I went through the LSAT Logical Reasoning Bible as well. For the most part, you will only find at the most 3 CR problems that will require diagramming. The main thing is to just be able to easily identify the conclusion in all of the arguments. Identifying the conclusion is the key to solving the majority of the problems. For additional practice, I bought the book The Next Ten LSATs and just used their logical reasoning and reading comprehension sections. Be warned though, they only provide the answers and don't provide explanations. If you've exhausted your practice materials though, this book is a good option. My main issue is the sentence correction. I have gone through the MGMAT guide twice and still can't improve my score.

yea agree, the book also stresses on zooming into the conclusion and underlying premise (S) to attack/defend. It's really of limited use if there are no explanations given - unless you are getting the questions right and understand how to solve them, but then, if that's the case, you can only derive limited benefits from the book itself

Yea, I used to balk at studying SC - it sounds simple and "sensibe" esp to native english speakers, but i have to eat my words when I saw my CAT score. =(

gmattering wrote:yea agree, the book also stresses on zooming into the conclusion and underlying premise (S) to attack/defend. It's really of limited use if there are no explanations given - unless you are getting the questions right and understand how to solve them, but then, if that's the case, you can only derive limited benefits from the book itself

Yea, I used to balk at studying SC - it sounds simple and "sensibe" esp to native english speakers, but i have to eat my words when I saw my CAT score. =(

I disagree about it being of limited use. I have found that it is very helpful. Not having explanations forces me to go through and understand the problem. I understand why I got something wrong from the context of my own reasoning and I can use that to compare it to the logic that I would have had to use to match the logic of the test makers. I think its helpful, because it takes more time to go through each wrong answer, but after you understand you have a deeper understanding of why you got a question wrong that you won't easily forget.

osirus0830 wrote:

gmattering wrote:yea agree, the book also stresses on zooming into the conclusion and underlying premise (S) to attack/defend. It's really of limited use if there are no explanations given - unless you are getting the questions right and understand how to solve them, but then, if that's the case, you can only derive limited benefits from the book itself

Yea, I used to balk at studying SC - it sounds simple and "sensibe" esp to native english speakers, but i have to eat my words when I saw my CAT score. =(

I disagree about it being of limited use. I have found that it is very helpful. Not having explanations forces me to go through and understand the problem. I understand why I got something wrong from the context of my own reasoning and I can use that to compare it to the logic that I would have had to use to match the logic of the test makers. I think its helpful, because it takes more time to go through each wrong answer, but after you understand you have a deeper understanding of why you got a question wrong that you won't easily forget.

point taken, i am still polishing the powerscore book again. Can i say the verbal standard here is higher than that of GMAT? i seem to have this idea after comparing the powerscore against OG ..