With Logic Games retired, Logical Reasoning is now two-thirds of your entire LSAT score.
Scoring 170+ on the modern LSAT requires spotting the gap between an author's premise and conclusion BEFORE you ever look at choices A through E.
The 5-step LSAT 170+ Logical Reasoning & Blind Review system
Separate the Conclusion from the Premises before reading the question stem
80% of LR stimuli are arguments. Highlight the Main Conclusion (look for Therefore, Thus, Consequently, or the claim supported by "Because/Since") and ask: "Why does the Evidence NOT 100% guarantee this Conclusion?"
Never confuse Sufficient Assumption (SA) vs. Necessary Assumption (NA)
Sufficient Assumption ("if assumed, enables the conclusion to be properly drawn"): strong language works—you need a bridge that 100% locks the argument shut. Necessary Assumption ("required/depends on"): moderate language wins—use the Negation Test (if negating the choice destroys the argument, it is correct!).
Memorize the 8 Classic LSAT Logical Flaws on sight
Spot immediately: Correlation → Causation, Mistaking Necessary for Sufficient (Conditional Reversal/Negation), Unrepresentative Sample, Part-to-Whole / Whole-to-Part, Ad Hominem, False Dichotomy, Equivocation, and Circular Reasoning.
Diagram Conditional Logic (If A → B, contrapositive ~B → ~A) only when needed
"Unless" means "If Not"! "Only if," "requires," and "essential" introduce the Necessary condition (right side of arrow); "If," "every," "all," and "whenever" introduce the Sufficient condition (left side).
Use the 2-Pass "Blind Review" Method on every PrepTest section
Take the 35-minute section timed and circle any question where you aren't 100% sure why 1 choice is right and 4 are wrong. Before checking the answer key, take unlimited time to re-analyze those circled questions and write down why each choice fails.
High-impact LSAT drills with our Critical Thinking Coach
Loophole & Gap Prediction Drills
Practice stating the flaw in an argument in your own words before seeing choices.
Negation Test Workouts (NA Questions)
Practice logically negating candidate choices ("Always" ↔ "Not always") to test if the argument collapses.
Conditional & Quantifier Chains
Combine "All A are B" and "Some A are C" to deduce valid "Most/Some" inferences.
Comparative Reading & Viewpoint Tracking
Map Author vs. Critic perspectives on dense Law, Science, and Humanities passages.
Match your language strength to the Question Family!
On Must Be True (Inference) and Necessary Assumption questions, extreme words ("all, never, only, most") are usually traps unless backed by strict conditional chains. On Sufficient Assumption and Principle-Justify questions, strong, sweeping rules are often right!
See the prompt
Run it live in our AI study workspace or paste it into ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini.
Best AI engines for LSAT Blind Review autopsies
Supercharge your LSAT Blind Review with our Critical Thinking Expert
Break down argument gaps, conditional contrapositives, and trap answers step by step.
14 days free • Cancel anytime in 2 clicks.
Test this study method on your own topic
Type any class topic or paste your notes below to start free.
Related Guides
Constitutional Law & Pre-Law Guide: How to Brief Cases with the IRAC Method
How to read dense Supreme Court opinions, write 1-page case briefs, and ace Law School / Pre-Law issue-spotter exams with IRAC.
MCAT CARS Strategy Guide: Daily Passage Analysis & Timing System
Raise your MCAT CARS score from 124 to 130+ by tracking author tone, paragraph shifts, and the 3 AAMC question categories.
GRE Verbal & Quantitative Guide: Context Vocabulary & Quant Comparison Traps
Ace the shorter 2-hour GRE by mastering the Pairing Strategy on Sentence Equivalence, pivot logic on Text Completion, and Equal/Zero/Negative testing on Quant Comparison.