Kilpatrick wrote:TLS isn't just 0ls. Plenty of people on TLS have gone through admissions cycles and have shared their experience. The conventional wisdom that LSAT>GPA>>>everything else (unless URM) has been shown to be true time and time again.
You're debating against yourself. Nobody in their right mind would disagree with this: LSAT>GPA>>>everything else (unless URM). But TLS takes it too far, saying: "Because your major doesn't matter as much your GPA, it doesn't matter at all." TLS would miss this one on the LSAT, lol.
Kilpatrick wrote:You can't listen to admissions officers, they're not going to admit that its 99% numbers based.
Of course. But Anna Ivy is no longer an admissions officer; so I don't see how this is relevant. It seems like you've never read the book. She spends an inordinate amount of time emphasizing that it's primarily numbers based.
Kilpatrick wrote:You certainly can't listen to Ann Ivy, she's trying to sell books for christs sakes.
Good point. I'll throw out Getting to Maybe and my E&Es, too. Because, as you've said, you can't trust something if it's in a book, because the author is just trying to make a sale.
Kilpatrick wrote:and also thousands of people who have been through the process.
Surely you realize that the plural or anecdote isn't data. TLS has legitimate advice on LSAT preparation and on how to excel in law school. This is because they can get feedback, critique their methods, adjust their methods, and then try again. But you don't rinse and repeat with law school admissions. People don't spend time going over practice applications like they do practice LSATs. Therefore many of the conclusions and advice on TLS re: law school admissions is dubious.