Finished Holtz’s PT seminar the other day. All in all, I have to say that I’m glad I took it. I was decidedly less than impressed with Honigsberg’s PT lectures. I came out of it with the understanding that all you had to do was to make sure that the instructions were reflected in your section headings, and that by being a sheep you could definitely succeed in the closed universe of the PT exam. Obviously this approach worked for many, but it certainly didn’t work for me.
I was pretty skeptical about Holtz’s PT workshop. I didn’t know anyone who had taken it, and so I could only rely on limited information gleaned from the various bar related message boards. My sense was the people either swore by the class, or decided that his methods were too complicated to be of any use. After three, rather long and grueling days, I came away decidedly impressed.
His system (which I'm precluded from discussing under the terms of a non-disclosure agreement) was complex, but certainly workable. I liked how he encouraged the class to adapt his system to suit our needs, as opposed to most other classes that heavily push their method as being the only method to pass. However, the most valuable element of the lectures was the sheer number of tests that he forced us to dissect. I now feel that I have a much clearer understanding of what is, and isn't, necessary to write a passing answer. I'm not saying that the workshop is for everyone, but I'm certainly glad that I stumbled onto it.