Came up with a Great Idea- The GambLSAT Forum

[DaRascal]

After you get your score back, LSAC should give you the option of answering one brand new question in exactly 1 minute and 30 seconds to replace a question you got wrong in LR.

This obviously wouldn't work for LG or RC unless LSAC wanted to make a game or a passage to answer only one question. An LR stimulus is much shorter and would require much less work.


Anyway the idea is that every LSAT taker has the option of answering this brand new question. If they choose to exercise this option and they get the question right, that correct answer will replace a wrong answer in the corresponding section thus increasing the raw score by 1 point. If the person gets it wrong, that wrong answer will replace a correct answer (replacing a correct answer for the same question type) thus costing the test taker a raw score point.


So someone who has a 168 (for example) before exercising their GambLSAT option could get a 169 if they get the GambLSAT question correct or a 167 if they get it wrong. (This of course all depends on the curve)


What do you guys think?

[Clearly]

I would do it in a heartbeat. I would wager 3 to 1 in fact.

[bdeebs]

I would do it in a heartbeat. I would wager 3 to 1 in fact.

It could be like a reverse Deal or No Deal where you lay the odds and the testmakers can decide whether they want to take your bet.

[Noblesse_Oblige]

I would do it in a heartbeat. I would wager 3 to 1 in fact.

You say that now, until they decide to test new question types on you lol

However I like this idea as long as the question isn't a Parallel one

[Br3v]

I would do it in a heartbeat. I would wager 3 to 1 in fact.

It could be like a reverse Deal or No Deal where you lay the odds and the testmakers can decide whether they want to take your bet.

*Ring Ring Ring*

LSAC is calling, let's see what he offers.....

4 RAW POINTS!

....

No Deal!

[DaRascal]

I'd be really scared to do it.

[S-IV]

I think the GambLSAT question's conditions need to be discussed. Maybe you could wager more points if you completed the problem under difficult conditions. Say, on a rollercoaster?

[GirlStop]

DaRascal,

You are definitely my favorite poster, this post made me laugh out loud and forced me online. Lmaoo thank you for the Lols.

[shifty_eyed]

I'd be really scared to do it.

THIS is what made me actually LOL.

[fronkman]

I don't like that you are playing with raw score points unless they show you the conversion chart first. One plus point may not raise your reported score but one minus could lower it.

[Noitaraperp]

This could help people who really want to hit a certain benchmark or else retake, but a one point difference shouldn't really change at that much I'm thinking, unless it's like 169 to 170, which psychologically seems like a bigger change.

Also, I'm not sure how fair it would be, seeing as how some people who are extremely strong in LR and got -0 would gain no benefit (and same for the people whose scaled scores equate to more than one raw score).

Funny idea though

[RodionRaskolnikov]

I would do it in a heartbeat. I would wager 3 to 1 in fact.

You say that now, until they decide to test new question types on you lol

However I like this idea as long as the question isn't a Parallel one

Hahaha I thought the same! You flip the page and there's a new question type with an extra long stimulus.

[Tom Joad]

darsacal's ban is up?