Geetar Man wrote:I really don't feel like arguing about it since it truly is irrelevant to how many people get a perfect 180. But honestly, if Dave lied/gave false information, then yes, he does lose some credibility.
What if what bernaldiaz's inference was wrong? I cant recall reading that Dave said he got a 179, followed by 3 180s. Can you find that explicit/implicit post?
bgdddymtty wrote:Here's my $.02 worth on Dave Hall and Scoregate:
5. Assuming arguendo that Mr. Hall did actually receive the scores reflected on the screen shot, he has still been dishonest about his LSAT performance. Remember that his story, parroted on this very page, was that he got a 179 the first time he took the test, followed by three 180's. I'm not sure if he ever said that those four scores were consecutive, but he certainly implied it. He probably would have wowed just as many people had he said he took the test six times, scoring three 180's, a 179, and two 177's, but he didn't. I find that troubling, and I doubt I'm alone here.
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 0#p5162582
Dave Hall wrote:
1. Indulge me while I tell you a story that will illustrate the thing I'd be most concerned about if I were you:
When I took the LSAT for the first time (in June 2005), I thought that I would probably be headed to law school. [Brief and probably uninteresting background in 3... 2... 1... I was working part time, my wife was pregnant, and I knew that I could score 175+. I didn't really care what I got on the test, because I figured that I'd get my 176 or 177 and get a full ride to a local 2nd-tier school, graduate at the top of my class, and get a job to gain some experience before heading back to teach law at my alma mater].
Here's how that first test went: Each LR section took me less than 25 minutes to complete. I literally went outside and smoked a cigarette (smoking is bad for you, and also SO HARD to quit. Don't do it, kids) during one section - I told the proctor I was going to the restroom. The RC took me a bit longer, but less than 28 minutes. The Games were my area of chief concern, and they took me almost all the allotted time (I was still working when the proctor gave the 5-minute warning). When I got my score, I was pleased with 179 (although also a little bummed; I missed an EXCEPT question in the RC because I took it down to two and then - so, so stupid, Dave! - bubbled the answer that WAS THERE in the passage).
Then I didn't go to law school, and spent another year teaching LSAT prep. When I sat my second test, it should've been easier, right? I mean, I should've been a year smarter and more experienced and just killed every section in even less time than the year before, right? It wasn't like I'd spent the intervening time doing speedballs and fighting UFC - I'd been doing LSAT the whole time.
Yet, in round two, every section took me until past the 5-minute warning. I was slower in every subject (except Games, where I was about the same speed).
Because the first time, I played my game. I did the things that I knew how to do, and I didn't worry about anything else but that.
But the second time?
I couldn't miss any questions, man! Anything less than 180 would've been a failure, and that pressure changed the whole test for me. Instead of just answering the questions like I knew how to do, I was suddenly reading and re-reading everything, making sure I wasn't making any careless errors. I knew I wasn't likely to make more than one or two over the test, but even one or two would ruin my shot at perfection.
Oh, it was horrible. It was one of the most stressful afternoons of my life, and I only got to smoke at the break, too (smoking is bad for you, and also SO HARD to quit. Don't do it, kids).
And the only thing that had changed was in my head. Instead of just doing one thing - answering LSAT questions - I was trying to do two things - answer LSAT questions and think about the ever-present possibility of careless error, including but not limited to: mis-bubbling, mis-circling in my test booklet before I bubbled, mentally inserting the word "not" where it was not written, ignoring the word "not" where it was written, picking a weaken response to a strengthen question, picking a... but you get the picture.
All of that to say this: try not to worry about your score per se, and focus instead on doing well those things that you know how to do well. The rest will happen very naturally on its own.
you dont need a 180 to figure out Dave was trying to make people believe he got a 179 THEN a 180...
Edit: he claims that he did the 179 in 05 and it has since fallen off his record
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 5#p4708582
Dave Hall wrote:
I took about 20 tests, in total, before taking the LSAT the first time (179, which was so long ago - June 2005 - that it's now fallen off my record). and I only took 5 of those as timed practice exams. The rest I split up into segments to learn from.
It wasn't about the quantity nearly so much as the quality (and depth) of my work. For those 20 tests, I'd estimate that I likely spent as much time working and re-working them as someone would spend taking 60 timed tests.