Dr. Strangelove wrote:Diagnostic Test: 170
PT average: 173.5
Found this LSAT to be hard- I'm guessing I got a few wrong in LR & RC with a perfect LG.
I didn't have time to doublecheck my answers on RC.
Well then I'm guessing atleast a 174. Usually for people who are good at the LSAT LG is the key to a good score. You seem confidante in yours so I see good things in your future.
Chimica wrote:I'll bite
Cold diagnostic 160 (but it wasn't an actual LSAT test, it was stupidity McGraw Hill)
Studied a bit and took the June 2007-170-I was happy, as I had a month befor the test and my LG were the weakest section
165, 167, 177 (compilation test-I pulled the LG from the easy, easy 40s, as I had already done the LG for that test) 166, 164
Based on that and bunches of seperate sections------>Never did get LG (-5 to -1 on timed tests), LR was OK (-3 on average) RC was awesome (-1/0) until I hit the 50's (-5/-6)
Test day LR-OK now that I know the experimental section (unsure on 5-8) LG-*SOB* messed up game 2 somehow-squint and guess on 4-8 questions, RC first three section were OK, last was impossible and rushed (5 minutes for whole thing...).
I was hoping for 170+, assumed I'd get 165+ and the whole thing felt like a 160.
Rewrite-here I come!
You definatly got atleast a 165. You feel worse because of the guesses and feeling rushed. I bet you did much better than how you feel. My last LSAT I thought I could have gotten a 162, but ended up with a 170.