In August 2024 the LSAT dropped Logic Games. Studiers lost a whole section of the test overnight, their courses lost a quarter of their material, and the marketing copy went quiet for about a week before pretending it had always been this way.
The change is worth sitting with, because it quietly settled a claim people have argued about for years: is the LSAT a trainable skill, or a raw-aptitude measure you either have or don't?
What actually changed
The LSAT is now two Logical Reasoning sections, one Reading Comprehension section, and one unscored experimental section. Still scored 120 to 180. The writing sample is separate and unscored.
That one structural edit moves a lot of weight. Logical Reasoning is now two-thirds of the scored test. The section everyone treats as "LR is where the score lives" is now most of the exam by definition.
Coachable, but not in the way the ads mean
Here is the honest position, and it is a more interesting one than either side of the old argument gives you.
The LSAT is the most coachable of the big admissions tests. Not because a magic method exists, but because what it tests is unusually specific. Assumption, flaw, strengthen, weaken, inference: these are learnable moves, not reflexes you are born with. Get good at naming the job of a question stem on sight and you buy back real speed. That is real.
But "coachable" does not mean "15 points in a month." The dramatic scored jumps you see advertised are selected samples, shown because they are dramatic. Controlled gains from real practice are solid, but modest and clustered: they show up as a handful of scaled points and, more durably, in how you read under time. Call it a real edge, not a transformation.
The trap that costs you time
The most expensive mistake a 2026 LSAT studier can make is studying the old test. Huge amounts of reputable material are still geared toward Logic Games that no longer exists on it. If your schedule still has a Logic Games block, you are rehearsing a test that stopped being real in 2024.
The sharpest reprioritization you can do is to point almost all of your reasoning practice at the two Logical Reasoning sections, because that is where two-thirds of your score now comes from.
What actually helps
This part is not complicated, and it is worth saying plainly:
- Know your question stems cold. Learn to recognize the job before reading the stimulus, so you read the argument with a purpose instead of hoping.
- Read comparatively. The comparative passage set rewards tracking who argues what. Practice on real dense prose, not warmed-over summaries.
- Drill timed, review the miss. The feedback loop is the highest-yield activity there is. Get one wrong and understand exactly why.
- Retake with a plan. A focused repeat beats passive repetition.
The through-line
The design of the new LSAT matches what the evidence has said all along: you get better at the reasoning you actually practice, in the form you practice it. You do not get smarter in general; you get sharper at this specific, high-value judgment.
That is the whole honest frame. And it is why, if you want a daily reasoning warm-up that chases the exact distinctions the LSAT cares about, there is one with no score promise: IntelligenceMax's LSAT guide, which breaks down the current test format, what prep buys you, and where the hype overshoots.
Disclosure: I founded IntelligenceMax, an adaptive reasoning practice. If any of this reads soft, say so.
Top comments (0)