Setup and Rule Diagrams

[Emily Haney-Caron]

Hi Alaina,

For this one, you'd want to set up two rows, one on top of the other, like this:

____ ____ ____ ____


____ ____ ____ ____

1 ... 2 ... 3 ... 4

One row will be stops, and one will be passengers getting off.

Then I'd add that L is the first or second stop:

__L/__ __/L__ ____ ____


____....____....____...____

1..2......3......4

We also know:
M = or < R
V < J
If F = or < J, then S = or < G; if J < F, G < S.

Adding that info the diagram, we get:

__L/__ __/L__ ____ ____


____....____....____...____
J.V

1..2......3......4

I hope that helps!

[lathlee]

hI. DAVE AND OTHERS,

since I tried all of the 12 hardest LG in this list and with single exception of Datalog game, https://www.powerscore.com/lsat/help/lg ... -games.cfm
I honestly believe and Shouldn't this game regarded as one of the honorable mentions If not, join the likes of possibly one of the 12 hardest LG ever ?

[James Finch]

Hi Lathlee,

This game is daunting at first because of its tricky rules and difficult diagramming, but is still nowhere near as difficult as the games on the list. Only having 5 questions helps, all of which are local except for the list question that comes first. If you can diagram rule 4 in a way that makes sense, this game becomes much simpler because of all the local questions, most of which force the remaining variables into one of two slots. The main challenge is in remembering and applying the rules. Overcome the difficulty on the frontend, and the game itself isn't particularly difficult or time consuming, but coming last it's designed to intimidate and cause test-takers to panic.

Remain calm and confident, apply your skills, and take it one step at a time and you'll be able to master even the worst of the "killer games!"

[irisyejinlee]

Hello! I'm struggling with the fourth rule. The setup shows F = J --> S = G, and the contrapositive is G--S --> J--F.

For the contrapositive, the sufficient condition implies that there can't be a GS block (G gets off at S), but that G must get off before S. Why is this the case? Wouldn't the negation of S = G be either GS, or G--S?

[Bob O'Halloran]

Hi Irisyejinlee,
Thank you for your question.
This goes to the difficult wording of the game discussed above. Basically you can think of it as the bus has to stop before the person can get off. So if G were to get off at S, then G would still be on the bus when it stopped at S. GS would be G=S, so the contrapositive of G=S would be that G must be before S.
I hope this helps and let us know if you have any additional questions.
Bob

[pwfquestions]

Why is the first diagram of the fourth rule excluded from the complete diagram? Why is it better to just use the contrapositive?

[Adam Tyson]

You certainly can include the first version of the rule, pwfquestions, but we chose not to because the biconditional setup with the contrapositives is, in our view, cleaner and easier to deal with than the alternative. Any biconditional rule (that's the double arrow setup, sometimes referred to as the "if and only if" approach) has the contrapositive built right in, because it means "either both of these things happens or else neither of them does." So in this case, the diagram we drew means "either G gets off before S and J gets off before F, or else G does not get off before S and J does not get off before F." Both happen, or neither happens!

Call it a style choice, if you like. You can choose to diagram it the other way or not, it's entirely up to you. We chose to go with what we felt was easier to deal with because of its simplicity.