June 2010 CURVE Predictions

notreallyalawyer
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 7:00 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby notreallyalawyer » Wed Jun 16, 2010 4:57 pm

mst wrote:
kesexton wrote:-11 at the very least. LG was ridiculously hard. Ive never seen a game like the last one.


wrong. definitely not a new format. there are plenty of hybrid games. look at you LG bible. There's a whole chapter devoted to them, I think. Yes, hypothetical questions are time consuming but only that and not automatically more difficult. And, usually (and it was the case here) the more hypotheticals you have to draw, the more likely you will be able to use one or more of them on later questions.

notreallyalawyer
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 7:00 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby notreallyalawyer » Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:02 pm

mst wrote:
kesexton wrote:Difficulty is a subjective quality, thus my first claim is not necessarily false. And again, the mere fact that a game may exist in a similar structure as the last game does not make my second claim false. You've used faulty logic. Your claims have been dismissed.


This is why this board is so annoying. I wasn't going to court with you... I was simply saying that I think your incredibly wrong to assert that at the very least this is a -11, and that I find it unbelievable that a person such as yourself hasn't seen a game very close to (aka "like") that one in terms of premises, set up, and questions. I'm sure you'll get the chance to get technical with your arguments one day, but in the meantime can't you just accept that this entire thread is just a bunch of guys and gals completely bullshitting random curve estimates to pass the time (and that includes me)?


well said and thank you. too many people on here think they're on law and order.

User avatar
KantStopTheRock
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby KantStopTheRock » Wed Jun 16, 2010 8:19 pm

notreallyalawyer wrote:well said and thank you. too many people on here think they're on law and order.


You're out of line. The curve will be -11.

User avatar
Albatross
Posts: 344
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:30 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby Albatross » Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:01 am

notreallyalawyer wrote:
mst wrote:
kesexton wrote:-11 at the very least. LG was ridiculously hard. Ive never seen a game like the last one.


wrong. definitely not a new format. there are plenty of hybrid games. look at you LG bible. There's a whole chapter devoted to them, I think. Yes, hypothetical questions are time consuming but only that and not automatically more difficult. And, usually (and it was the case here) the more hypotheticals you have to draw, the more likely you will be able to use one or more of them on later questions.


Wrong? How can a subjective statement be necessarily wrong?

User avatar
Albatross
Posts: 344
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:30 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby Albatross » Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:12 am

suspicious android wrote:
kesexton wrote:
Im not sure that's correct. Seeing as how they only allow so many percentage of people score a certain score, I feel that the scale cannot be predetermined. They would also have to have a fairly close prediction of how many people were taking the test I think.



This is not the case. The score range for a given test is not necessarily the score range for a different test. June and October/September tests have a higher median (about 2 points) than the other tests (with February having the lowest median of all). This means on certain tests, more than half of all scorers will score above the median for the LSAT in general. They don't predetermine the % of people who get a certain score.


I was under the impression that a 172 was always the top ~99% of test takers for a certain test. And for every test, if you scored a 172, you are in the ~99%. But now that I think about it, if you were to assume that [u]every[u] test taker got the exact same raw score, then they would not be able to assign correct scores under my hypothesis. Maybe I'm not right.

User avatar
suspicious android
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby suspicious android » Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:22 am

kesexton wrote:I was under the impression that a 172 was always the top ~99% of test takers for a certain test. And for every test, if you scored a 172, you are in the ~99%. But now that I think about it, if you were to assume that [u]every[u] test taker got the exact same raw score, then they would not be able to assign correct scores under my hypothesis. Maybe I'm not right.


Percentiles shift a bit from year to year. For instance, 172 is actually like a 98.7 or something like that, whereas back in the day it was a straight 99th percentile. 170 used to be 97th percentile, now it's 97.5 (rounding up to 98), which is why some prep companies used to not accept 170 scorers but now do.

User avatar
3|ink
Posts: 7331
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:23 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby 3|ink » Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:23 am

-20 for a 170

User avatar
Albatross
Posts: 344
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:30 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby Albatross » Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:57 am

3|ink wrote:-20 for a 170


I will give up sex for a year + go to church every Sunday AND Wednesday for the next year as well if this were the case (Keep that in mind, God).

WestOfTheRest
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:10 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby WestOfTheRest » Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:58 am

kesexton wrote:
3|ink wrote:-20 for a 170


I will give up sex for a year + go to church every Sunday AND Wednesday for the next year as well if this were the case (Keep that in mind, God).

I'd probably give up my left testie for a -14, I don't want to get into what I would do for a -20.

User avatar
Albatross
Posts: 344
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:30 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby Albatross » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:06 am

CastleRock wrote:
kesexton wrote:
3|ink wrote:-20 for a 170


I will give up sex for a year + go to church every Sunday AND Wednesday for the next year as well if this were the case (Keep that in mind, God).

I'd probably give up my left testie for a -14, I don't want to get into what I would do for a -20.


I would too. Maybe we could start some kind of testicle cancer foundation. We might not get a -14 curve, but what a hell of a soft that would be.

User avatar
Ragged
Posts: 1509
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby Ragged » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:32 am

3|ink wrote:-20 for a 170



Wouldn't want that. It would make 175 worthless.

User avatar
zworykin
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 4:18 am

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby zworykin » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:39 am

Ragged wrote:
3|ink wrote:-20 for a 170



Wouldn't want that. It would make 175 worthless.



No it wouldn't, the test is equated. A 175 is a 175 ;) Of course, I doubt we'll ever see an LSAT that's so difficult it earns a -20... but remember, back in the early '90s it wasn't uncommon to see a -15 or even -16 (the 175s on those were around -8 to -10).

User avatar
Ragged
Posts: 1509
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby Ragged » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:42 am

zworykin wrote:
Ragged wrote:
3|ink wrote:-20 for a 170



Wouldn't want that. It would make 175 worthless.



No it wouldn't, the test is equated. A 175 is a 175 ;) Of course, I doubt we'll ever see an LSAT that's so difficult it earns a -20... but remember, back in the early '90s it wasn't uncommon to see a -15 or even -16 (the 175s on those were around -8 to -10).


I know. But if there was 2000 people with a 175+ applying to Harvard it would suck.

User avatar
zworykin
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 4:18 am

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby zworykin » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:52 am

Ragged wrote:
zworykin wrote:
Ragged wrote:
3|ink wrote:-20 for a 170



Wouldn't want that. It would make 175 worthless.



No it wouldn't, the test is equated. A 175 is a 175 ;) Of course, I doubt we'll ever see an LSAT that's so difficult it earns a -20... but remember, back in the early '90s it wasn't uncommon to see a -15 or even -16 (the 175s on those were around -8 to -10).


I know. But if there was 2000 people with a 175+ applying to Harvard it would suck.



No doubt. Hmm. The average number of takers for the June LSAT is around 25,000. So 2,000 people would put us at the 92nd percentile. That's normally, what--164, 165? That would have to be either the most ridiculously poorly equated LSAT ever, or the most incredibly gifted+neurotic group of takers ever.

Of course that's assuming your "2000 people" are all from this test. We can expect something like 160,000 people to take the test this year--call 1/4 of them retakers, so 120,000 people. 2,000 would then be 98.33 percentile, which is usually something like a 170-171, so that would still be a pretty crazy cycle. 175 is about 99.7 generally, so there ought to be more like 350-400 people with that score.

Of course, that's not counting people applying with scores from previous years...

(Yes, I know you aren't being serious. Neither am I. I'm just bored and in the mood to play with ridiculous hypotheticals. :D)

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

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby Bildungsroman » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:56 am

Ragged wrote:
zworykin wrote:
Ragged wrote:
3|ink wrote:-20 for a 170



Wouldn't want that. It would make 175 worthless.



No it wouldn't, the test is equated. A 175 is a 175 ;) Of course, I doubt we'll ever see an LSAT that's so difficult it earns a -20... but remember, back in the early '90s it wasn't uncommon to see a -15 or even -16 (the 175s on those were around -8 to -10).


I know. But if there was 2000 people with a 175+ applying to Harvard it would suck.


The LSAT curve is designed to keep the percentiles associated with each score roughly the same from year to year. LSAC wouldn't curve a test to make a 175 go from being 99.7th percentile to the 98th percentile or lower.

User avatar
Ragged
Posts: 1509
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby Ragged » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:02 am

zworykin wrote:
Ragged wrote:
zworykin wrote:
Ragged wrote:

Wouldn't want that. It would make 175 worthless.



No it wouldn't, the test is equated. A 175 is a 175 ;) Of course, I doubt we'll ever see an LSAT that's so difficult it earns a -20... but remember, back in the early '90s it wasn't uncommon to see a -15 or even -16 (the 175s on those were around -8 to -10).


I know. But if there was 2000 people with a 175+ applying to Harvard it would suck.



No doubt. Hmm. The average number of takers for the June LSAT is around 25,000. So 2,000 people would put us at the 92nd percentile. That's normally, what--164, 165? That would have to be either the most ridiculously poorly equated LSAT ever, or the most incredibly gifted+neurotic group of takers ever.

Of course that's assuming your "2000 people" are all from this test. We can expect something like 160,000 people to take the test this year--call 1/4 of them retakers, so 120,000 people. 2,000 would then be 98.33 percentile, which is usually something like a 170-171, so that would still be a pretty crazy cycle. 175 is about 99.7 generally, so there ought to be more like 350-400 people with that score.

Of course, that's not counting people applying with scores from previous years...

(Yes, I know you aren't being serious. Neither am I. I'm just bored and in the mood to play with ridiculous hypotheticals. :D)


I would still take my 175 and then wait it out for like 3 years until the numbers came back to normal. Then I'd also have WE but would be forced to delay LS. So it would be a win-win-lose.

User avatar
Ragged
Posts: 1509
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby Ragged » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:03 am

Bildungsroman wrote:
The LSAT curve is designed to keep the percentiles associated with each score roughly the same from year to year. LSAC wouldn't curve a test to make a 175 go from being 99.7th percentile to the 98th percentile or lower.


I was referring to the joke about the -20 curve.

User avatar
3|ink
Posts: 7331
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:23 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby 3|ink » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:31 am

Ragged wrote:
Bildungsroman wrote:
The LSAT curve is designed to keep the percentiles associated with each score roughly the same from year to year. LSAC wouldn't curve a test to make a 175 go from being 99.7th percentile to the 98th percentile or lower.


I was referring to the joke about the -20 curve.


Joke?

User avatar
zworykin
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 4:18 am

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby zworykin » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:35 am

3|ink wrote:
Ragged wrote:
Bildungsroman wrote:
The LSAT curve is designed to keep the percentiles associated with each score roughly the same from year to year. LSAC wouldn't curve a test to make a 175 go from being 99.7th percentile to the 98th percentile or lower.


I was referring to the joke about the -20 curve.


Joke?


:lol:

User avatar
Albatross
Posts: 344
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:30 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby Albatross » Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:24 pm

Ragged wrote:
zworykin wrote:
Ragged wrote:
3|ink wrote:-20 for a 170



Wouldn't want that. It would make 175 worthless.



No it wouldn't, the test is equated. A 175 is a 175 ;) Of course, I doubt we'll ever see an LSAT that's so difficult it earns a -20... but remember, back in the early '90s it wasn't uncommon to see a -15 or even -16 (the 175s on those were around -8 to -10).


I know. But if there was 2000 people with a 175+ applying to Harvard it would suck.


Maybe for those going to Harvard. I hear adcomms at schools out of the T14 supply hookers, liquor, and HBO for those students scoring 175 or higher (granted that you stay in the top 1/3 of your class).

User avatar
Ragged
Posts: 1509
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby Ragged » Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:50 pm

3|ink wrote:
Ragged wrote:
Bildungsroman wrote:
The LSAT curve is designed to keep the percentiles associated with each score roughly the same from year to year. LSAC wouldn't curve a test to make a 175 go from being 99.7th percentile to the 98th percentile or lower.


I was referring to the joke most plausible prediction about the -20 curve.


Joke?


Fixt. :mrgreen:

notreallyalawyer
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 7:00 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby notreallyalawyer » Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:52 pm

KantStopTheRock wrote:
notreallyalawyer wrote:well said and thank you. too many people on here think they're on law and order.


You're out of line. The curve will be -11.


truth hurts. -9

am060459
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:14 am

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby am060459 » Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:06 pm

notreallyalawyer wrote:
KantStopTheRock wrote:
notreallyalawyer wrote:well said and thank you. too many people on here think they're on law and order.


You're out of line. The curve will be -11.


truth hurts. -9


how is that the truth? how can u claim something to be true when you have NO idea what its going to be. please choose words wisely.

User avatar
3|ink
Posts: 7331
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:23 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby 3|ink » Thu Jun 17, 2010 6:06 pm

am060459 wrote:
notreallyalawyer wrote:
KantStopTheRock wrote:
notreallyalawyer wrote:well said and thank you. too many people on here think they're on law and order.


You're out of line. The curve will be -11.


truth hurts. -9


how is that the truth? how can u claim something to be true when you have NO idea what its going to be. please choose words wisely.


I think it would be inappropriate to take any of these postings seriously. Sarcasm isn't easy to express via internet.
Last edited by 3|ink on Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
theZeigs
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 3:26 pm

Re: June 2010 CURVE Predictions

Postby theZeigs » Thu Jun 17, 2010 6:09 pm

notreallyalawyer wrote:
KantStopTheRock wrote:
notreallyalawyer wrote:well said and thank you. too many people on here think they're on law and order.


You're out of line. The curve will be -11.


truth hurts. -9


A -9 (or less) curve has only happened 6 times since the modern LSAT was started: SPA, 12, 15, 48 (-8 curve), Free June '07 (-8 curve), 55. I don't think that the test was necessarily "easy" enough to warrant this curve, but my judgment is definitely clouded by adrenaline and emotion. It is interesting to note that a few early tests had a harsh curve, then a huge break, than a bunch of recent tests (3/3 split). It wouldn't be surprising to see a -9 curve. I am going to check the curve before my score (see this thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=120718 ), so if I see -8 or -9, I can go into the score check with low hopes (and hopefully be pleasantly surprised).

BTW, who the eff said it got easier to wait for your score after 10 days, what a load of crap.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandros, Baidu [Spider], Pozzo, scalawag and 15 guests