Diagram

[stackoutawinner]

This game came up in a recent study hall I attended. As part of my own prep, I not only want to understand a game, but to be able to explain it completely. For this reason, I'm posting a solution to this game along with a bonus question. The solution is also attached.

PT30, Game 2, Stacks Solutions.pdf

(69.07 KiB) Downloaded 152845 times

(Moderator note: PT30, Game 2, Stacks Solutions.pdf)

Mind you the bonus Q is not a real LSAT question, it's one that I made up.

The Bonus Q:
If Pasquale leaves three messages, then all of the following could be true EXCEPT:
A. Liam leaves the 4th message
B. Pasquale leaves the 5th message
C. Hildy leaves the third message
D. Theodore leaves the fourth message
E. Hildy leaves the sixth message

[dan]

Stacks, thanks for this fantastic solution. This is exactly the sort of work that will lead to improved games performance. Mastering any one game (as you've done here) is more valuable than kind of being familiar with 10 games. Really great work.

A small point... in the answer to your bonus question, you mention "since there is no G, H can't be in 1." Maybe I'm missing something? This would be true if there were no P, but no G? Let me know if I've overlooked something.

Thanks again Stacks!

dan

[stackoutawinner]

Great question Dan!

I don't think you missed anything, I think I got turned around in typing. Suppose we have 3 P's, and we put H in the first slot. Because F is not appearing, the rule that says all of P must come before T does not come into play. I think somewhere when I was writing I confused the H first means P last rule into H first into G last... which is a mental mistake that can cost points. This would explain why I said if no G, then no H in the first slot. The actual rule is that if there's no P, then there's no H in the first slot, and that rule doesn't even come into play.

My bad. Good catch!

[derb284]

The second question on this game (#7) was driving me nuts, apparently I was reading it wrong (as): The first and last messages on the answering machine could be the first and second messages left on the machine (I didn't get that the question meant second as in the second message left by the same person, not as in the second slot). In other words I interpreted the question as, the first, second, and sixth messages could all have been left by who? In which the correct answer could have been Pasquale, P P H L T P. Make sure you read the question very carefully so you don't make the same mistake I did and end up scratching your head for a half hour trying to figure out why your right answer is in fact wrong! Most of my mishaps occur because I cannot fully understand what the question is actually asking...

[savannajolie]

Q6. Dan said: F followed by P then T and then by P again, but in my book its followed by H then P then L. Do you think it was a typo in my book? Please advise. Thanks

[savannajolie]

Correction: Stackawinner wrote it not Dan.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Hi savannajolie!

If you're looking at answer choice (A) from Q6, then you're book does not have a typo. My book has the same order that you listed - F, P, T, H, P, L. I'm not sure that the discussion above is really about that answer choice anyway. Your book seems to be fine.

Good luck!

[savannajolie]

Thanks MS,

I was referencing the downloaded solutions and explanations for Q 6 that a poster provided. The explanation stated a diff order for this question.Thus, stumping me.Please provide a detailed explanation as to why- A is not the credited answer. Thanking you in advance.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

I don't think stackoutawinner meant to imply that P immediately followed T, but that there was a second P that followed T at some point.

So in your answer choice (A) it goes F, P, T, H, P, L. In which case it goes F, P, T and then after that at some point comes another P, which would be grounds for eliminating answer choice (A). This would violate the 5th constraint.

Does that make sense?

[giladedelman]

Whoops, looks like the attachment got lost somehow! Here's the diagram I drew. Let me know if you have any more questions.

[theonlyrij]

Hi,

Could someone please explain this game to me? I got the set up correct, but I do not understand the inferences from the diagram. Why does there need to be a minimum of 4 people and why does it have to P,T,H,L?

Thanks!

[timmydoeslsat]

Hi,

Could someone please explain this game to me? I got the set up correct, but I do not understand the inferences from the diagram. Why does there need to be a minimum of 4 people and why does it have to P,T,H,L?

Thanks!

Definitely the key to the game in my opinion.

The rules are:

H1 ---> P6

G ---> F and P

F ---> All P > T

P ---> All H> L

We also know that at most only one person can leave more than a message.

We also know that the maximum amount that person could leave would be 3.

Notice what happens if we do not have L. We know via the contrapositive that we do not have P. We then know that we do not have F and G. We only have H and T left. We know that could not work because how could we get 6 messages from two people? The numbers do not work.

Same with H. Without H, we know there is no P, then we know there is no F and no G. Only T and L left to place six messages. Will not work.

Same with P. Without P, we do not have F and we do not have G.

That leaves us with 3 variables: H, L, and T. Even with three variables, the numbers do not work.

We could have one of those variables go 3 times, the maximum amount. So we now have exhausted the only variable that can go more than once and we have three spaces left to place with only 2 variables that can go only once. Will not work.

If T was not used, then F could not be used, and then G could not be used. Three variables, six messages. Will not work.

So this means that we have to have at least 4 variables to make this game work. And we also know that we have to have P, H, L, and T.

[eht1991]

Hello all,

I am brand new to this forum, so please bear with me!

Anyway, just out of curiosity (and for my own reassurance), I wanted to ask if anybody else found this game somewhat tricky to approach?

To me, it seemed as if a lot of crucial inferences were scaffolded onto other inferences, and if you didn't get them all from the start it was impossible to eliminate answer choices. Second, this game combines aspects of numbered ordering, closed assignment, and conditional logic. Is it typical for games on post-2000 exams to be this hybrid?

Thanks!

[littletiger]

Anyway, just out of curiosity (and for my own reassurance), I wanted to ask if anybody else found this game somewhat tricky to approach?

I found this game difficult because I had never seen anything like it before (which isn't saying much since I haven't played many games) and consequently did not have an efficient system of notation for these rules. This is why we take practice tests! We'll be much better prepared next time .

[Demi]

would it make sense to use the logic chain for part of our game board?

Thanks!

[ohthatpatrick]

Yeah, it could certainly be useful, because there are 4 conditionals and P, F, and H appear in more than one each.

Only the last 3 conditionals have that In/Out feel that goes with the logic chain.

You'd basically get

G -> F and P -> T and H and L .... with all P - T and all H - L

If G is in, everyone is in. So if anyone else is OUT, then G must also be OUT.

You also get
F -> P and T -> H and L .... with all P - T and all H - L

I think the key inference in this game is framing the three possibilities for numerical distributions:
6 ppl in ... each one goes once
5 IN / 1 OUT ... one person goes twice
4 IN / 2 OUT ... two people go twice or one person goes three times

From that big G chain, we know that any time G is in, all 6 ppl are in. So anytime someone is going more than once, we know G is out.

When 5 IN / 1 OUT, then G must be OUT. If anyone else were OUT, then G would ALSO have to be OUT.

When F is in, 5 ppl (at least) are in. So when 4 IN / 2 OUT, then F and G are the two that are OUT.

[JamieH298]

I'm having a little bit of trouble figuring out a scenario where H can ever be 1st with P 6th in accordance with the last constraint. Does the P preceding T constraint only apply when F has left a message? So, for example, would this arrangement be allowed in order: H-L-T-P-P-P ?