Something weird about TLS

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
Nulli Secundus
Posts: 2625
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 7:19 am

Something weird about TLS

Postby Nulli Secundus » Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:59 am

X asks his / her chances, X has good GPA but lower than 172 LSAT.

Unanimous TLS opinion #1: YHS is out.
Unanimous TLS opinion #2: Unless it is Nobel prize caliber, softs do not matter.

Paradox: HLS accepts ~220 people with lower than 170/171 LSAT score (25% percentile). Nobel prize is awarded in 6 categories, and except for peace, a maximum of 3 people can receive the award in a category in a year. (6*3 = 18) Assuming there are no people receiving Nobels during undergraduate and everyone applying to law school do so within 12 years of completing undergraduate, there are exactly (18*12 = 216) Nobel prize winners.

Which one of the following resolves the apparent paradox above?

a - The 25th percentile of HLS consists of every Nobel prize winner of the last 12 years.
b - TLS is wrong. (Somebody is wrong on the internet)
c - HLS is a lie. (So is cake)
d - Screenshots or it didn't happen.
e - None of the above.

Thanks!

(BEFORE A STORM OF AD HOMINEM, I DID NOT TAKE THE LSAT YET, HENCE I AM NOT THE X IN QUESTION)

miamiman
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:55 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby miamiman » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:03 am

You're distorting the advice TLS gives and for what -- lulz? Ridiculous thread.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby vanwinkle » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:10 am

miamiman wrote:You're distorting the advice TLS gives and for what -- lulz? Ridiculous thread.

User avatar
Nulli Secundus
Posts: 2625
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 7:19 am

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby Nulli Secundus » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:14 am

Where exactly is the distortion? Indeed I made this thread for lulz, but the replies confused me a bit, you claim the two TLS opinions I referred to are not meant to be used together or what exactly?

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby vanwinkle » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:18 am

nullisecundus wrote:Where exactly is the distortion? Indeed I made this thread for lulz

I stopped caring enough to respond here.

User avatar
ShuckingNotJiving
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:24 am

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby ShuckingNotJiving » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:19 am

nullisecundus wrote:Where exactly is the distortion?


nullisecundus wrote:Unanimous TLS opinion #2: Unless it is Nobel prize caliber, softs do not matter.



I understand your grievances, but the above is a pretty obvious distortion.

oakroom
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:52 am

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby oakroom » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:19 am

As far as percentiles go, there is no difference between the case where the entire bottom 25% of the class has a 171 and the case where the bottom 24% has a 170 or lower but the next person has a 171. The truth is somewhere in between and unknowable (other than to HLS admissions staff), but that accounts for at least part of the discrepancy.

Also, URM.

User avatar
kittenmittons
Posts: 1453
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:24 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby kittenmittons » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:20 am

You aren't as smart or clever as you think you are.

hi cc

User avatar
SullaFelix
Posts: 113
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 8:18 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby SullaFelix » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:21 am

nullisecundus wrote:Where exactly is the distortion? Indeed I made this thread for lulz, but the replies confused me a bit, you claim the two TLS opinions I referred to are not meant to be used together or what exactly?


People are going to base their advice on probability. Especially if someone isn't a URM, the chances of being part of that lower 25th percentile is slim.

At best, it's a total crapshoot — if Harvard wanted, they could fill another few classes with students above that 25th percentile, and they have an enormous number of applicants to choose from with approximately 25th percentile numbers to fill those extremely limited spots. So telling someone they have a good chance would be awful advice.

User avatar
kazu
Posts: 1602
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 9:35 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby kazu » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:48 am

oakroom wrote:Also, URM.


Plus, where did the 220 people come from? I think Harvard selects around 550 people each year, not 880, so the lower-than-25% would be closer to 140 or something.

Also, define "good" GPA. Harvard's median is 3.89. I have not seen that many people on here with 170~172 LSAT and 3.89+ GPA.

User avatar
Nulli Secundus
Posts: 2625
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 7:19 am

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby Nulli Secundus » Thu Aug 12, 2010 12:32 pm

880~ = Accepted
550~ = Enrolled

User avatar
acrossthelake
Posts: 4432
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby acrossthelake » Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:29 pm

nullisecundus wrote:X asks his / her chances, X has good GPA but lower than 172 LSAT.

Unanimous TLS opinion #1: YHS is out.
Unanimous TLS opinion #2: Unless it is Nobel prize caliber, softs do not matter.

Paradox: HLS accepts ~220 people with lower than 170/171 LSAT score (25% percentile). Nobel prize is awarded in 6 categories, and except for peace, a maximum of 3 people can receive the award in a category in a year. (6*3 = 18) Assuming there are no people receiving Nobels during undergraduate and everyone applying to law school do so within 12 years of completing undergraduate, there are exactly (18*12 = 216) Nobel prize winners.

Which one of the following resolves the apparent paradox above?

a - The 25th percentile of HLS consists of every Nobel prize winner of the last 12 years.
b - TLS is wrong. (Somebody is wrong on the internet)
c - HLS is a lie. (So is cake)
d - Screenshots or it didn't happen.
e - None of the above.

Thanks!

(BEFORE A STORM OF AD HOMINEM, I DID NOT TAKE THE LSAT YET, HENCE I AM NOT THE X IN QUESTION)


Alright I'll bite.

1) Nobel Prize Caliber is too strong, I would substitute that with "Rhodes Scholar" caliber. It is possible that softs not quite at that caliber can sway as well, however, that's going to depend on specific admissions officers, and we can't read the minds of specific people to judge a gray area.
2) Ever heard of URMs?
3) Some of those people are reverse splitters. Not sure what your definition of a "good" GPA is, but it's got to be pretty high in order to get up above the 75th at YHS. (Above a 3.96 at YH, and 3.94 at S). Don't forget that median GPA at Yale is 3.9 and at Stanford is 3.87...not sure about Harvard, but I'm sure it's around there as well, so by that standard, a "3.82/169" for example is below median for GPA and below the 25th percentile for the LSAT...which obviously is not a strong combination.

User avatar
jcd178
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:24 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby jcd178 » Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:35 pm

nullisecundus wrote:X asks his / her chances, X has good GPA but lower than 172 LSAT.

Unanimous TLS opinion #1: YHS is out.
Unanimous TLS opinion #2: Unless it is Nobel prize caliber, softs do not matter.

Paradox: HLS accepts ~220 people with lower than 170/171 LSAT score (25% percentile). Nobel prize is awarded in 6 categories, and except for peace, a maximum of 3 people can receive the award in a category in a year. (6*3 = 18) Assuming there are no people receiving Nobels during undergraduate and everyone applying to law school do so within 12 years of completing undergraduate, there are exactly (18*12 = 216) Nobel prize winners.

Which one of the following resolves the apparent paradox above?

a - The 25th percentile of HLS consists of every Nobel prize winner of the last 12 years.
b - TLS is wrong. (Somebody is wrong on the internet)
c - HLS is a lie. (So is cake)
d - Screenshots or it didn't happen.
e - None of the above.

Thanks!

(BEFORE A STORM OF AD HOMINEM, I DID NOT TAKE THE LSAT YET, HENCE I AM NOT THE X IN QUESTION)


Not sure this is an entirely accurate view of the TLS opinion either. I'm a 4.0/170/mediocre softs and I was told YHS should be my reaches, not that they were out.

User avatar
acrossthelake
Posts: 4432
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby acrossthelake » Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:36 pm

jcd178 wrote:
nullisecundus wrote:X asks his / her chances, X has good GPA but lower than 172 LSAT.

Unanimous TLS opinion #1: YHS is out.
Unanimous TLS opinion #2: Unless it is Nobel prize caliber, softs do not matter.

Paradox: HLS accepts ~220 people with lower than 170/171 LSAT score (25% percentile). Nobel prize is awarded in 6 categories, and except for peace, a maximum of 3 people can receive the award in a category in a year. (6*3 = 18) Assuming there are no people receiving Nobels during undergraduate and everyone applying to law school do so within 12 years of completing undergraduate, there are exactly (18*12 = 216) Nobel prize winners.

Which one of the following resolves the apparent paradox above?

a - The 25th percentile of HLS consists of every Nobel prize winner of the last 12 years.
b - TLS is wrong. (Somebody is wrong on the internet)
c - HLS is a lie. (So is cake)
d - Screenshots or it didn't happen.
e - None of the above.

Thanks!

(BEFORE A STORM OF AD HOMINEM, I DID NOT TAKE THE LSAT YET, HENCE I AM NOT THE X IN QUESTION)


Not sure this is an entirely accurate view of the TLS opinion either. I'm a 4.0/170/mediocre softs and I was told YHS should be my reaches, not that they were out.


This is correct, because you have a GPA above their 75th percentile. I think the problem with the OP is realizing that you really need around a 4.0GPA to be "good" at YHS.

User avatar
BioEBear2010
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:05 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby BioEBear2010 » Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:40 pm

First off, yes, people on TLS don't know what they are talking about. One does not need Nobel Prize-level softs to get into HYS with those stats.

But nonetheless, your argument is critically flawed. You do some cute number crunching on Nobel prize data, but you explicitly state the following:
"
nullisecundus wrote:Unanimous TLS opinion #2: Unless it is Nobel prize caliber, softs do not matter.
.

"Nobel prize caliber" does not mean "only Nobel prize."

User avatar
98234872348
Posts: 1547
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby 98234872348 » Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:42 pm

I believe the typical advice given by TLS posters for folks with a 3.85+/172 is that HYS are unlikely but certainly worth the application fee.

I sincerely doubt any rational human would contest that advice.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby DoubleChecks » Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:48 pm

yeah for the most part, TLS advice on YHS has been pretty decent/accurate

your examples and misrepresentations are so poorly done that...oh man, iunno what to say haha; everyone's already said it for me

User avatar
KibblesAndVick
Posts: 541
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:29 am

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby KibblesAndVick » Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:52 pm


User avatar
acrossthelake
Posts: 4432
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby acrossthelake » Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:03 pm

KibblesAndVick wrote:This is the LSN data for students with LSATs below 172 but GPAs above 3.9 (URMs excluded)

This is the LSN data for students with LSATs below 170 but GPAs above 3.9 (URMs excluded)

--ImageRemoved--
This is an image of some black students graduating college.

I think that should more or less cover it.


Oh, and here is LSN data for students with LSATs at 170 or lower and GPAS 3.85 or lower with URMS excluded:
http://harvard.lawschoolnumbers.com/app ... ,8&type=jd

1 admission out of many rejections. Fabulous chances.

User avatar
JollyGreenGiant
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:12 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby JollyGreenGiant » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:02 pm

kazu wrote:Also, define "good" GPA. Harvard's median is 3.89. I have not seen that many people on here with 170~172 LSAT and 3.89+ GPA.

That would be me and I'm currently rotting on the Harvard WL. Oh well, that's life.. eh?

User avatar
calicocat
Posts: 1099
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 1:29 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby calicocat » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:34 pm

kittenmittons wrote:You aren't as smart or clever as you think you are.

hi cc

hi km :oops:

User avatar
skoobily doobily
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby skoobily doobily » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:50 pm

OP: learn much you must, before time it is for LSAT

User avatar
kazu
Posts: 1602
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 9:35 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby kazu » Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:20 am

JollyGreenGiant wrote:
kazu wrote:Also, define "good" GPA. Harvard's median is 3.89. I have not seen that many people on here with 170~172 LSAT and 3.89+ GPA.

That would be me and I'm currently rotting on the Harvard WL. Oh well, that's life.. eh?

Aww I'm sorry :(

User avatar
20160810
Posts: 19648
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:18 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby 20160810 » Fri Aug 13, 2010 7:11 am

SOMETIMES GENERAL TRENDS HAVE EXCEPTIONS I DARESAY

User avatar
AngryAvocado
Posts: 776
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:22 pm

Re: Something weird about TLS

Postby AngryAvocado » Fri Aug 13, 2010 7:41 am

SBL wrote:SOMETIMES GENERAL TRENDS HAVE EXCEPTIONS I DARESAY


Blasphemy!




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: patrickkpaul and 6 guests