Is a 165 really that bad?

danielle9281
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 5:32 pm

Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby danielle9281 » Thu Nov 04, 2010 11:29 am

I have a 3.85 GPA and got a 165 on my LSAT. I am debating about retaking the LSAT becase i did make a couple errors that I usually do not make and feel I could possibly get a better score. The top school I am applying to is UCLA. I know I would be better off with a 167-168 for UCLA, but I don't want to have to retake the test since it was so stressful the first time I took it.

Also, would it help if I aply early decision to UCLA?

User avatar
pppokerface
Posts: 205
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 4:45 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby pppokerface » Thu Nov 04, 2010 11:34 am

UCLA will be a reach based only on numbers. However, if you really don't want to take it again, if the rest of your app is strong, you may have a shot. I'd try LSN and make sure you submit your apps early, ED if you can make it.

User avatar
DieAntwoord
Posts: 250
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:17 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby DieAntwoord » Thu Nov 04, 2010 11:36 am

danielle9281 wrote:I have a 3.85 GPA and got a 165 on my LSAT. I am debating about retaking the LSAT becase i did make a couple errors that I usually do not make and feel I could possibly get a better score. The top school I am applying to is UCLA. I know I would be better off with a 167-168 for UCLA, but I don't want to have to retake the test since it was so stressful the first time I took it.

Also, would it help if I aply early decision to UCLA?


Get over the fact that it is stressful, law school is stressful. Retake if you want to save money and/or get into a better school. study harder

tomwatts
Posts: 1551
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:01 am

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby tomwatts » Thu Nov 04, 2010 12:21 pm

I don't really get the negativity in the previous post. LSAC says (in the Official Guide to ABA blah blah Law School UGPA/LSAT Search) that your odds of getting into UCLA are around 30% or so, it looks like. If that's the top school to which you're applying, then it's a pretty good reach school (not unreasonably out of range, but not a sure bet). Make sure you mix in some lower-ranking schools that you have a pretty good shot to get into, and don't count on UCLA, but with good softs, you could get into UCLA.

Still, a higher LSAT score would help. With, say, a 169, your chances move to better than 50%. So I wouldn't actively discourage a retake, if you want to improve your odds.

User avatar
Borhas
Posts: 4858
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:09 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby Borhas » Thu Nov 04, 2010 12:23 pm

danielle9281 wrote:I have a 3.85 GPA and got a 165 on my LSAT. I am debating about retaking the LSAT becase i did make a couple errors that I usually do not make and feel I could possibly get a better score. The top school I am applying to is UCLA. I know I would be better off with a 167-168 for UCLA, but I don't want to have to retake the test since it was so stressful the first time I took it.

Also, would it help if I aply early decision to UCLA?

165 is the ideal score, not too high not too low

Plato would be proud of you

User avatar
plenipotentiary
Posts: 616
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:13 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby plenipotentiary » Thu Nov 04, 2010 12:25 pm

It's not really that bad. But you should still retake. +5 and you are getting $ at better schools than UCLA.

WhirledWorld
Posts: 331
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:04 am

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby WhirledWorld » Thu Nov 04, 2010 12:32 pm

.
Last edited by WhirledWorld on Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

JOThompson
Posts: 1311
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 3:16 am

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby JOThompson » Thu Nov 04, 2010 12:38 pm

A 165 is by no means bad. You are elite compared to the average test taker. There are droves of people out there who would cut off their right testicle to a mid 160's score. TLS attracts many atypical, high-scoring applicants. Don't get down because so many people here claim to have a 170. If you're asking whether a 165 is bad for the purposes of admittance to a T14, well, it may be a struggle, but your high GPA should help a bit. If you're that concerned, you should retake.

youknowryan
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:20 am

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby youknowryan » Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:04 pm

danielle9281 wrote:I have a 3.85 GPA and got a 165 on my LSAT. I am debating about retaking the LSAT becase i did make a couple errors that I usually do not make and feel I could possibly get a better score. The top school I am applying to is UCLA. I know I would be better off with a 167-168 for UCLA, but I don't want to have to retake the test since it was so stressful the first time I took it.

Also, would it help if I aply early decision to UCLA?


With a solid app, UCLA isn't out of the question especially if you live in CA. One point to consider: most retakers score about the same while some go up and some go down. To most law schools 165 or 167 does not show a useful difference in ability. Unless you are sure you can get yourself to 170 or some score that clearly moves you into a higher tier, think long and hard about retaking.

On another note: 165 is a good score by any standard.
Last edited by youknowryan on Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
glucose101
Posts: 423
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:23 am

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby glucose101 » Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:05 pm

I think some people think that some TLSers are being harsh--but I agree with the few that are saying that getting into a good law school isn't easy. If you feel confident with a 165, then, that's your thing. Personally, I would retake if I had the time and money. The applicant pool will only get harder, and your numbers will mean more. If not to get in, to save money.

And everyone keeps saying that a 165 is a good score. Given the percentile, obviously in comparison. It's relative though. For UCLA, it's average. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want to be ordinary, but rather, I'd want to be extraordinary if i knew I could.
Last edited by glucose101 on Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Pizon
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2008 2:53 am

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby Pizon » Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:10 pm

DieAntwoord wrote:
danielle9281 wrote:I have a 3.85 GPA and got a 165 on my LSAT. I am debating about retaking the LSAT becase i did make a couple errors that I usually do not make and feel I could possibly get a better score. The top school I am applying to is UCLA. I know I would be better off with a 167-168 for UCLA, but I don't want to have to retake the test since it was so stressful the first time I took it.

Also, would it help if I aply early decision to UCLA?


Get over the fact that it is stressful, law school is stressful. Retake if you want to save money and/or get into a better school. study harder


LSAT stress >>>>>>>> law school stress

User avatar
pppokerface
Posts: 205
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 4:45 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby pppokerface » Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:13 pm

Pizon wrote:
DieAntwoord wrote:
danielle9281 wrote:I have a 3.85 GPA and got a 165 on my LSAT. I am debating about retaking the LSAT becase i did make a couple errors that I usually do not make and feel I could possibly get a better score. The top school I am applying to is UCLA. I know I would be better off with a 167-168 for UCLA, but I don't want to have to retake the test since it was so stressful the first time I took it.

Also, would it help if I aply early decision to UCLA?


Get over the fact that it is stressful, law school is stressful. Retake if you want to save money and/or get into a better school. study harder


LSAT stress >>>>>>>> law school stress

It could be a different type of stress. However, I am a 0L so :|

User avatar
androstan
Posts: 2666
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby androstan » Fri Nov 05, 2010 11:24 am

It's terribly horribly god awful.

User avatar
patrickd139
Posts: 2883
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:53 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby patrickd139 » Fri Nov 05, 2010 11:27 am

Borhas wrote:
danielle9281 wrote:I have a 3.85 GPA and got a 165 on my LSAT. I am debating about retaking the LSAT becase i did make a couple errors that I usually do not make and feel I could possibly get a better score. The top school I am applying to is UCLA. I know I would be better off with a 167-168 for UCLA, but I don't want to have to retake the test since it was so stressful the first time I took it.

Also, would it help if I aply early decision to UCLA?

165 is the ideal score, not too high not too low

Plato would be proud of you

Underrated comment. +1

User avatar
Pizon
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2008 2:53 am

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby Pizon » Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:14 pm

pppokerface wrote:
Pizon wrote:
DieAntwoord wrote:
danielle9281 wrote:I have a 3.85 GPA and got a 165 on my LSAT. I am debating about retaking the LSAT becase i did make a couple errors that I usually do not make and feel I could possibly get a better score. The top school I am applying to is UCLA. I know I would be better off with a 167-168 for UCLA, but I don't want to have to retake the test since it was so stressful the first time I took it.

Also, would it help if I aply early decision to UCLA?


Get over the fact that it is stressful, law school is stressful. Retake if you want to save money and/or get into a better school. study harder


LSAT stress >>>>>>>> law school stress

It could be a different type of stress. However, I am a 0L so :|


To clarify, I meant the stress of taking the LSAT is much worse than most of what you'll endure in law school. The whole law school admissions process is more stressful than law school itself.

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

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby aesis » Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:24 pm

Please do not waste your GPA you worked so hard for and "settle" for a 165, unless you absolutely know you that you are at your LSAT peak. If so, congrats!

If not, retake.

User avatar
well-hello-there
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:38 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby well-hello-there » Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:35 pm

tomwatts wrote:I don't really get the negativity in the previous post. LSAC says (in the Official Guide to ABA blah blah Law School UGPA/LSAT Search) that your odds of getting into UCLA are around 30% or so, it looks like. If that's the top school to which you're applying, then it's a pretty good reach school (not unreasonably out of range, but not a sure bet). Make sure you mix in some lower-ranking schools that you have a pretty good shot to get into, and don't count on UCLA, but with good softs, you could get into UCLA.

Still, a higher LSAT score would help. With, say, a 169, your chances move to better than 50%. So I wouldn't actively discourage a retake, if you want to improve your odds.

If your daddy didn't give boat loads of money to the school or if you're an average Joe, then I think your chances are WAY WAY lower than 30% at UCLA. Don't be fooled into thinking you're good to go because your numbers fall between their 25th - 75th percentile statistics for GPA and LSAT. Unless there is something extraordinary about you, at a minimum, you need a 168 LSAT.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18422
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby bk1 » Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:37 pm

Retake.

/thread

User avatar
shod_contessa
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby shod_contessa » Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:40 pm

well-hello-there wrote:If your daddy didn't give boat loads of money to the school or if you're an average Joe, then I think your chances are WAY WAY lower than 30% at UCLA. Don't be fooled into thinking you're good to go because your numbers fall between their 25th - 75th percentile statistics for GPA and LSAT. Unless there is something extraordinary about you, at a minimum, you need a 168 LSAT.


There's some truth in this slightly harsh post. Numbers don't completely determine your chances, but they do matter. You don't need to be "extraordinary", 165 isn't a bad score at all, but you do need to give schools a reason to admit you. Strong recs, softs, or a demonstration of good writing ability in your personal statement can overcome a modest LSAT score.

User avatar
jcunni5
Posts: 226
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:51 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby jcunni5 » Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:40 pm

ED UVA there's a great chance you'll be admitted Unless u meant ucla was you're top choice

SupraVln180
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:50 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby SupraVln180 » Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:23 pm

bk1 wrote:Retake.

/thread



You overuse "/thread". It begins to lose its effect. Actually, its had no effect the past 30 times you used it. You need to stay fresh and original to gain acceptance from people you don't know on these internet forums.

dannyde7
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:27 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby dannyde7 » Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:30 pm

danielle9281 wrote:I have a 3.85 GPA and got a 165 on my LSAT. I am debating about retaking the LSAT becase i did make a couple errors that I usually do not make and feel I could possibly get a better score. The top school I am applying to is UCLA. I know I would be better off with a 167-168 for UCLA, but I don't want to have to retake the test since it was so stressful the first time I took it.

Also, would it help if I aply early decision to UCLA?


I just got into Duke with basically the same numbers.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18422
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby bk1 » Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:32 pm

SupraVln180 wrote:You overuse "/thread". It begins to lose its effect. Actually, its had no effect the past 30 times you used it. You need to stay fresh and original to gain acceptance from people you don't know on these internet forums.


Your lack of approval haunts me every night before I go to sleep.

SupraVln180
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:50 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby SupraVln180 » Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:34 pm

bk1 wrote:
SupraVln180 wrote:You overuse "/thread". It begins to lose its effect. Actually, its had no effect the past 30 times you used it. You need to stay fresh and original to gain acceptance from people you don't know on these internet forums.


Your lack of approval haunts me every night before I go to sleep.



Your need for approval haunts me every night before I go to sleep. /thread

User avatar
Flips88
Posts: 13640
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:42 pm

Re: Is a 165 really that bad?

Postby Flips88 » Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:50 pm

LSP gives you a basically 50/50 shot. You're above the 25th for LSAT and right around the 75th for LSAT. If you have some strong softs, good rec letters, and a killer personal statement, you should have a shot at least.

And don't let anyone tell you 165 is not a good score. You scored higher than 92% of test taker, you should be proud.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], HamNewton, maddawg2020, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 6 guests