When a question gives you a new rule, you should draw the new rule. Here are both scenarios, with Zacny immediately after Weiss:
Now you can use the same approach of visualizing the scenarios using these two diagrams. If an answer is possible, it’s wrong.
A is possible in the first scenario. Larue is first in that scenario.
B is possible in the first scenario. Just put Pei second and Treviño third.
C is possible in the second scenario. Just put T – WZ in the first three spaces.
E is possible in the first scenario. Put Zacny fourth and Pei fifth.
(Note that most of these are possible in either scenario. I’m not trying to prove all the possibilities. I’m just trying to prove the answers are possible somewhere, and therefore wrong.)
D is CORRECT. In this scenario, Pei can only go second, third or fifth. I recommend trying a couple of sketches using the diagram above if you have any doubts on this point.
Want a free Logic Games lesson?
Get a free sample of the Logic Games Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for going faster at logic games
Tyler Russell says
What would be wrong with L-T-W-Z-P-O? Am I misunderstanding Rule 4? Do they have to be subsequent?
TutorLucas (LSAT Hacks) says
Remember, this is a must be false question, so we’re looking to eliminate answer choices that could be true. The correct answer choice can under no circumstances be true. L-T-W-Z-P-O is an acceptable scenario, so we can eliminate (A) and (E) on that basis.
If you’re also referring to the first scenario in the diagram: there’s a small typo that will be fixed shortly. “O” should be placed in the final position.