I think the frustrating aspect of this website, and why I dont frequent it much, is the utter confidence of advice-givers. These few people, treated as dieties on this website, say things like "you must" and "you cant" if you want #1 (as opposed to say #5). In my opinion, thats just not how it works; not all #1's did or did not do those things. I think its clear that I dont want to give any advice here, but Ill leave one tired cliche: find your own path.
(Also note this may be different for higher-ranked schools; ours is Top 20).
somethingdemure wrote:MyPseudonym wrote: Until a person who is number 1 in his or her class (and this board probably has a fair number of them) can step up and say they did it without working extremely hard, that they did what all of those who are "comfortably near the top of the class" did, then there really is no point in bringing it up.
Now, there's some truth to the idea that working harder will, on average, produce better results. There's some truth to the idea that hundreds of other factors go into law school success too.
I know a couple people who worked as hard as OP did, including 0L prep. One did rather well, the other ended up below median. The sample size is tiny, so I'm in no way suggesting that working too hard can lead to bad grades, just that your belief that working as hard as OP is a "blueprint" to success is flawed.
I'm not convinced that anyone's substantive 0L prep led to better grades than they could have gotten without it. Obviously, OP thinks differently, and really anyone's guess could be accurate.
And just in case anyone believes your ludicrous premise that being #1 is vastly different from being #4, I'd just like to chime in. #1 and #4 will likely be separated by hundredths of a GPA point. It can be the difference of one fraction of one grade, and it's simply preposterous to suggest that fractions of a grade are always, or even usually, indicative of a vastly superior approach to law school.