The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

User avatar
Adjudicator
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:18 am

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby Adjudicator » Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:55 pm

incompetentia wrote:165 has been consistently -15 to -20 since 2007...recently trending toward the generous side of that. With a -13 to -16 estimate penciled in, you're probably looking at 166-168.


Looking back it is hard to believe I got a 164 the first time... I can't conceive of missing that many now. Not finishing LG might have had something to do with it, but still... missing more than 15? I don't think I missed 15 problems total on my last 4 PTs.

User avatar
crysmissmichelle
Posts: 399
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 8:39 am

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby crysmissmichelle » Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:58 pm

ilikecheese wrote:misreading the stupid rule about two spaces in the nurses game. what a rookie mistake. i suddenly find myself disliking nurses... except for my mom. she's cool.

my guaranteed -5 on the real lg section contrasted with the super easy experimental lg section (that i'm 100% sure i aced) has been ruining my life for the last 4 days.

time machine, where are yooouuuu??!!


It only really affected like three questions the rest it was okay to assume. . . I made the same mistake but the first question didn't have a right answer with that rule so when I re-read it helped me with the rest of my hypo's.

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

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby 3|ink » Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:59 pm

crysmissmichelle wrote:
ilikecheese wrote:misreading the stupid rule about two spaces in the nurses game. what a rookie mistake. i suddenly find myself disliking nurses... except for my mom. she's cool.

my guaranteed -5 on the real lg section contrasted with the super easy experimental lg section (that i'm 100% sure i aced) has been ruining my life for the last 4 days.

time machine, where are yooouuuu??!!


It only really affected like three questions the rest it was okay to assume. . . I made the same mistake but the first question didn't have a right answer with that rule so when I re-read it helped me with the rest of my hypo's.


I don't get it. How does one misread that rule? I suppose it is hard to diagram. I think this was a rule better applied to your brain than to paper.

User avatar
Adjudicator
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:18 am

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby Adjudicator » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:01 pm

For that rule, I just wrote down "at least" in front of it, with a double underline... Its not so much that I needed to see it as it is that writing it down helps you internalize it.

User avatar
s0ph1e2007
Posts: 1054
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 10:37 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby s0ph1e2007 » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:02 pm

Adjudicator wrote:
incompetentia wrote:165 has been consistently -15 to -20 since 2007...recently trending toward the generous side of that. With a -13 to -16 estimate penciled in, you're probably looking at 166-168.


Looking back it is hard to believe I got a 164 the first time... I can't conceive of missing that many now. Not finishing LG might have had something to do with it, but still... missing more than 15? I don't think I missed 15 problems total on my last 4 PTs.


You got a 164 before and today you're confident in a 180?
...

What did you think you were going to get pre-164?

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

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby 3|ink » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:03 pm

Adjudicator wrote:For that rule, I just wrote down "at least" in front of it, with a double underline... Its not so much that I needed to see it as it is that writing it down helps you internalize it.


I'm ashamed to say I did this, minus the underlining.

User avatar
crysmissmichelle
Posts: 399
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 8:39 am

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby crysmissmichelle » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:04 pm

3|ink wrote:
crysmissmichelle wrote:
ilikecheese wrote:misreading the stupid rule about two spaces in the nurses game. what a rookie mistake. i suddenly find myself disliking nurses... except for my mom. she's cool.

my guaranteed -5 on the real lg section contrasted with the super easy experimental lg section (that i'm 100% sure i aced) has been ruining my life for the last 4 days.

time machine, where are yooouuuu??!!


It only really affected like three questions the rest it was okay to assume. . . I made the same mistake but the first question didn't have a right answer with that rule so when I re-read it helped me with the rest of my hypo's.


I don't get it. How does one misread that rule? I suppose it is hard to diagram. I think this was a rule better applied to your brain than to paper.


Fast reading and nerves. It was my first game of the day. . . .my first test center had a lull before letting you into the room . . .so I had brought a practice game to warm up with while I waited. Alas, no waiting period so I didn't get to "warm up." lol

User avatar
incompetentia
Posts: 2307
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:57 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby incompetentia » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:06 pm

Maybe I'm just weird, but I didn't need to put the 'at least' part into my diagram to remember it. Was it really that much of a throw-off?

Regardless. I'm finally remembering a few of the agonizing questions I had about LR, and I'm pretty sure I'm wrong on at least one now.
Bye bye 180 (probably)

User avatar
Adjudicator
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:18 am

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby Adjudicator » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:07 pm

s0ph1e2007 wrote:
Adjudicator wrote:
incompetentia wrote:165 has been consistently -15 to -20 since 2007...recently trending toward the generous side of that. With a -13 to -16 estimate penciled in, you're probably looking at 166-168.


Looking back it is hard to believe I got a 164 the first time... I can't conceive of missing that many now. Not finishing LG might have had something to do with it, but still... missing more than 15? I don't think I missed 15 problems total on my last 4 PTs.


You got a 164 before and today you're confident in a 180?
...

What did you think you were going to get pre-164?


I don't remember; I really wasn't very well-informed or prepared, even though I thought I was at the time.

And I never said I was confident in a 180. I predicted a 176. 180 is my best case scenario.

User avatar
incompetentia
Posts: 2307
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:57 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby incompetentia » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:10 pm

Adjudicator wrote:180 is my best case scenario.

Is there an alternative?

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

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby 3|ink » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:10 pm

incompetentia wrote:Maybe I'm just weird, but I didn't need to put the 'at least' part into my diagram to remember it. Was it really that much of a throw-off?

Regardless. I'm finally remembering a few of the agonizing questions I had about LR, and I'm pretty sure I'm wrong on at least one now.
Bye bye 180 (probably)


Welcom to the club.

lolol10
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 2:39 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby lolol10 » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:11 pm

Adjudicator wrote:
s0ph1e2007 wrote:
Adjudicator wrote:
incompetentia wrote:165 has been consistently -15 to -20 since 2007...recently trending toward the generous side of that. With a -13 to -16 estimate penciled in, you're probably looking at 166-168.


Looking back it is hard to believe I got a 164 the first time... I can't conceive of missing that many now. Not finishing LG might have had something to do with it, but still... missing more than 15? I don't think I missed 15 problems total on my last 4 PTs.


You got a 164 before and today you're confident in a 180?
...

What did you think you were going to get pre-164?


I don't remember; I really wasn't very well-informed or prepared, even though I thought I was at the time.

And I never said I was confident in a 180. I predicted a 176. 180 is my best case scenario.



can i borrow your brain if i have to retake?

User avatar
Adjudicator
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:18 am

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby Adjudicator » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:15 pm

Depends on when your retake is. I'm going to need my brain by next summer, but I might be able to let you borrow it before then.

User avatar
incompetentia
Posts: 2307
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:57 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby incompetentia » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:16 pm

3|ink wrote:
incompetentia wrote:Maybe I'm just weird, but I didn't need to put the 'at least' part into my diagram to remember it. Was it really that much of a throw-off?

Regardless. I'm finally remembering a few of the agonizing questions I had about LR, and I'm pretty sure I'm wrong on at least one now.
Bye bye 180 (probably)


Welcom to the club.

Do we got fun and games?

User avatar
s0ph1e2007
Posts: 1054
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 10:37 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby s0ph1e2007 » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:20 pm

Adjudicator:


I think you should change your 'tar.

Having someone super confident in a 180 is hard enough.... Having your 'tar sneering at me makes it REAALLLYY hard not to dislike you lol

User avatar
Sinra
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:15 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby Sinra » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:20 pm

incompetentia wrote:Maybe I'm just weird, but I didn't need to put the 'at least' part into my diagram to remember it. Was it really that much of a throw-off?

Regardless. I'm finally remembering a few of the agonizing questions I had about LR, and I'm pretty sure I'm wrong on at least one now.
Bye bye 180 (probably)



You know I'm not really sure why this rule was such a big deal. I remember writing "at least" after the rule but never had to refer to it once I had internalized it. However, I disagree with whoever said that the L rule might affect only one question. I was pretty sure it affected at least 3-4 since they were so hypo-heavy in that game. If you didn't remember that I don't see how you could have eliminated answers. I actually really liked the nurses game and am pretty sure I went -0 on that. I got one wrong definitely in artifacts (hopefully that's all) and one wrong on the racers. Drivers was nice and simple IMO.

LR was tough! But as far as I can tell, I'm about -3 or -4 max there. Ugh. I hope I'm not miscalculating. When taking PTs I invariably did better (172-176) on tests I'd never seen before during prep. I always tended to mess up a bit on tests I'd had access to during my previous prep. So I felt kind of great during the test on Saturday...all fresh questions! I hope my confidence post-test is not shattered utterly come October 29th.

User avatar
Adjudicator
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:18 am

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby Adjudicator » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:21 pm

s0ph1e2007 wrote:Adjudicator:


I think you should change your 'tar.

Having someone super confident in a 180 is hard enough.... Having your 'tar sneering at me makes it REAALLLYY hard not to dislike you lol


Once again, when did I ever say I was super confident in a 180?

My official prediction was 176, which is just my PT average. I said I think I have a shot at 180.

Perhaps you are projecting a little insecurity?

edit: You might be right about the avatar though. But if I change it now, it will confuse people.

second edit: All right, you win. :)
Last edited by Adjudicator on Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
aesis
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 9:26 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby aesis » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:23 pm

incompetentia wrote:Maybe I'm just weird, but I didn't need to put the 'at least' part into my diagram to remember it. Was it really that much of a throw-off?

Regardless. I'm finally remembering a few of the agonizing questions I had about LR, and I'm pretty sure I'm wrong on at least one now.
Bye bye 180 (probably)


Not sure if I remember correctly but the game went fine even without remembering at least # spaceswith the exception of the first question, since the other four variables were pretty flexible except for the block. Does anyone remember more clearly if another question depended essentially on an at least as opposed to a [exactly # spaces].

Of course it's hard to say since all the rules work together ... I'm worried I may have made a mistake on one of the questions due to being more cognizant of [#] spaces rather than [min #] spaces.

blah...
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:28 am

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby blah... » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:24 pm

s0ph1e2007 wrote:Adjudicator:


I think you should change your 'tar.

Having someone super confident in a 180 is hard enough.... Having your 'tar sneering at me makes it REAALLLYY hard not to dislike you lol


+1

User avatar
incompetentia
Posts: 2307
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:57 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby incompetentia » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:24 pm

Sinra wrote:LR was tough! But as far as I can tell, I'm about -3 or -4 max there. Ugh. I hope I'm not miscalculating. When taking PTs I invariably did better (172-176) on tests I'd never seen before during prep. I always tended to mess up a bit on tests I'd had access to during my previous prep. So I felt kind of great during the test on Saturday...all fresh questions! I hope my confidence post-test is not shattered utterly come October 29th.

Well, at least when the scores come out it won't come down to your confidence anymore.
I'm hoping I'm no more than -2 in LR, because I know I'm going to have messed up on at least 1 or 2 RC questions. Still hoping for a 177 to save my GPA from dragging me away from CCN, but we'll just have to wait and see...

User avatar
Adjudicator
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:18 am

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby Adjudicator » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:26 pm

aesis wrote:
incompetentia wrote:Maybe I'm just weird, but I didn't need to put the 'at least' part into my diagram to remember it. Was it really that much of a throw-off?

Regardless. I'm finally remembering a few of the agonizing questions I had about LR, and I'm pretty sure I'm wrong on at least one now.
Bye bye 180 (probably)


Not sure if I remember correctly but the game went fine even without remembering at least # spaceswith the exception of the first question, since the other four variables were pretty flexible except for the block. Does anyone remember more clearly if another question depended essentially on an at least as opposed to a [exactly # spaces].

Of course it's hard to say since all the rules work together ... I'm worried I may have made a mistake on one of the questions due to being more cognizant of [#] spaces rather than [min #] spaces.


I remember getting to one of the last questions and having to consider the "at least" rule, and as a reaction I quickly went back and checked each previous question see if I had overlooked anything. But it was my impression that the two usually had exactly 2 spaces in between them, even though they were permitted to have more. So I don't think it was relevant in most of the questions.

I hope I'm not crossing any lines with this post.

User avatar
Sinra
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:15 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby Sinra » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:33 pm

Adjudicator wrote:
aesis wrote:
incompetentia wrote:Maybe I'm just weird, but I didn't need to put the 'at least' part into my diagram to remember it. Was it really that much of a throw-off?

Regardless. I'm finally remembering a few of the agonizing questions I had about LR, and I'm pretty sure I'm wrong on at least one now.
Bye bye 180 (probably)


Not sure if I remember correctly but the game went fine even without remembering at least # spaceswith the exception of the first question, since the other four variables were pretty flexible except for the block. Does anyone remember more clearly if another question depended essentially on an at least as opposed to a [exactly # spaces].

Of course it's hard to say since all the rules work together ... I'm worried I may have made a mistake on one of the questions due to being more cognizant of [#] spaces rather than [min #] spaces.


I remember getting to one of the last questions and having to consider the "at least" rule, and as a reaction I quickly went back and checked each previous question see if I had overlooked anything. But it was my impression that the two usually had exactly 2 spaces in between them, even though they were permitted to have more. So I don't think it was relevant in most of the questions.

I hope I'm not crossing any lines with this post.



Yeah there was the global one that affected it and then one that had the spaces considered towards the end. I found the other restriction affected more questions myself. I don't see how you could have gotten through that game without noticing you missed the rule. A lot of the CBTs would not have made sense or worked otherwise.

User avatar
incompetentia
Posts: 2307
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:57 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby incompetentia » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:34 pm

Your new tar makes almost as little sense as mine.

Unless you're from WA of course

User avatar
Sinra
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:15 pm

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby Sinra » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:35 pm

incompetentia wrote:
Sinra wrote:LR was tough! But as far as I can tell, I'm about -3 or -4 max there. Ugh. I hope I'm not miscalculating. When taking PTs I invariably did better (172-176) on tests I'd never seen before during prep. I always tended to mess up a bit on tests I'd had access to during my previous prep. So I felt kind of great during the test on Saturday...all fresh questions! I hope my confidence post-test is not shattered utterly come October 29th.

Well, at least when the scores come out it won't come down to your confidence anymore.
I'm hoping I'm no more than -2 in LR, because I know I'm going to have messed up on at least 1 or 2 RC questions. Still hoping for a 177 to save my GPA from dragging me away from CCN, but we'll just have to wait and see...


LR is the tossup for me. I'm pretty sure LG I am -2 for sure. -4 worst case scenario. RC I'm pretty sure I am at -1 at the most. Best section by far. And LR I sort of loved on this test. I am pretty happy it seems I was able to avoid most trap answers/red herrings.

User avatar
Adjudicator
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:18 am

Re: The STUPIDEST thing I did with this LSAT was...

Postby Adjudicator » Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:35 pm

incompetentia wrote:Your new tar makes almost as little sense as mine.

Unless you're from WA of course


Well, I am. I thought that would be the obvious implication.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Screech Owl, ThatOneAfrican, xtremenite and 6 guests