CapHillLove wrote:eskimo wrote:PDaddy wrote:
BTW, no adcom (even from HYS) would ever say that someone with a 158-163 "couldn't handle the LSAT". That person handled the LSAT just fine, beating out what...77-90% of all test takers?
If you have a 4.0 and a 158, you absolutely couldn't handle the LSAT. It would be different if it weren't a learnable test, but if you can put in 4 years of straight As in college and can't get 165+ on the LSAT, you either couldn't handle it or didn't study hard enough.
There are very rare exceptions, but if I'm a Harvard adcomm and I see a 158/4.0, my first thought is: This person worked for four years for a great GPA and couldn't work for four months to get a better LSAT score?
But what if you saw that and then a 175+ re-take? I understand that a 158 to 176+ jump isn't likely, but low-160's to high-170's is definitely not uncommon. The point about being able to re-take and proving yourself to be capable of a higher score, while not being able to raise your GPA, is a valid one.
Completely missed my point there, bud. If you'll look earlier in the thread, you'll notice I said that I would ONLY want to be a reverse splitter if retake was an option.
I was responding solely to PDaddy's statement that an HYS adcomm would never say that a 158-163 "couldn't handle the LSAT." If in fact that applicant had a 4.0, and APPLIED with a 158 (so clearly retake is not an option, since in the scenario the adcomm is looking at the score), then they couldn't handle the LSAT.
My post had nothing to do with retaking, or even which splitter I'd rather be. I was just responding to one point that PDaddy made.