Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th Forum
- cotiger
- Posts: 1648
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm
Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
For all of the T14 that have posted medians, 25th, and 75th data for the class of 2016, I went to mylsn and found the likelihood of acceptance in the 2012-2013 cycle based on location in the categories of 0-24th, 25-49th, 50-74th, and 75-100th percentile for LSAT and GPA.
Edited: GPA and LSAT floors are now taken as the lowest non-URM score to get at least a waitlist in order to weed out useless data on the low end.
As an example, here's Harvard:
Harvard 3.30-3.76 3.77-3.87 3.88-3.94 3.95-4.33
164-169 0% 0% 4.8% 13.3%
170-172 8.6% 7.4% 57.1% 83.3%
173-174 20% 76.2% 83.3% 100%
175-180 35.3% 81% 93.8% 100%
The spreadsheet is here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... ZN2c#gid=0
Feel free to make it prettier if you're good at that kind of thing.
Note: URMs and ED excluded
Edited: GPA and LSAT floors are now taken as the lowest non-URM score to get at least a waitlist in order to weed out useless data on the low end.
As an example, here's Harvard:
Harvard 3.30-3.76 3.77-3.87 3.88-3.94 3.95-4.33
164-169 0% 0% 4.8% 13.3%
170-172 8.6% 7.4% 57.1% 83.3%
173-174 20% 76.2% 83.3% 100%
175-180 35.3% 81% 93.8% 100%
The spreadsheet is here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... ZN2c#gid=0
Feel free to make it prettier if you're good at that kind of thing.
Note: URMs and ED excluded
Last edited by cotiger on Wed Sep 11, 2013 12:02 pm, edited 3 times in total.
- jrsbaseball5
- Posts: 290
- Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 12:41 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
This is awesome. Thanks!
- whippersnappery
- Posts: 174
- Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 10:19 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
This is awesome! Did you exclude or include URMs?
- cotiger
- Posts: 1648
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
Excluded URMs and EDwhippersnappery wrote:This is awesome! Did you exclude or include URMs?
-
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:43 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
this is rad.
Any way to incorporate assumed GPA floors into the matrix? I mean, I know that nothing is going to be perfect, and we could subdivide this further and further forever.
But in this case, given the fact that most schools seem to have an unofficial gpa floor, I think that by taking this into account you gain a significant amount of accuracy on the low end for the cost of only one additional column.
Take duke, for example. the low GPA column goes from 2.0-3.58, whereas someone with a 2.0 has really zero chance and someone with a 3.58 has a pretty good chance depending on lsat score.
Their gpa floor looked like it was about 3.3 last year (with one lower outlier), so if the column is added that separates the "2.0-floor" gpas from the "floor-25th) gpas, you end up with all people under the floor—who, while definitely not offering or intending to offer perfect percentages, are statistically very similar—lumped into one percentage range that will reflect the fact that a) outliers do exist, and b) despite this, your chances really do approach zero at a certain gpa. You also lump all people from the floor to the median GPA, and again, while not perfect, they all stand chances that are much closer together than a range that dips below the floor.
I just think that, since this is a matrix, the attempt is to consider all significant cutoffs, and I would argue that the gpa floor is one. It will really only improve the accuracy of the low gpa/high lsat box (i think!), but for such a small price, I think it's worth it.
The percentages boxes for 170-180 lsat for duke currently run:
39.9 - 93.1 - 97.3 - 87.6
If the subdivision is made, taking data for the last 2 years for the lower end data (URM excluded), it will look more like this:
13 - 53 - 92 - 96 - 93
That's a significant division.
I didn't want to just run in and change stuff on someone else's work! But if this is something that you think sounds good, i'd be happy to do it or to compile to data and send it over, or whatever. Or you can just ignore me if you think it's good enough
And, really, it is good enough. This was a killer idea.
Any way to incorporate assumed GPA floors into the matrix? I mean, I know that nothing is going to be perfect, and we could subdivide this further and further forever.
But in this case, given the fact that most schools seem to have an unofficial gpa floor, I think that by taking this into account you gain a significant amount of accuracy on the low end for the cost of only one additional column.
Take duke, for example. the low GPA column goes from 2.0-3.58, whereas someone with a 2.0 has really zero chance and someone with a 3.58 has a pretty good chance depending on lsat score.
Their gpa floor looked like it was about 3.3 last year (with one lower outlier), so if the column is added that separates the "2.0-floor" gpas from the "floor-25th) gpas, you end up with all people under the floor—who, while definitely not offering or intending to offer perfect percentages, are statistically very similar—lumped into one percentage range that will reflect the fact that a) outliers do exist, and b) despite this, your chances really do approach zero at a certain gpa. You also lump all people from the floor to the median GPA, and again, while not perfect, they all stand chances that are much closer together than a range that dips below the floor.
I just think that, since this is a matrix, the attempt is to consider all significant cutoffs, and I would argue that the gpa floor is one. It will really only improve the accuracy of the low gpa/high lsat box (i think!), but for such a small price, I think it's worth it.
The percentages boxes for 170-180 lsat for duke currently run:
39.9 - 93.1 - 97.3 - 87.6
If the subdivision is made, taking data for the last 2 years for the lower end data (URM excluded), it will look more like this:
13 - 53 - 92 - 96 - 93
That's a significant division.
I didn't want to just run in and change stuff on someone else's work! But if this is something that you think sounds good, i'd be happy to do it or to compile to data and send it over, or whatever. Or you can just ignore me if you think it's good enough

And, really, it is good enough. This was a killer idea.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- cotiger
- Posts: 1648
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
Yeah, that's a good point. I didn't do anything like that initially just because that would require more work and I was just doing it to kill time in the airport. I don't like just eyeballing a floor, though. So here's my thought.. use the score of the lowest waitlisted non-URM as the floor. If they're waitlisted there's at least a theoretical chance of acceptance, so the lowest scores there sort of proxy for the lowest scores possible to have some sort of chance at acceptance.wolfgang wrote:this is rad.
Any way to incorporate assumed GPA floors into the matrix? I mean, I know that nothing is going to be perfect, and we could subdivide this further and further forever.
But in this case, given the fact that most schools seem to have an unofficial gpa floor, I think that by taking this into account you gain a significant amount of accuracy on the low end for the cost of only one additional column.
Take duke, for example. the low GPA column goes from 2.0-3.58, whereas someone with a 2.0 has really zero chance and someone with a 3.58 has a pretty good chance depending on lsat score.
Their gpa floor looked like it was about 3.3 last year (with one lower outlier), so if the column is added that separates the "2.0-floor" gpas from the "floor-25th) gpas, you end up with all people under the floor—who, while definitely not offering or intending to offer perfect percentages, are statistically very similar—lumped into one percentage range that will reflect the fact that a) outliers do exist, and b) despite this, your chances really do approach zero at a certain gpa. You also lump all people from the floor to the median GPA, and again, while not perfect, they all stand chances that are much closer together than a range that dips below the floor.
I just think that, since this is a matrix, the attempt is to consider all significant cutoffs, and I would argue that the gpa floor is one. It will really only improve the accuracy of the low gpa/high lsat box (i think!), but for such a small price, I think it's worth it.
The percentages boxes for 170-180 lsat for duke currently run:
39.9 - 93.1 - 97.3 - 87.6
If the subdivision is made, taking data for the last 2 years for the lower end data (URM excluded), it will look more like this:
13 - 53 - 92 - 96 - 93
That's a significant division.
I didn't want to just run in and change stuff on someone else's work! But if this is something that you think sounds good, i'd be happy to do it or to compile to data and send it over, or whatever. Or you can just ignore me if you think it's good enough
And, really, it is good enough. This was a killer idea.
-
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 12:23 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
delete
Last edited by lawbeahs on Mon Sep 16, 2013 9:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- cotiger
- Posts: 1648
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
Yeah, I'd say so. Especially looking at UVA, the most egregious and obvious YP school ever.lawbeahs wrote:I'm sure I'm missing something, by why is it that the highest GPA/ highest LSAT bracket is often less likely to be admitted than the highest GPA/ second-highest LSAT bracket? Is this YP?
Notice that everyone still gives the most money to that highest GPA / highest LSAT bracket, just that some of them are hesitant about handing out an acceptance to someone who probably won't come. (Berkeley doesn't count because they're weird/stingy about money anyway)
- John Winger
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 6:28 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
This is absolutely fantastic! Mad props my man.
- wtrc
- Posts: 2053
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:37 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
This is great! Thanks.
I wish my GPA was 0.02 higher
I wish my GPA was 0.02 higher

- RetakeFrenzy
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:41 am
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
amazing! Thank you



-
- Posts: 242
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 8:28 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
This gives me hope. At least I have an 8.6% chance at Harvard...
- Happy Gilmore
- Posts: 314
- Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 4:24 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
Yale is the worst. 

Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- t-14orbust
- Posts: 2130
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 4:43 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
damn, too bad my GPA isn't lower. lol yale
-
- Posts: 512
- Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 3:29 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
Lol Yale, indeed.t-14orbust wrote:damn, too bad my GPA isn't lower. lol yale
- AT9
- Posts: 1884
- Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:00 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
This is awesome. Gives me a glimmer of hope for my Duke ED app.
- cotiger
- Posts: 1648
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
Clearly yield protectingt-14orbust wrote:damn, too bad my GPA isn't lower. lol yale
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- cotiger
- Posts: 1648
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
Updated with Columbia. We have a new winner for importance of being at the LSAT median. Although based on the crazy high acceptance rate for NYU at below 25th GPA but above 75th LSAT, it might not stay that way.
- cotiger
- Posts: 1648
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
Now that all of the stats from last year are in, I thought I'd update this and make a few awards:
Most Splitter Friendly (>75% LSAT, <25% GPA)
1. Northwestern
2. NYU
3. Georgetown
Least Splitter Friendly (>75% LSAT, <25% GPA)
1. Stanford
2. Yale
3. Penn
Most important to be at or slightly above median LSAT vs slightly below
1. Columbia
2. NYU
3. Georgetown
Least important to be at or slightly above median LSAT vs slightly below
1. Berkeley
2. Yale
3. Stanford
Accepts the highest percentage of at or above both medians applicants
1. Duke
2. Harvard
3. NYU
Accepts the lowest percentage of at or above both medians applicants
1. Yale
2. Stanford
3. Berkeley
Friendliest to Reverse Splitters (<50% LSAT, >50% GPA)
1. Cornell
2. NYU
3. UVA
Most Splitter Friendly (>75% LSAT, <25% GPA)
1. Northwestern
2. NYU
3. Georgetown
Least Splitter Friendly (>75% LSAT, <25% GPA)
1. Stanford
2. Yale
3. Penn
Most important to be at or slightly above median LSAT vs slightly below
1. Columbia
2. NYU
3. Georgetown
Least important to be at or slightly above median LSAT vs slightly below
1. Berkeley
2. Yale
3. Stanford
Accepts the highest percentage of at or above both medians applicants
1. Duke
2. Harvard
3. NYU
Accepts the lowest percentage of at or above both medians applicants
1. Yale
2. Stanford
3. Berkeley
Friendliest to Reverse Splitters (<50% LSAT, >50% GPA)
1. Cornell
2. NYU
3. UVA
Last edited by cotiger on Fri Dec 20, 2013 11:55 am, edited 2 times in total.
- Vincent
- Posts: 256
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 6:57 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
I'd take this as further evidence that in order of black-boxiness,cotiger wrote:Now that all of the stats from last year are in, I thought I'd update this and make a few awards:
Most Splitter Friendly (>75% LSAT, <25% GPA)
1. Northwestern
2. NYU
3. Georgetown
Least Splitter Friendly (>75% LSAT, <25% GPA)
1. Stanford
2. Yale
3. Penn
Most important to be slightly above median LSAT vs slightly below
1. Columbia
2. NYU
3. Georgetown
Least important to be slightly above median LSAT vs slightly below
1. Berkeley
2. Yale
3. Stanford
Accepts the highest percentage of above both medians applicants
1. Duke
2. Harvard
3. NYU
Accepts the lowest percentage of above both medians applicants
1. Yale
2. Stanford
3. Berkeley
Friendliest to Reverse Splitters (<50% LSAT, >50% GPA)
1. Cornell
2. NYU
3. UVA
1. Yale
2. Stanford
3. Berkeley
-
- Posts: 5215
- Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 2:16 am
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
Holy yield protect, UVA
Last edited by xylocarp on Tue Jan 30, 2018 12:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- lawschool22
- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
Great contribution!
-
- Posts: 54
- Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:44 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
AMAZING JOB!
seems to me that NYU pretty much only cares about LSAT (something i'm happy about!!)
seems to me that NYU pretty much only cares about LSAT (something i'm happy about!!)
- lastsamurai
- Posts: 978
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2013 11:17 am
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
this is possibly the most useful thing since LS22's spreadsheets
- lawschool22
- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Acceptance Matrices using C/O 2016 Medians and 25th/75th
Prettied it up just a teeny bitcotiger wrote: Feel free to make it prettier if you're good at that kind of thing.

Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login