Logic Games...useful to memorize question classifications/strategies?

[M2]

In the powerscore logic games bible it recommends memorizng all the possible types of games (grouping, pattern, linear,etc..) and then memorizing the right setup approach for each one.

My main problem with games is in setting up the diagrams, so i was thinking that maybe i should spend some time just learning how to identify games from reading the initial paragraph. In the back of the logic games bible it gives all the classifications for every "modern" LSAT up to I think 40...

has anyone done this? Or do you usually just attack the question in the way that "feels right"?


Thanks,

M2

[jgruber]

The book I read suggested a similar approach.  I had trouble memorizing and identifying the different types.  But I also did very badly with games.   

[slacker]

If you do a lot of games, you'll get familiar w/the basic types.

I screwed up one of the games problems on mine...it was one that I hadn't done many of, and that hurt.

[zpops]

The first thing I did when I started a game was figure out what type it was.  Otherwise, how will you draw your diagram quickly?

[nathanielmark]

Its important to know the basic types, but i wouldnt get to caught up in all the details that the LG Bible gives you.  i never memorized the types but after doing nearly 20 games sections now, i recognize the game types as soon as i begin. 

[Meltdown]

Its important to know the basic types, but i wouldnt get to caught up in all the details that the LG Bible gives you.  i never memorized the types but after doing nearly 20 games sections now, i recognize the game types as soon as i begin. 

Agreed. The types are there, I think, to help you identify the basic features of each game. The more you do, the more familiar you become with each type and the less importnat it is to know the exact term for each feature. I don't necessarily think about a game being "unbalanced" but now that I know what it is I just process that info and continue on.

I have used the classifications several times to make sure my take on a game is correct. It does help to be able to have that confirmation (or in my case, disconfirmation a few times!).

[zpops]

Its important to know the basic types, but i wouldnt get to caught up in all the details that the LG Bible gives you.  i never memorized the types but after doing nearly 20 games sections now, i recognize the game types as soon as i begin. 

I never even heard of the LG bible before coming here, but if it gives elaborate steps for each game, then that is probably overkill.  You look at the game, see that it's a sequencing game or whatever, and then make your diagram in a way that works for you.  Extraneous things like formal steps for a question wil only slow you down.

[nathanielmark]

Put it this way.  the LG Bible gives you like 3 or 4 different ways of categorizing grouping games.  you could litterally eat up 2 or 3 minutes of the test just classifying each game.  i wouldnt worry about it.

[Meltdown]

I woudn't say there are formal steps outline for each game. Classification seems to be a big part of recognition, so there is time spent on that. I found the discussions of rule diagramming and making inferences to be the most helpful part by far.

In my experience, I tried to classify everything at first, but then as I got used to what I was seeing, the time I spent on that dropped dramatically. That's when I started seeing my score increase in the section. But I guess that's just the learning curve at work. 

[ortsac]

This is the section I find the most entertaining and easy. Strangely so.