most efficient thought for…
Not both Jon and Sara ~(
If Jon then not Sara
At most one of Jon and Sara
Most efficient:
At least one is NOT
ALL GAME - num distrib When to consider doing a numeric distrib???
Selection games (in and out categories)
same place
repeating entities…
(few others)
ALL GAMES if the trigger causes a contradiction IN THAT BRANCH….
~I–>M–>~G–>~R–>I
Then you know the trigger is impossible. Since the trigger is ~I here, you know I is in. Go ahead and put I as “in” on the diagram, remove from rules
ALL GAMES preview Games section, should you preview each of the 4 games to assess, or just dive right in?
Preview! Start with easiest game and save hardest for last. Hardest game should be last.
ALL GAMES - entity in more than one rule? It’s a hint! Keep an eye out for the same entity in more than one rule because why?
Because it means something is going on with that entity! there is some further deduction to be made…
e.g. ~H6 and V…R…H
tells you that the the 6 spot will be from another rule not VRH
ALL GAMES – if you have NOT BOTH in trigger, but BOTH in result? Rare and Sorta crazy!
Rare but it happens. See attached.

ALL GAMES entity and its not What if you come up with chain-branch diagram of if-then rules that has an entity AND its not (e.g. T and ~T)? Freak out?
No. If T and ~T are on DIFFERENT BRANCHES (meaning they have no direct relationship) then it is ok.
But if they are on the same branch, it is a contradiction and cannot exist, so double check your work. Or kill that scenario.
ALL GAMES – entity and ~entity result from same trigger, what to do? If you have an if then branch n chain arrangement where a contradiction is forced, do you kill the whole arrangement?
No–it just tells you that the trigger causing the contradiction never is activated!
No. Don’t confuse it with a self-contradicting scenario. It just means the trigger that causes the contradiction never happens. I.e. in the attached situation it means ~G never happens, aka G is always IN. You don’t throw away the whole contrapositive arrangement! In this case just do your 3 scenarios based on J trig F trig, neither

ALL GAMES - If you have non-specific numeric distribs, and are narrowed down to 2… good for Power-OR>
that still is not probably a good power-or component. Much better to use 2 specific numeric distribs in power-or if possible
Need a good numeric distrib power-or example? Look at Botanist Chem Zoologists, but note that is a SPECIFIC numeric distrib
ALL GAMES Can you ignore OR BOTH in either…or both? What about either…BUT NOT BOTH?
can ignore the OR BOTH bc EITHER includes that
never ignore But Not Both
ALL GAMES - if-then chain/branch has an entity that forces contradiction?!?!
Keep an eye out for the same entities showing up twice in a single BRANCH. If they are the same (L, L) then that is ok. But if one is positive and one is negative, and they are on the same branch, you may have a contradiction
To allow yourself to see possible contradictions when drawing your chain/branch, it is better to choose the EARLIER ~J when connecting stuff, so you can better see what happens downstream
see PT 54 Dancers On Stage
Easy to miss! In this case, you see that ~G forces ~L but also forces L! That is a contradiction, and we cannot have contradictions, which means that ~G cannot ever happen because a contradiction cannot happen, therefore you know that G is in.
So put G in the “in” category on your master diagram, and ignore the ~G rules, and also ignore the rules that force G, because we already know G is in.
Note this doesn’t necessarily have to be a strong trigger or a weak trigger, it can be any entity that forces a contradiction.

ALL GAMES “Power Or” can be played for what types of games?
It is likely you will have 1 or or more games most efficiently attacked with Power-Or combining, usually in sequencing games, but possibly association games.
Note you can have Power-Or using RULES in ea quad, or using SCENARIOS in ea quad. Important decision!
Vast majority of simple “or” rules are in and of themselves worthless for playing out normal non-power-or scenarios in and of themselves because they don’t connect significantly to other rules. **But** those same simple “or” rules, if they can connect with ANOTHER rule(s), are worthy of partnering with another “or” rule to play out a Power-Or 4x quadrant. Obvs the more connecting rules, the better the Power Or will be.
STEPS to COMBINE
*note that an If And Only If stmt, and its contrapositive stmt, can serve as 1 “or” rule together for purposes of Power Or. Note you can only do that with an If And Only If stmt. If you want to use a normal If-Then Stmt in your Power-Or, your rule must be Trigger True orTrigger False, which is less useful but still ok*
















































