If you’re like most LSAT students, I’ll bet you hate rule substitution questions. If I told you they don’t have to be hard, would you believe me?
The trick is to look at the full effect of a rule, and describe it another way. Let’s look at what we know about X:
X comes after Z, V and W. X also comes after Y, because Y has to be in one of the first three places, and X already has three people in front.
So Z, V, W and Y comes before X. Only U could come after X. That’s the full extent of the rule.
And now that’s we’ve looked at the full extent of the rule, it’s obvious that A is CORRECT.
You can also answer these questions by elimination. An answer is wrong if it allows something that shouldn’t be allowed, or if it prevents something that normally would be allowed.
B is wrong because it puts V before W. Normally, it’s possible for W to go before V.
C is wrong because it leaves out Z. With the rule in this answer, it would be possible for Z to go after X.
D is wrong because it allows Z to go after X. For example, this order is normally illegal, but it would be allowed with this rule:
That diagram also proves that E wrong. E allows Z to be after X as long as X is in five. That is different from the normal rules.
Want a free Logic Games lesson?
Get a free sample of the Logic Games Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for going faster at logic games