Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
silverlake33
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:57 am

Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby silverlake33 » Thu Nov 18, 2010 3:38 pm

For early decision applicants, do schools (T25) generally favor applicants with LSAT scores above median, or is it advised for those with high GPAs/low LSAT to apply ED for a better chance?

User avatar
MysticalWheel
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:23 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby MysticalWheel » Thu Nov 18, 2010 3:50 pm

silverlake33 wrote:For early decision applicants, do schools (T25) generally favor applicants with LSAT scores above median, or is it advised for those with high GPAs/low LSAT to apply ED for a better chance?

I don't see the dichotomy: if they favor higher LSATs, then yes, it would be advised for low LSATs to ED for a better chance. And as a general rule of thumb, the LSAT is weighed more than the GPA.

MW

User avatar
silverlake33
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:57 am

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby silverlake33 » Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:16 pm

MysticalWheel wrote: I don't see the dichotomy: if they favor higher LSATs, then yes, it would be advised for low LSATs to ED for a better chance. And as a general rule of thumb, the LSAT is weighed more than the GPA.

MW


Thanks for your input : ) I am concerned that with a lower LSAT/higher GPA, an ED applicant would be rejected outright (whereas a retake + applying later in the cycle yields a greater chance than ED-ing with the lower score...let's say <170/3.5< vs. 170</<3.5).

User avatar
MysticalWheel
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:23 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby MysticalWheel » Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:23 pm

silverlake33 wrote:
MysticalWheel wrote: I don't see the dichotomy: if they favor higher LSATs, then yes, it would be advised for low LSATs to ED for a better chance. And as a general rule of thumb, the LSAT is weighed more than the GPA.

MW


Thanks for your input : ) I am concerned that with a lower LSAT/higher GPA, an ED applicant would be rejected outright (whereas a retake + applying later in the cycle yields a greater chance than ED-ing with the lower score...let's say <170/3.5< vs. 170</<3.5).

It depends on how great the difference is. An EDer with 169/3.55 vs an RD 171/3.45 would probably have similar chances, but I would give the edge to the 171/3.4 applicant because of the LSAT.

MW

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18422
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby bk1 » Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:59 pm

Depends on your numbers and the school. In general, schools are almost always more forgiving to splitters than reverse-splitters.

whymeohgodno
Posts: 2508
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby whymeohgodno » Thu Nov 18, 2010 5:27 pm

bk1 wrote:Depends on your numbers and the school. In general, schools are almost always more forgiving to splitters than reverse-splitters.

+1.

User avatar
MysticalWheel
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:23 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby MysticalWheel » Thu Nov 18, 2010 10:49 pm

bk1 wrote:Depends on your numbers and the school. In general, schools are almost always more forgiving to splitters than reverse-splitters.

-1.

czelede
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby czelede » Fri Nov 19, 2010 11:21 am

MysticalWheel wrote:
bk1 wrote:Depends on your numbers and the school. In general, schools are almost always more forgiving to splitters than reverse-splitters.

-1.


You disagree?

It does seem that in general, if you have to be below one median it's better to be below the GPA median than the LSAT. Of course there are exceptions and you have to take into account how big the split is/how far below the median you are, but it would appear that the rationale behind all this lies in the fact that high LSATs are more rare than high GPAs.

User avatar
silverlake33
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:57 am

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby silverlake33 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 12:18 pm

czelede wrote:
MysticalWheel wrote:
bk1 wrote:Depends on your numbers and the school. In general, schools are almost always more forgiving to splitters than reverse-splitters.

-1.


You disagree?

It does seem that in general, if you have to be below one median it's better to be below the GPA median than the LSAT. Of course there are exceptions and you have to take into account how big the split is/how far below the median you are, but it would appear that the rationale behind all this lies in the fact that high LSATs are more rare than high GPAs.


MW- your example was very helpful since I was thinking of cases in which the numbers are fairly close within a few points.

Czelede- also the timing in the cycle might matter...for 'late' RD applicants, by the time Feb/March rolls around, they already might have filled up the class with higher LSATs and can afford to take lower LSATs at that point, hurting late splitter applicants' chances...of course, this is only speculative and based off anecdotal evidence, but nonetheless I'm worried about it.

User avatar
MysticalWheel
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:23 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby MysticalWheel » Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:23 pm

czelede wrote:
MysticalWheel wrote:
bk1 wrote:Depends on your numbers and the school. In general, schools are almost always more forgiving to splitters than reverse-splitters.

-1.


You disagree?

It does seem that in general, if you have to be below one median it's better to be below the GPA median than the LSAT. Of course there are exceptions and you have to take into account how big the split is/how far below the median you are, but it would appear that the rationale behind all this lies in the fact that high LSATs are more rare than high GPAs.

As so many have said before, splitters (reverse or not) are notoriously difficult to predict, despite general trends, so I think it is a bit extreme to say schools are "almost always more forgiving" towards splitters. Berkeley is one school that comes to mind that surely favors GPA over LSAT.

MW

User avatar
Hannibal
Posts: 2213
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:00 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby Hannibal » Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:46 pm

Way to underline your own emphasis in someone else's sentence. The "almost" is there to cover places like Berkeley. Considering Berkeley is the only T14 to favor reverse splitters over regular splitters, almost always is appropriate.

User avatar
Deuce
Posts: 1048
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:12 am

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby Deuce » Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:55 pm

Just wanted to throw my hat into the ring here.



D, DMan, Deucaliah, D-Nasty, Durrtyy D, DeucesWild, DoubleDeezy

User avatar
Dany
Posts: 11580
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:00 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby Dany » Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:59 pm

Deuce wrote:Just wanted to throw my hat into the ring here.



D, DMan, Deucaliah, D-Nasty, Durrtyy D, DeucesWild, DoubleDeezy

:lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby JazzOne » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:01 pm

Deuce wrote:Just wanted to throw my hat into the ring here.



D, DMan, Deucaliah, D-Nasty, Durrtyy D, DeucesWild, DoubleDeezy

lol

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby JazzOne » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:01 pm

MysticalWheel wrote:
czelede wrote:
MysticalWheel wrote:
bk1 wrote:Depends on your numbers and the school. In general, schools are almost always more forgiving to splitters than reverse-splitters.

-1.


You disagree?

It does seem that in general, if you have to be below one median it's better to be below the GPA median than the LSAT. Of course there are exceptions and you have to take into account how big the split is/how far below the median you are, but it would appear that the rationale behind all this lies in the fact that high LSATs are more rare than high GPAs.

As so many have said before, splitters (reverse or not) are notoriously difficult to predict, despite general trends, so I think it is a bit extreme to say schools are "almost always more forgiving" towards splitters. Berkeley is one school that comes to mind that surely favors GPA over LSAT.

MW

You're either an elaborate flame or else perfect for Chicago.
Last edited by JazzOne on Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

firemed
Posts: 1195
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:36 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby firemed » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:02 pm

Deuce wrote:Just wanted to throw my hat into the ring here.



D, DMan, Deucaliah, D-Nasty, Durrtyy D, DeucesWild, DoubleDeezy


Awesome!

FM, FMPL, the Fireman, CalienteHombre, Firemed, Firemedic, Your Daddy

Oh, and to the OP: regular (high LSAT/low GPA) splitters, generally. With exceptions. Expect a lot of WL.

User avatar
MysticalWheel
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:23 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby MysticalWheel » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:06 pm

Hannibal wrote:Way to underline your own emphasis in someone else's sentence. The "almost" is there to cover places like Berkeley. Considering Berkeley is the only T14 to favor reverse splitters over regular splitters, almost always is appropriate.

No, it's not appropriate. It is extreme language that oversimplifies the complexity of splitters. And the underline was to emphasize the extremity.

MW

User avatar
Hannibal
Posts: 2213
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:00 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby Hannibal » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:08 pm

MysticalWheel wrote:
Hannibal wrote:Way to underline your own emphasis in someone else's sentence. The "almost" is there to cover places like Berkeley. Considering Berkeley is the only T14 to favor reverse splitters over regular splitters, almost always is appropriate.

No, it's not appropriate. It is extreme language that oversimplifies the complexity of splitters. And the underline was to emphasize the extremity.

MW


Wow, I wouldn't say splitters' results are OVERcomplex. It's not THAT bad.

User avatar
MysticalWheel
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:23 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby MysticalWheel » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:09 pm

JazzOne wrote:
MysticalWheel wrote:
czelede wrote:
MysticalWheel wrote:
You disagree?

It does seem that in general, if you have to be below one median it's better to be below the GPA median than the LSAT. Of course there are exceptions and you have to take into account how big the split is/how far below the median you are, but it would appear that the rationale behind all this lies in the fact that high LSATs are more rare than high GPAs.

As so many have said before, splitters (reverse or not) are notoriously difficult to predict, despite general trends, so I think it is a bit extreme to say schools are "almost always more forgiving" towards splitters. Berkeley is one school that comes to mind that surely favors GPA over LSAT.

MW

You're either an elaborate flame or else perfect for Chicago.

Well, I applied to Chicago, but I think I'll go to Harvard or Stanford instead. Columbia is the consolation prize. Also, it seems quite odd to call someone who is relevantly responding with rational argument a flame, especially when you are not part of said argument. Why are you going to law school again?

MW
Last edited by MysticalWheel on Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Deuce
Posts: 1048
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:12 am

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby Deuce » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:10 pm

Double signature! What does it mean?!?!?!?!?

User avatar
MysticalWheel
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:23 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby MysticalWheel » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:11 pm

Hannibal wrote:
MysticalWheel wrote:
Hannibal wrote:Way to underline your own emphasis in someone else's sentence. The "almost" is there to cover places like Berkeley. Considering Berkeley is the only T14 to favor reverse splitters over regular splitters, almost always is appropriate.

No, it's not appropriate. It is extreme language that oversimplifies the complexity of splitters. And the underline was to emphasize the extremity.

MW


Wow, I wouldn't say splitters' results are OVERcomplex. It's not THAT bad.

Either way, I find saying "almost always" extreme.

MW
Last edited by MysticalWheel on Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MysticalWheel
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:23 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby MysticalWheel » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:12 pm

Deuce wrote:Double signature! What does it mean?!?!?!?!?

I took care of it for you :).

MW

User avatar
Hannibal
Posts: 2213
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:00 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby Hannibal » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:17 pm

MysticalWheel wrote:
Hannibal wrote:
MysticalWheel wrote:
Hannibal wrote:Way to underline your own emphasis in someone else's sentence. The "almost" is there to cover places like Berkeley. Considering Berkeley is the only T14 to favor reverse splitters over regular splitters, almost always is appropriate.

No, it's not appropriate. It is extreme language that oversimplifies the complexity of splitters. And the underline was to emphasize the extremity.

MW


Wow, I wouldn't say splitters' results are OVERcomplex. It's not THAT bad.

Either way, I find saying "almost always" extreme.

MW


Always would be 14/14. What would be the closest to always you can get, without it being always (thus almost always)?

firemed
Posts: 1195
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:36 pm

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby firemed » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:17 pm

MysticalWheel wrote:
Hannibal wrote:
MysticalWheel wrote:
Hannibal wrote:Way to underline your own emphasis in someone else's sentence. The "almost" is there to cover places like Berkeley. Considering Berkeley is the only T14 to favor reverse splitters over regular splitters, almost always is appropriate.

No, it's not appropriate. It is extreme language that oversimplifies the complexity of splitters. And the underline was to emphasize the extremity.

MW


Wow, I wouldn't say splitters' results are OVERcomplex. It's not THAT bad.

Either way, I find saying "almost always" extreme.

MW


"Almost always" is held up over and over again by things like LSN. The majority of splitters don't have any complex issues going on. Let's face it, it is almost always about the numbers. Unless you have a published novel or a nobel peace prize you are just a set of numbers to admissions. Maybe a set of numbers they like after reading your PS or resume... but they aren't making the decision off that liking. They are going to make the decision off the numbers 9.9/10 times. And 13/14 times they will favor the "regular" splitter.

You are arguing a point you are wrong on for no apparent reason.
Last edited by firemed on Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: Who first- Splitters or Reverse-Splitters?

Postby JazzOne » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:18 pm

MysticalWheel wrote:Well, I applied to Chicago, but I think I'll go to Harvard or Stanford instead. Columbia is the consolation prize. Also, it seems quite odd to call someone who is relevantly responding with rational argument a flame, especially when you are not part of said argument. Why are you going to law school again?

MW

You are uniformly despised on this forum. Do you not get that? Wait, flame.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BruiseWillis, patrickkpaul and 4 guests