151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

User avatar
Vaulter
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:43 pm

151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby Vaulter » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:33 pm

Long time member. First time poster. Ask away.

User avatar
CardozoLaw09
Posts: 1746
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby CardozoLaw09 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Was your first score an underperformance?

Bobnoxious
Posts: 157
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:47 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby Bobnoxious » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:40 pm

In what time frame? Explanation for the improvement? What contributed the most to the improvement?

User avatar
Vaulter
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:43 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby Vaulter » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:41 pm

I had taken Kaplan classes. I did the best I could do at that time.

User avatar
superpippo
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:25 am

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby superpippo » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:46 pm

Vaulter wrote:I had taken Kaplan classes. I did the best I could do at that time.


I'm a former Kaplan class taker who is thinking about retaking. Scored 164 and I want a 170+. How big of a factor was switching test prep companies/methods in your improvement?

User avatar
Vaulter
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:43 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby Vaulter » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:48 pm

Bobnoxious wrote:In what time frame? Explanation for the improvement? What contributed the most to the improvement?


Time frame: I took the first one in 2003. I actually took one in between the two in February 2009 and got a 155. The last one I took was December 2010.

Explanation for the improvement: Pithypike's guide

What contributed the most to the improvement: doing 10 logic games almost everyday for 4 months

User avatar
Vaulter
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:43 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby Vaulter » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:56 pm

superpippo wrote:
Vaulter wrote:I had taken Kaplan classes. I did the best I could do at that time.


I'm a former Kaplan class taker who is thinking about retaking. Scored 164 and I want a 170+. How big of a factor was switching test prep companies/methods in your improvement?


I think it's whatever you identify best with.

User avatar
052220151
Posts: 2421
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:58 am

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby 052220151 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:29 pm

Why is your tar 180 if you only got 167?

User avatar
Vaulter
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:43 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby Vaulter » Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:40 pm

It's just for the idea of getting a 180.

itachiuchiha
Posts: 907
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:59 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby itachiuchiha » Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:50 pm

Vaulter wrote:Long time member. First time poster. Ask away.


here is my question. Why does your avatar say 180 when you got a 167?
EDIT: oh lol someone already asked that :)

User avatar
mindarmed
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 2:16 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby mindarmed » Fri Apr 05, 2013 5:08 pm

Why did you make a taking questions thread? Is 167 supposed to be impressive?

User avatar
ManoftheHour
Posts: 3402
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:03 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby ManoftheHour » Fri Apr 05, 2013 5:19 pm

armedwithamind wrote:Why did you make a taking questions thread? Is 167 supposed to be impressive?


I think from a 151, it's impressive. I know people that scored in that range and never even got above a 160. Keep in mind that his/her 151 is on an actual exam, not one taken at Kaplan and whatnot. Of course, its impressiveness depends on how much OP actually studied prior to his/her 151 or not (Just because you take a class, doesn't mean you've prepped). Having taken two LSATs, I know there are people out there that take the exam completely cold and talk about hoping to get into Chapman.

062914123
Posts: 1846
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:11 pm

.

Postby 062914123 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 5:26 pm

.
Last edited by 062914123 on Mon Jun 30, 2014 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ruxin1
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby Ruxin1 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 5:42 pm

Vaulter wrote:It's just for the idea of getting a 180.


I liked the idea of it more than I actually like it.

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby PDaddy » Fri Apr 05, 2013 5:44 pm

Although by TLS's outrageous and mostly unrealistic standards (only 3% of test-takers can reach the top-3%, right?!) a 167 may not be considered to be "impressive", it is an impressive score on its face. Only a very elite class of test-takers ever gets past 165. Look up the stats and translate them to real numbers. By almost any standard, 90th percentile or better on anything should be impressive.

The 16-POINT JUMP OP made is downright scary, because it makes clear that it is possible to jump from 160 to 176 by using the pithypike method. Think about that for a minute...let it marinate. How many T2 law students might have gotten into Harvard if they had spent more time and effort practicing the test. Don't knock OP's hustle.

Maybe OP simply never innately possessed the reading speed or hand-eye coordination - which both matter when taking standardized tests - to get above 170. People obscure the fact that, beyond testing reasoning abilities, the LSAT is a speed-reading exam that only tests some of the skills necessary for law school success. It also tests, to a very small degree, one's vision (mostly out of our control), ability to control one's central nervous system, and one's hand-eye coordination.

Based on innate, deeply established factors OP may have "maxed out". That's a clear victory, because most test-takers don't teach their optimum score.

Factors like sleep depravation, physical stamina, etc. all factor into scores. To manage so many factors on test day and come out with a win like that is damn impressive, IMO.

bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby bp shinners » Fri Apr 05, 2013 5:54 pm

PDaddy wrote:The 16-POINT JUMP OP made is downright scary, because it makes clear that it is possible to jump from 160 to 176 by using the pithypike method.


Hmm, while I don't doubt the conclusion, and while your statement is extremely weak ("it is possible"), there seem to be some implications that I don't quite agree with.

Mainly that a 16-point jump from any X to any X+16 is equal. I don't think that's the case. Going from a 140 to a 156 is much easier than a 164 to 180, for example. In the middle of the "curve", it's closer, but once you get to the extremes, it starts to break down.

User avatar
mindarmed
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 2:16 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby mindarmed » Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:50 pm

ITT some special snowflake brags about getting a 167.

User avatar
tuffyjohnson
Posts: 226
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:07 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby tuffyjohnson » Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:51 pm

armedwithamind wrote:ITT some special snowflake brags about getting a 167.


I didn't read any bragging.

User avatar
gaud
Posts: 5790
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 2:58 am

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby gaud » Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:52 pm

armedwithamind wrote:ITT some special snowflake brags about getting a 167.


Don't hate on dude if he's trying to help give other posters hope/advice, bro.



If he doesn't, hate away.

User avatar
mindarmed
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 2:16 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby mindarmed » Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:56 pm

gaud wrote:
armedwithamind wrote:ITT some special snowflake brags about getting a 167.


Don't hate on dude if he's trying to help give other posters hope/advice, bro.



If he doesn't, hate away.


the whole idea of this thread GRINDS MY GEARS

User avatar
gaud
Posts: 5790
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 2:58 am

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby gaud » Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:57 pm

That's fair lol

User avatar
052220151
Posts: 2421
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:58 am

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby 052220151 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:17 pm

armed, you scared off OP, now there can be no lulz.

User avatar
mindarmed
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 2:16 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby mindarmed » Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:50 pm

deputydog wrote:armed, you scared off OP, now there can be no lulz.


:( sorry brother

User avatar
Vaulter
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:43 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby Vaulter » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:44 pm

spam

User avatar
Pneumonia
Posts: 1642
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: 151 -> 167 (Real LSAC Administered Tests) - Taking Questions

Postby Pneumonia » Sun Apr 07, 2013 4:21 pm

Vaulter wrote:Also, if you think you need help with Logic Games, I offer one on one tutoring/coaching over phone/skype exclusively for the logic games section. For more info:


That website is golden.

If it is in fact real then problem with OP trying to make a buck, but TLS probably isn't the best place for a 167'er that went -4 on LG to advertise tutoring services. It's easy to find people who did lots better charging significantly less.

After looking over the website more this seems to pretty obviously be a troll.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, Baidu [Spider], batlaw, BobBoblaw, chichi1992, dontsaywhatyoumean, Google [Bot], judill, LobLaw_LawFirm, mrgstephe, pvnyc, Yahoo [Bot] and 9 guests