LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 beeke
  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: Jan 15, 2018
|
#43537
Is this an identify the templates game? I noticed that the first and fourth rules are pretty restrictive.
 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 3676
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#43565
Beeke, I am a total template junkie - I do them all the time, even when they aren't the best approach - and I don't think this one is a true template game. The last rule isn't all that restrictive, as it doesn't force certain variables into fixed relationships or certain spaces. All it does it establish that this a defined game, setting up a 2-1-1-1-1-1 numerical distribution. In fact, that actually suggests NOT doing templates - it would be much more interesting if the year for two monuments could be either 1st or 2nd, setting up two possible distributions, and perhaps templates based on those. With only one distribution, fixed firmly in place, templates may be going overboard and doing more work than is called for.

The first rule gives us a sequence of G-L-F, but that sequence, covering only 3 of 6 spaces, isn't that exciting. Add a fourth to that sequence and I would jump all over a template approach, but here it still leaves a lot of flexibility.

That said, once I diagrammed the rules, I did try out a couple "what if" ideas to see if it might be a template game and what other inferences I could make. For example, I like to push sequences to their extremes, so I started by putting G as far to the right as I thought I could get away with, the 4th position. That put L 5th and F 6th, and...wait a minute, there's no room for H! My not-laws for H under 1 through 3 helped me spot that quickly, and I added a not-law for G at 4th and another for L at 5th. Then I pushed the sequence the other direction and put F as early as I could, 3rd. That put L 2nd and G 1st. Not-laws for M under 4 and 5 meant that M had to join G at 1st, and H and S (the random variable) became interchangeable at 5 and 6.

At this point I could have pursued other "what-if" scenarios, but having gotten a good sense of the game I felt it was time to move on. Even I, a template junkie, didn't think it would be worth it to try G 2nd (if a question asks me to do so, I'll do it then), or G first and L 3rd (I'll go there later if I must). Why? Because the benefits didn't seem to be there. I could already see the overall shape of the game, the distribution was done, and the not-laws were doing great work for me. I felt well prepared for the questions, and that's all I want from my diagram. Anything more is overkill. I'm guilty of it much of the time, but not in this case.

I hope that helps! Don't get too addicted to templates!
 NR 2020
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: Oct 04, 2020
|
#80721
Could you please post the setup and rule diagrams for this game?
 Jeremy Press
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 836
  • Joined: Jun 12, 2017
|
#80749
Hi NR2020,

Sure, a diagram of the setup and rules is below! A couple notes on that diagram: as Adam mentioned in his excellent post above, the 2-1-1-1-1-1 distribution is reflected in the baseline, with two slots for 601 and one for each of the remaining years. In addition, the extra Not-Laws he mentioned (one for G underneath spot 4 and one for L underneath spot 5) are included, for the reasons he mentioned in that post. Other than that, it's a pretty straightforward Basic Linear-Balanced setup. Let us know if this triggers any additional questions!
Screen Shot 2020-11-04 at 12.16.22 PM.png
Screen Shot 2020-11-04 at 12.16.22 PM.png (20.15 KiB) Viewed 151 times

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.