Who has underperformed their numbers?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
oregon000
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:45 am

Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby oregon000 » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:17 pm

TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?

TheOcho
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:46 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby TheOcho » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:20 pm

oregon000 wrote:TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?


169/ 3.75

WL at Cornell, Vandy, UCLA, USC, BU, Duke, Michigan. Duke and Michigan probably aren't anomalies, however.

I don't really have decent "softs" and got a minor in consumption during UG. That's about all I can think of.

User avatar
AntipodeanPhil
Posts: 1300
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:02 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby AntipodeanPhil » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:31 pm

I came across this person while browsing LSN last night:

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Hercules14/jd

I hope it's okay to post the link here - information on LSN is hardly private. With 177 / 3.82, you would have thought he was auto admit almost everywhere, but I guess there must be something else going on.

TheOcho
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:46 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby TheOcho » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:33 pm

AntipodeanPhil wrote:I came across this person while browsing LSN last night:

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Hercules14/jd

I hope it's okay to post the link here - information on LSN is hardly private. With 177 / 3.82, you would have thought he was auto admit almost everywhere, but I guess there must be something else going on.


Not too surprising. Yale and Harvard are almost always toss-ups and the other schools were probably engaging in some form of YP knowing Hercules would end up with much better offers.

bhan87
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:08 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby bhan87 » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:34 pm

AntipodeanPhil wrote:I came across this person while browsing LSN last night:

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Hercules14/jd

I hope it's okay to post the link here - information on LSN is hardly private. With 177 / 3.82, you would have thought he was auto admit almost everywhere, but I guess there must be something else going on.


HY rejected for GPA, I buy that.

UPenn, UVA WL for no targetted essay probably

Berk ding because it's Berk.

The guy got into Columbia and NYU, and also received sizable schollies in the 15-25 range. Seems like a standard cycle to me

oregon000
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:45 am

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby oregon000 » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:35 pm

that is brutal. Maybe he didn't do anything after undergrad. It looks like the lower schools could have been YP, but the top schools didn't cooperate. Columbia with money is nothing to scoff at though...

User avatar
AntipodeanPhil
Posts: 1300
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:02 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby AntipodeanPhil » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:38 pm

I hope Bhan is right. It would make me very anxious if he was rejected by top 10 places for yield protect. If you look at the Harvard decision graph on LSN, he stands out as by far the best number-qualified rejection.

oregon000
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:45 am

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby oregon000 » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:45 pm

Another theory: I feel that it might be tempting to rely on your numbers when applying ( i.e. 177 LSAT). Perhaps he didn't put as much time and thought into his apps as he would have with a 170.

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby Patriot1208 » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:46 pm

TheOcho wrote:
oregon000 wrote:TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?


169/ 3.75

WL at Cornell, Vandy, UCLA, USC, BU, Duke, Michigan. Duke and Michigan probably aren't anomalies, however.

I don't really have decent "softs" and got a minor in consumption during UG. That's about all I can think of.

That is a bad cycle. How late did you apply? I'd reapply with more targeted essays at Cornell and the rest. And, if you didn't mind paying sticker, i'd ED to Mich because you are at both medians.

leapincamelleopard
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby leapincamelleopard » Fri Apr 15, 2011 2:13 pm

171, 3.86

Waitlisted: Duke, UChicago, USC, Cornel, UVA, UCLA, Columbia, UWash
Highest ranked school I was accepted to was Georgetown (with no money)

I am not the most interesting person and I went to an undergrad with no history of anyone having applied to law school after graduating. Multiple LSAT- previous scores 157, 159- so that was hopefully the reason and not that I am just a terrible person/essay writer Or maybe I just really screwed something up.

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby ahduth » Fri Apr 15, 2011 2:19 pm

AntipodeanPhil wrote:I hope Bhan is right. It would make me very anxious if he was rejected by top 10 places for yield protect. If you look at the Harvard decision graph on LSN, he stands out as by far the best number-qualified rejection.


Yeah I'm not buying this. 177 / 3.82 at H?

Maybe Rubenstein started playing rookie ball up there. But... I kinda doubt it.

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby ahduth » Fri Apr 15, 2011 2:21 pm

leapincamelleopard wrote:171, 3.86

Waitlisted: Duke, UChicago, USC, Cornel, UVA, UCLA, Columbia, UWash
Highest ranked school I was accepted to was Georgetown (with no money)

I am not the most interesting person and I went to an undergrad with no history of anyone having applied to law school after graduating. Multiple LSAT- previous scores 157, 159- so that was hopefully the reason and not that I am just a terrible person/essay writer Or maybe I just really screwed something up.


Sweetheart, you've got great numbers. Wait out the wait list, and you'll get in somewhere good. :D

leapincamelleopard
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby leapincamelleopard » Fri Apr 15, 2011 2:25 pm

ahduth wrote:
Sweetheart, you've got great numbers. Wait out the wait list, and you'll get in somewhere good. :D


Aw thanks! thats what I'm hoping for.

mezzoitaliano702
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:32 am

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby mezzoitaliano702 » Sat Apr 16, 2011 1:26 pm

h
Last edited by mezzoitaliano702 on Thu May 09, 2013 2:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

FiveSermon
Posts: 1507
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:56 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby FiveSermon » Sat Apr 16, 2011 1:31 pm

Patriot1208 wrote:
TheOcho wrote:
oregon000 wrote:TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?


169/ 3.75

WL at Cornell, Vandy, UCLA, USC, BU, Duke, Michigan. Duke and Michigan probably aren't anomalies, however.

I don't really have decent "softs" and got a minor in consumption during UG. That's about all I can think of.

That is a bad cycle. How late did you apply? I'd reapply with more targeted essays at Cornell and the rest. And, if you didn't mind paying sticker, i'd ED to Mich because you are at both medians.


I agree it's a horrible cycle. Did he interview at Vandy? Write a why MICH?

I've heard that Why Cornell doesn't matter.

deltasigbn
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 1:58 am

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby deltasigbn » Sat Apr 16, 2011 7:12 pm

I'm curious about the question but if a different way. Whether somebody has been above both medians and done very poorly (bottom half of their class) in law school.

oregon000
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:45 am

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby oregon000 » Sat Apr 16, 2011 7:17 pm

TheOcho wrote:
oregon000 wrote:TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?


169/ 3.75

WL at Cornell, Vandy, UCLA, USC, BU, Duke, Michigan. Duke and Michigan probably aren't anomalies, however.

I don't really have decent "softs" and got a minor in consumption during UG. That's about all I can think of.


I feel like a consumption minor would be a positive soft if you were interested in environmental law

User avatar
AntipodeanPhil
Posts: 1300
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:02 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby AntipodeanPhil » Sat Apr 16, 2011 7:35 pm

oregon000 wrote:I feel like a consumption minor would be a positive soft if you were interested in environmental law

+1

LOL. I read it the same way the first time. I started thinking about what sort of material the subject would cover.

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

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby Hannibal » Sat Apr 16, 2011 7:36 pm

<---This guy

Highest ranked school I got into is WUSTL (with significant money), WLed everywhere from Columbia on down. Except Texas.

User avatar
AntipodeanPhil
Posts: 1300
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:02 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby AntipodeanPhil » Sat Apr 16, 2011 7:39 pm

Hannibal wrote:<---This guy

Highest ranked school I got into is WUSTL (with significant money), WLed everywhere from Columbia on down. Except Texas.

Ouch! 174 is high for WUSTL. But I guess you're a splitter. Is that an exceptionally bad result, by splitter standards?

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

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby Hannibal » Sat Apr 16, 2011 7:42 pm

AntipodeanPhil wrote:
Hannibal wrote:<---This guy

Highest ranked school I got into is WUSTL (with significant money), WLed everywhere from Columbia on down. Except Texas.

Ouch! 174 is high for WUSTL. But I guess you're a splitter. Is that an exceptionally bad result, by splitter standards?


Nah, splitters with my numbers have been WL pwned pretty often this cycle.

So I guess I didn't underperform my numbers so much as "my combination of numbers did worse than you'd expect this year."

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby Grizz » Sat Apr 16, 2011 7:48 pm

deltasigbn wrote:I'm curious about the question but if a different way. Whether somebody has been above both medians and done very poorly (bottom half of their class) in law school.


Yes.

User avatar
SilverE2
Posts: 931
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:04 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby SilverE2 » Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:35 pm

169/3.5. I applied in September, The only T20 I got into was GW, and at sticker. WL at Mich, Vandy, and BU. Rejected at BC, Cornell, GULC (part time) USC. :(

I'm a 4 time test taker though, so who knows. Maybe about standard.

User avatar
Bildungsroman
Posts: 5548
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:42 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby Bildungsroman » Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:38 pm

I didn't think I underperformed until I saw all the people I was following as #s twins get into Chicago RD. :(

TheOcho
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:46 pm

Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?

Postby TheOcho » Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:39 pm

FiveSermon wrote:
Patriot1208 wrote:
TheOcho wrote:
oregon000 wrote:TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?


169/ 3.75

WL at Cornell, Vandy, UCLA, USC, BU, Duke, Michigan. Duke and Michigan probably aren't anomalies, however.

I don't really have decent "softs" and got a minor in consumption during UG. That's about all I can think of.

That is a bad cycle. How late did you apply? I'd reapply with more targeted essays at Cornell and the rest. And, if you didn't mind paying sticker, i'd ED to Mich because you are at both medians.


I agree it's a horrible cycle. Did he interview at Vandy? Write a why MICH?

I've heard that Why Cornell doesn't matter.


I wrote "Why" essays for UVA (rejected), Duke, and Michigan. I did not interview at Vandy. I applied early, before Thanksgiving.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media and 4 guests