If you didn't take the LSAT, I wouldn't ignore verbal. My favorite way to practice CR is to look at poasts on SF.net and find the leaps of logic. To wit:
I took the GMAT in 2007 and didn't study. For the GMAT - brush up on geometry formulas and alegbra (FOIL, etc....)
. Ignore the verbal if your time is limited. Like Pio, I literally did not miss a question on the verbal part. Granted, I've always tested well and had just finished law school, but the verbal part is still easy. Doing geometry for the first time since high school? A little more difficult.
Which of the following statements, if true, most seriously undermines FLMM's bolded conclusion: A) The GMAT was given only on Saturdays in 2007. B) FLMM did not end up going to b-school. C) If you are having trouble with geometry, you will not see the harder math problems, like combinatorics and rate/work stuff. D) If you find the verbal section easy, you will find the math section even easier. E) I usually agree with FLMM, but not now. I agree that taking the LSAT makes the verbal part much easier, I think due to the fact that on the LSAT you're training yourself to answer 4 RC passages in around 7 mins each, and the GMAT assumes a longer time will be spent on these. Sentence correction can literally be done in 30 secs per problem and you have on avg 2 mins to complete all the verbal questions. I didn't notice a huge difference in difficulties of args and RC across LSAT and GMAT. I just think with LSAT you're shooting for a much higher standard b/c the raw intelligence of the applicant pool is a bit higher. For the OP, take both and official gmat prep test and get a Manhattan GMAT book (there are 8 of them on different topics, very focused, about $20 each). The MGMAT book comes with access to 6 computer adaptive tests, and these have very detailed explanations of the questions you get wrong. They are also much harder than the real thing, which is good for practice.