|
Basic Game Types
and Frequency of Appearance
While you prepare
for the Logic Games section of the LSAT, you should be aware of the game
types that appear most frequently on the exam. In our LSAT
preparation courses and Logic Games publications we delineate
the advanced and comprehensive game classification system used by PowerScore
to attack the Logic Games section of the LSAT*. Below, we use some of
the most basic classification levels of that system to provide an informative
analysis of the game types that have appeared on all LSATs since June
1991.
Basic
Game Types and Frequency of Appearance: 1991 to the Present
| Game
Type |
#
of Games |
Frequency
Percentage |
| Linear
(Basic and Advanced) |
100 |
45.45% |
| Grouping |
77 |
35.00% |
| Grouping/Linear
Combination |
11 |
5.00% |
| Pattern |
7 |
3.18% |
| Pure
Sequencing |
13 |
5.91% |
| Mapping |
6 |
2.73% |
| Circular
Linearity |
3 |
1.36% |
|
A brief analysis of
the table reveals that Linear and Grouping games dominate the percentages,
and fully 85% of games on past tests were Grouping, Linear, or Grouping/Linear
Combination games (almost 90% if you consider that Pattern games are also
Linear in nature). Other game types appeared relatively infrequently.
A student with limited preparation time would obviously be well-served
to tilt their preparation towards the Linear and Grouping games as these
types appear on every LSAT.
Within certain game
types, further analysis is helpful. Linear games can be divided into two
types—Basic and Advanced—and as you might expect, Advanced Linear games
appear somewhat more frequently than Basic Linear games:
| Linear
Game Type |
#
of Games |
Percentage
of
Linear Games |
| Basic
Linear |
45 |
45.00% |
| Advanced
Linear |
55 |
55.00% |
|
For students tracking
the basic complexity of Linear games, among both Basic and Advanced Linear
games, Balanced games appear more frequently than Unbalanced games:
| Linear
Game Subclassification Type |
#
of Games* |
Percentage
of
Linear Games |
| Balanced |
67 |
67.00% |
| Unbalanced |
32 |
32.00% |
| *
One game appeared as an Undefined Linear Game, and was therefore
neither Balanced nor Unbalanced. |
|
Thus, a test taker
encountering a Linear game has a two in three chance of seeing a Balanced
game.
BACK
TO THE TOP
Grouping games, often
considered the most challenging game type, can be divided into several
subcategories:
| Grouping
Game Subclassification Type |
#
of Games |
Percentage
of
Grouping Games |
| Defined |
53 |
68.83% |
| Partially
Defined |
15 |
19.48% |
| Undefined |
8 |
10.39% |
|
One sub-type—Defined
games—appears far more frequently that the other sub-types. This weighting
is beneficial for test takers as Defined games are generally easier than
Undefined or Partially Defined games.
Some of the more advanced
game concepts and techniques specifically addressed in the PowerScore
full-length course also appear quite frequently:
| Concept/Technique
Type |
#
of Games |
Percentage
of All Games |
| Identify
the Templates |
34 |
15.45% |
| Identify
the Possibilities |
17 |
7.73% |
| Numerical
Distribution |
37 |
16.82% |
|
Almost 25% of games
require an advanced approach such as Identify the Templates or Identify
the Possibilities, and well over 15% of games feature a challenging element
such as a Numerical Distribution. These high rates of appearance put an
unprepared test taker at a severe disadvantage.
Students often ask
how the LSAT has changed over the years. Consider the difference in the
percentages when only the games from 2000 to the present are considered:
Basic
Game Types and Frequency of Appearance: 2000 to the Present
| Game
Type |
#
of Games |
Frequency
Percentage,
2000-Present |
Frequency
Percentage,
1991-Present |
| Linear
(Basic and Advanced) |
42 |
47.77% |
45.45% |
| Grouping |
33 |
37.50% |
35.00% |
| Grouping/Linear
Combination |
5 |
5.68% |
5.00% |
| Pure
Sequencing |
6 |
6.82% |
3.18% |
| Circular
Linearity |
1 |
1.14% |
5.91% |
| Mapping |
0 |
0.00% |
2.73% |
| Pattern |
0 |
0.00% |
1.36% |
|
Amazingly, the focus
on Linear and Grouping games has become even greater. What about the use
of more advanced features in games? The table below reveals that on recent
tests the makers of the LSAT have begun to attack the students with ever
more challenging games:
| Concept/Technique
Type |
#
of Games |
Percentage
of
All Games,
2000-Present |
Percentage
of
All Games,
1991-Present |
| Identify
the Templates |
18 |
20.45% |
15.45% |
| Identify
the Possibilities |
3 |
3.41% |
7.73% |
| Numerical
Distribution |
20 |
22.73% |
16.82% |
|
Over 20% of all games
since 2000 have required an advanced “Numerical Distribution” approach,
a significant increase from previous years.
The discussion above
shows clearly that the LSAT is not a collection of random ideas. The protocols
of the test dictate that certain concepts must be tested with frequency,
and as a test taker, arming yourself with the most advanced knowledge
is crucial. A solid course of preparation is necessary for performing
well, and your preparation must have focus and direction. Students who
are unprepared for the most frequently appearing games and concepts are
at a serious disadvantage when taking the LSAT.
* The Logic Games
classification system used by PowerScore helps students specifically identify
the dominant features of each game. By understanding how each game presents
problems, students can then better attack that game. The discussion presented
above uses only a few, very basic classification terms. For a detailed
discussion of the entire Unified Games Theory™ classification system,
please refer to a PowerScore LSAT Course textbook or the Logic
Games Bible.
BACK
TO THE TOP
|
