After reading Kaplan's explanations, I really feel that they do not have a firm grasp on what LSAC looks for in a correct answer and what makes the other answer choices wrong. I was just perusing their explanations of 1999 exams.
They rarely explain the best 2nd choice answers, dismissing them as if they were asinine (lumping them together with the really bad answers).
Example: June 1999 section 4 VC Question 16: A, B, C, and D. All four choices "faster rates" are utterly distinct from the context of the conclusion of line 28. So they are wrong, period.
It also says essentially "just like up a sentence from the conclusion, and there is your answer, almost word for word. Can't be anymore simple." The PROBLEM is a) is also included (half of it is at least) in the sentence above...it is a complex sentence. Their ability to just ignore tricky 2nd answers like they are utterly out of context is laughable. Their advice is: "ummm, get the right answer...if you dont you didnt follow our methods" type approach (yes there are more examples, im just too lazy to detail them)
Sigh, its so sad.