I’ve teaching this beautiful test for over 20 years. I post and comment regularly on [r/LSAT](r/LSAT), so I certainly encourage folks to take a look at my profile. I offer a free 45 minute zoom session to see whether there’s a good fit.

$900 for 9 hours. $450 is due before the first 90-minute session (an hour simply isn’t enough). The second $450 payment is due after the second 90-minute session. Students often want to continue after this, in which case the hourly rate remains the same: $100 per hour. 

I’m a full-service tutor, meaning that my students only need my tutoring and access to LawHub. The vehicle for the tutoring is my original 17-page LSAT training manual. This is the outline/syllabus: 

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/t9nz6lov3ot6q5ivp4lt3?r=ACuTOLeYfs9N9fJyyAgZvCxdvhX3D70kxIs_hd9ScSmvy8-DBVKvju7PrMcXLtxqequuFTVt1xUd-9Tqg9qtT575wmLWtYFvnOT0Slz3aetFdpw5kMNPi9EhmwfVmIL_XFeMsLlWKwkTn6IPtdX0nSEo

I’m an old guy so not that tech savvy. If folks have trouble downloading this from here, DM me with your email address. I won’t try to sell you on tutoring. I’ll just email you the outline/syllabus.

I have a full plan of action for each session. Naturally, it’s focused on students’ individual aptitude and knowledge. 

I also show people how to do their homework. Again, if you check my profile, you’ll see it’s largely about review review review review. And then review again. There are very real patterns to this test. The way to see them is through constant review of material with which a student is already familiar. 

The large majority of my students have previous experience with the LSAT. Many of them are currently taking a course. I never tell people to forget what they’ve learned because I’m a big believer in multiple perspectives. 

But my approach is completely streamlined. It provides a specific step-by-step method for every single question on the test. It also includes strategies that I’m 95% confident are not taught anywhere else. 

My website: www.lsatcodebreaker.com

My user name is chosen quite purposely, reflecting theories of hormesis, distress tolerance, exposure therapy, and learned-industriousness. I encourage people to look up on these random sounding buzz words for themselves. Let me tell you, they’re a real trip.

My website name is due to the fact that I believe I have cracked the code to the LSAT. I’m not talking tricks. I don’t do diagramming. I believe that my approach is how the LSAC truly wants people to approach the test. 

Although make no mistake: Mastering the science of conditional reasoning is essential to true LSAT success, defined as a significant increase in score and not necessarily a high score (there are those in this world that can score 170+ on a cold diagnostic).

If you’ve checked my profile, it goes without saying that I talk a lot about psychology and the right mindset towards this test. Over the years, I’ve taken great interest in neuroscience and what makes the brain stronger and faster.

Basically, you have to work out your brain the way you have to work out your body. And working out isn’t any fun at all. At least if you’re doing it right. 

If anyone’s interested, feel free to DM me and we can take it from there.

Hi! I am looking to start studying for the LSAT and I’m looking for a good tutor. I have ADHD and really struggle with testing like the LSAT. If anyone has any recommendations for someone in New York City - please let me know

What, in your opinion, is the best and effective study program? I know this question has been asked a lot on here (although I haven’t seen all post about it recently). Anyway, my budget is capped at $500. I am taking the LSAT in January.

PLEASE NO SPAM!

Thank you!

Hey everyone, I'm the founder of Forge180, an LSAT prep platform I've been building.

I just finished a free 20-question diagnostic that I'm hoping will be useful for people trying to figure out where they need to focus their LSAT prep.

The idea is pretty simple. You take 20 questions in about 30 minutes, and the results give you a sense of which areas and question types are strengths and which ones might need more work.

It's completely free to take, and you don't need to create an account to see your results.

If you want to give it a try, it's here:

https://forge180.com/free-lsat-diagnostic

I'm genuinely looking for feedback, too. If you take it and something feels confusing, too easy, too hard, or just not useful, I'd really appreciate hearing what you think.

Sorry if this isn't allowed. I can't find any explanation for this in my research and studying. I'm typically around 168-170 in practice tests, but these specific logic questions keep throwing me. What is the difference between these answers? What am I missing? Can anyone help me?

Passage:

As a buyer for a large chain of department stores, I will buy a garment only if it is fashionable and not too expensive for our clientele. The evening dress from the fall collection by Peruka is certainly fashionable, but it is far too expensive for our clientele. Therefore, I will not buy that dress.

The pattern of reasoning in which one of the following arguments most closely resembles the pattern of reasoning in the buyer's argument?

-------

(1): A snowflake will melt if it is in a warm place and not protected by insulation. This snowflake is in a warm place, but it is protected by insulation. Therefore, this snowflake will not melt. (Wrong answer I chose)

(2): A stuffed animal, in order to pass inspection, must be free of sharp edges and completely sealed. This stuffed hippo is free of sharp edges, but it is not completely sealed. Therefore, this hippo will not pass inspection. (Correct answer)

--------

Here's my understanding of the passage's logic:

It will A only if it is B and X (not C).
It is B, but it is not X (it is C). So it will not A.

Answer (1):

It will A if it is B and X (not C).
It is B, but not X (it is C). So it will not A.

Answer (2):

It will A only if B and X.
It is B, but it is not X. So it will not A.

I think Answer 1 is closer because X is defined as "not C," where in answer 2 X is just X. The only difference I can see is that Answer 1 is about a causal/natural relationship, whereas 2 is about taking action?? Is that the difference? Or is it the "only" conditional, whereas in Answer 1 technically it could happen for other unnamed reasons? The logic seems the same to me!

Thanks for any help :)

I recently subscribed to lsat demon and took my first diagnostic test after only studying maybe an hour, mainly learning the basics of the test, and I was looking for advice on where to go next and or how to improve my score. Any advice about the lsat demon platform in general is also welcome.

Hey guys! I am having so much trouble with timing in the LSAT. When it comes to the material, I will say I am pretty good at it. I do well with drills these days and I have been making good progress, but my weakness is timing while taking PT’s. It takes me almost up to 5 hours to finish a PT untimed. I take them untimed to truly see where I am at with the test itself without time, and honestly all the reviewing I’ve been doing has helped I just need to know how to improve on time and my stamina.

Thank you

Hi Everyone!

My name's Chris. I'm posting because I have a passion for logic and am looking to help others improve their LSAT through my academic and tutoring background. I graduated from UC Santa Barbara with Dean's Honors, double-majoring in philosophy and history. I have experience in high school and university education.

I took the August LSAT and scored a 176. While I found LSAT sites to be helpful in many ways, I often found the explanations to be too narrow and impersonal. My tutoring focuses on both a more thoughtful understanding of underlying logic as well as methods to quickly dismiss incorrect answers.

If you've had a similar experience with LSAT sites, or are just looking for general LSAT help, please leave a comment or DM! I'm offering free consultation meetings this week! I really love talking about logic in general, so happy to help with anything!

Hi everyone! I’m looking for an LSAT tutor who can hopefully help me break through a score plateau.
I’ve been studying pretty consistently for about 2 months, but my timed PT scores seem to be stuck around 155. The frustrating part is that my blind review is usually around 165, so I feel like I understand a lot more than what’s actually translating under timed conditions.

My biggest issue, especially with LR, is constantly getting down to two answer choices. A lot of the time I can explain why I’m between those two, but I somehow keep choosing the wrong one. It’s starting to feel like there’s something systematic going wrong with my reasoning/decision-making that I’m not able to diagnose on my own.

I’m taking the October LSAT as my first attempt, and I’m honestly not feeling great about where I’m at right now. I’m also already registered for November, so I’m looking for someone who can help me figure out what’s holding me back and make the most of the next month.
My goal is 160–165+, ideally getting my timed performance much closer to what I’m capable of during blind review.

If you’re a tutor taking new students, or if you’ve worked with someone who was especially good at helping with this kind of plateau, I’d really appreciate recommendations! Please feel free to comment or DM me with rates/availability as well. Thank you :)

Title. I have a few friends in law and their ranges are so different that I'm not sure lmao (one said 3 months is ok, one said end of sophmore year.)
Also I know GPA matters but does LSAT score take precedence over maybe a more mid gpa? (like 3.6, nothing super low)

Hey guys! I am having so much trouble with timing in the LSAT. When it comes to the material, I will say I am pretty good at it. I do well with drills these days and I have been making good progress, but my weakness is timing while taking PT’s. It takes me almost up to 5 hours to finish a PT untimed. I take them untimed to truly see where I am at with the test itself without time, and honestly all the reviewing I’ve been doing has helped I just need to know how to improve on time and my stamina.

Thank you

If anyone is considering using the 175 method taught by Ava, use this as a WARNING to save your money.

I was one of the first students to enroll, at the time the fee was $500, which was incredibly steep. Now it's $1,997, which imo unreasonable for what you're paying for.

Why I signed up: At the time I was looking for a community to join and have a few people to study with. I watched her intro video and fell for the confidence she had when she was mentioning her methods. I was also struggling with reading comp so I thought it would help. BOY WAS I WRONG. Ava mentioned a 14 day money back guarantee, but I learned the catch was that you weren't able to access the reading comp portion until after those 14 days.

When I was able to finally access it, I learned RC module was ONE video that was a "deep dive" that was essentially telling us to "read quickly and retain the important parts, highlight effectively so you can quickly glance at the passage during questions and remember what's going on. Identify and summarize the main point(s) of the passage be able to go back to those important parts" she said it comes with practice. Like are you kidding me? How are we even supposed to know what the main point is if I'm just starting studying for the test?

It's not worth you're money, especially if you've already started studying, here's why:

I say this with absolute confidence because I talked to other students and someone even reached out to me to ask if I'd be able to teach them. They said, and I very much agree, that her "method" is not understandable.

Her "deep dive" into LR teaches that every question type falls into 3 different buckets, "Argument, Premise-Set, Debate, and Paradox" and to think of multiple "what-if" scenarios that could happen that would make the argument wrong, look for the overlap in the premise-set, figure out what two people are debating over, and ask "What would make this make sense?” for paradox questions. She goes over 6 flaws (if you've been studying you would know there are more), and she has one video about Sufficient Assumption vs Necessary Assumption which didn't cover conditional logic (which was what got me in the 160s).

Overall it's very general, and doesn't go into the nuances that are very important to know for the test and would actually increase your score.

She was says "I went to a normal college, I have a normal brain, and I had a normal amount of time." which is true but I believe she was an econ major, or some type of major that involved lots of analytics, that was able to train her brain before she even started studying. I on the other hand got a BA (I'm worried to say what my actual major was because she might find out who I am) and started with a lower diagnostic. She was already in the 160s on her diagnostic and after a year of studying I was able to get there by the time I started the course so I was already skeptical of her methods when I first joined, but stayed past the 14 day window to access the reading comp.

Overall she's a great person, incredibly friendly, and I have absolutely nothing bad to say about her. If you do ask her a question she will get back to you, and she made a personalized AI that will tell you if they don't know the answer to something instead of pretending it knows like GPT.

That said, there was recently someone who asked for tips in the argumentative writing portion which she just said it's nothing to stress about and she'll talk about it during a live lesson. BUT when I was studying for just the writing portion, a lot of people said it's becoming more important and schools will look at it to figure out if your personal essay involved any AI...

Take this with a grain of salt this was just my experience.

Im 20 yrs old and have a bachelor's degree in social sciences. My goal was 4.0 and I made the Dean's List for academic excellence. I'm hoping to get into a law school in 2028 but have no idea how to take a LSAT or which schools are good. (I live in New York). I beg of you reddit: please help