The "Guide", My Story of 145-170. Forum

[lawschool2014hopeful]

I have uploaded it as a pdf because I wrote this in word and the formatting is all messed up when I copy pasted it over

If a moderator wants to copy/paste the PDF and put in the OP with proper formatting, please do.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/205229477/The-Journey

I apologize for the inconvenience to use an external website.

If you have any questions/comments, please post it here rather than PMing me, if is not personal. This way everyone can benefit from your questions.

I am going to keep all of the Q&A in the OP as well so people dont have to scroll

1) How did you learn to improve your timing? This is especially important.

2) Do you think reading magazines such as the Economist or The New Yorker help? You mentioned in the guides to read complex material. Do you consider those publications "complex"?

3) Everyone said this guide works, but when I post something bad about it, everyone is telling me I am not executing the strategies outline in the guide properly

4) Why did you take the first/2nd time when you werent ready.

5) I am in a similar situation, I started off low, but now I am prepping somewhat between 160-170s, I have some problems with answers I dont have a pre-phrase for, do you think is possible for me to achieve 170+ by X date?

6) Do you have any other suggestions besides "A short history of everything"

7) This guide is demotivating

8 ) Your guide is overly-pessimistic, most people dont study. So chance of 173 is actually not 1/100.

A:

1) In general, there is no such thing as a timing problem, is usually a problem of not mastering the fundamentals so it that becomes natural and intuitive. However after fair amount of practice (30pt test) you might notice that there are certain questions that is a major time sucker, and you dont get them right half of the time anyways, skip them. For me it was substitution questions on games, and those giant parallel analogy questions on R.C (those that take up quarter a page, I forget the example they are asking for by the time I read through all of the answer choices).

2) I didnt. Instead of getting use to a style of writing that TLS suggests I went to get comfortable with the material/topics instead. I read books like A short history of everything by Bill Bryson, once I had a good overview of certain topics I read stuff I was interested in. You cant force yourself in reading the economist, if you are not interested, and words are just flying by you, you are not reading or learning. You are just lying to yourself.

3) If this is not a prime example of a logical flaw defending a studying strategy (in case you dont know what I am talking about, I am referring to the not falsifiable hypothesis flaw), I dont know what is.

4)
Test #1) Delusional and I didnt want miss a cycle
Test #2) By here I kind of gave up on HYS to be quite honest, and I was willing to settle for a mid 160s and call it a day. I was consistently in high 160s and low 170s, with a occasional mid 170s, the reason I didnt mention the higher end of the PT scores is because of the score inflation issue. There was a consistent internal struggle of shooting for the stars and looking at my realistic possibilities

Sometimes taking the LSAT could be as easy as one make it to be, dont take it until you score consistently 1-2 pts higher than your goal score. The problem arises when that is not possible. You start lying to yourself, shift your goals, eventually resulting in non-rational decisions

5) 2 points: One of the biggest lessons I hope people to take away from this guide is that dont be obsessed with a target goal, is good to have something to shoot for, but have your goal as to master the test to the best of your abilities, fixing your mistakes/mastering your basic mechanics, rather than an abstract goal of 173+ or whatever you goal is. Point 2: No one can predict your score, I mean no one. I know you ask the question to seek a confidence booster, whether or not you are aware of it, I use to do it as well. The best way to approach this is to let your past behaviour predict your future, if you prep consistently in a range, without cheating yourself, and with the most possible simulated/realistic testing conditions (in a social environment close to the testing location), then you should have high confidence in your prep test scores to represent your true ability.

6) I have read plenty of introduction-esq books to prepare for this test. But I feel like Bill Bryson's book is a phenomenal primer for all sort of interesting topics that relates to science and history. I hope after reading the book you would have a good idea what sort of thing you are interested in and further pursue that topic yourself. The idea is to get your mind used to think about abstract, and yet complex topics very frequently. So those skills can be translated into another field of study/topic. Now if you really dont get literature passages, I think the best bet is to enroll in a introductionary literature course, pass/fail or audit or even online, because honestly I tried studying this stuff by myself, it is really boring. I dont see how any one could get through books of this stuff without some external motivations (have friends to talk literature about etc).

7) I didnt write this guide with the purpose to motivate or demotivate anyone, as oppose to the many out there that likes to give the false illusion, whether the authors realize it or not, that anyone can achieve an exceptional score with enough effort or this promoted strategy. I really cant emphasize this enough that people on TLS dont seem to grasp the meaning of a 170+ or 173+ (HYS OR BUST!!). A 173 is a score in the 99th percentile, that means, out of 100 people taking this test, you believe, with enough effort, you can beat 99 of them? Are you the top student of your class? Are you the top athlete in your sport? Are you in the 99th percentile of anything?

Look like the guide states, I am not here to tell you a 173 is nearly impossible. I am just here to tell you, if you start off fairly low, and if you want to score extremely high. There will be no magic pill. It will be hardwork, not just dedicating few hours a day of studying. It might mean changing your life around the test, i.e., reading more. Even with that you might not achieve it. Not everyone who spent their life trying to be NHL players end up as NHL players.

Nonetheless having a target a goal can be helpful. But just dont get obsessed with it. If you are going to get obsessed with anything, get obsessed with mastering your basic mechanics (i.e., conditional logic!). Once you master the basics, the score will come. I swear Karate Kid is a metaphor of real life.

8 )
I suppose from my perspective, is better to be somewhat faced with the harsh reality at first, even ending up on the side of pessimism, than being overly-optimistic due to the many success stories of TLS, that when you fail, you blame yourself for being stupid, rather than just accepting it is just the norm.

For me, the feeling of being "I am stupid" when failing compared to the norm is far more discouraging than being told your chance of success is not high to begin with.
*There is actually statistical evidence backing up my reasons.

In very many empirically based studies, people have found to be significantly more discouraged/annoyed/embarrassed/frustrated in a working environment when the chance of promotion is high rather than low. The rationale was that, if you didnt get promoted, and a significant amount do, you blame yourself very harshly, and become unhappy with your work, resulting in deteriorating performance. Conversely, when you know the chance of promotion is not very high to begin with, you are not that discouraged at all when the promotion misses you, because that is the norm.




Question for you all:


If I wrote a comprehensive guide to studying the LSAT, like the specific strategies/drills I used, ways of comprehending/interpreting questions, would you read it? I would imagine this would be quite the tome, perhaps 100 pages (it would be more like 300 pages in a regular book, but I wont/cant copy LSAT questions directly so I will reference the test/section/question #). I would publish it as a book of some sort.

Would you after reading both guides be interested in hiring me as a tutor? I am looking to take few students over the summer (less than 5), and maybe 1 or 2 throughout my LS years. I havent exactly thought out the payments, but it wont be anything close to the $100/hour market rate.

[Sid]

Thanks for sharing that.

You must have studied for a ridiculous number of hours in toto!

[lawschool2014hopeful]

Thanks for sharing that.

You must have studied for a ridiculous number of hours in toto!

You dont even want to know.

[cinephile]

I'm genuinely impressed. Congrats!

[ScrewMick180]

In my opinion, this is the BEST guide I've ever read on this forum. Cannot agree with you more about people thinking that if I read the books, drill, and take PT's, then I'm guaranteed a 170+.

Just have a few questions, and I'd really appreciate some answers:

1) What did you get on your cold diagnostic?

2) How did you learn to improve your timing? This is especially important.

3) Do you think reading magazines such as the Economist or The New Yorker help? You mentioned in the guides to read complex material. Do you consider those publications "complex"?

Again, thank you for the amazing guide!

[lawschool2014hopeful]

In my opinion, this is the BEST guide I've ever read on this forum. Cannot agree with you more about people thinking that if I read the books, drill, and take PT's, then I'm guaranteed a 170+.

Just have a few questions, and I'd really appreciate some answers:

1) What did you get on your cold diagnostic?

2) How did you learn to improve your timing? This is especially important.

3) Do you think reading magazines such as the Economist or The New Yorker help? You mentioned in the guides to read complex material. Do you consider those publications "complex"?

Again, thank you for the amazing guide!

Thank you

1) In the picture as you can see on the left, 145
2) In general, there is no such thing as a timing problem, is usually a problem of not mastering the fundamentals so it that becomes natural and intuitive. However after fair amount of practice (30pt test) you might notice that there are certain questions that is a major time sucker, and you dont get them right half of the time anyways, skip them. For me it was substitution questions on games, and those giant parallel analogy questions on R.C (those that take up quarter a page, I forget the example they are asking for by the time I read through all of the answer choices).
3) I didnt. Instead of getting use to a style of writing that TLS suggests I went to get comfortable with the material/topics instead. I read books like A short history of everything by Bill Bryson, once I had a good overview of certain topics I read stuff I was interested in. You cant force yourself in reading the economist, if you are not interested, and words are just flying by you, you are not reading or learning. You are just lying to yourself.

*Edited for an improved answer.

[ScrewMick180]

Sorry, thought initially that it was your first real exam score but then realized you mention explicitly in the guide that it was your diagnostic.

[npt2901]

this is awesome thanks so much. you rule.

[lawschool2014hopeful]

this is awesome thanks so much. you rule.

I'm genuinely impressed. Congrats!

Thank you !

[flash21]

thank you for this

[Jeffort]

Thanks for sharing this, hopefully it will help some future LSAT takers. If more people would take the time to write honest prep stories and stick them in one thread it could become a good resource and help people avoid many of the common prep misconceptions and pitfalls.

I especially liked that you included this since it's something many people do and aren't honest with themselves about when evaluating score range:

It is important to note that, in guarding my self-confidence, I almost always cheated while timing myself. I often gave myself an extra minute or two, and I never wrote a 5 section test

This type of thing is partly responsible for why many people here report 3-5 point test day drop scores compared to PT range as well as other more significant test day score drops.

A thread dedicated to stories about prep misconceptions, pitfalls, bad prep strategies, stories of strategies that did/didn't work, good and bad personal experiences, etc. would be good if others contribute, maybe this can be it! There really needs to be more honesty and information about what long LSAT prep journeys are really like with all the struggles, obstacles, self-doubt, frustration, etc. in part just so people know it's normal to experience that stuff and aren't alone/the only one with the same frustrations and difficulties. Just realizing that everyone else shooting for a high score is feeling stupid and doubting themselves all the time too can be very comforting and helpful.

People tend to progress through prep much smoother when they have reasonable expectations about how the process works in terms of what is required and what to realistically expect along the way with time commitment, reasonable improvement rates over time, all the various struggles in a long relentless uphill battle to a high score. The LSAT shouldn't be sugar coated to new students. Scoring 170+ is really frigging hard! and takes a ton of work to accomplish if you're not a natural. Unfortunately, harsh reality isn't a great marketing strategy for prep providers.

[lawschool2014hopeful]

@Flash thank you
@Jeffort. The issue with TLS is that if you have been long enough, and dont score 170+, rather than feeling normal, you become the outlier, then you develop a tendency to lie to yourself/become delusional, because nobody wants to feel like an outlier.

[Jeffort]

@Flash thank you
@Jeffort. The issue with TLS is that if you have been long enough, and dont score 170+, rather than feeling normal, you become the outlier, then you develop a tendency to lie to yourself/become delusional, because nobody wants to feel like an outlier.

Yeah, it's unfortunate that TLS peer pressure/the attitudes of some posters fosters that type of thinking, especially since 170+ is only ~3% of all test takers and I highly doubt anywhere close to even a bare majority of TLS members/users end up scoring 170+ on the real test. It would be nice if the population represented itself more proportionally with posts and honesty to help better portray reality to new users trying to form expectations, but of course not much can be done about the self selecting sample except more people like you being willing to share personal stories and others feeling safe to do so without getting attacked and labeled as stupid or whatever. I liked it here better a few years ago when one of the sticky threads was something like 'how to score mid/high 160s+' or something like that where it was clear that 165-69s and even 160+ for certain goals/circumstances are actually really darn good LSAT scores, NOT marks of failure!

I think it's really cool that you took the time to write and post it and wish more people would follow your lead. As a tutor and TLS regular all I can do is encourage others and hope they volunteer too so that future students/TLS users get more and better information about what trying to score 170+ is really like for most people that seriously set out to do it. It isn't an easy road for people that don't have a cold baseline in the 160s, which few people do. I wish this basic information was more widespread amongst students when they begin prep so that peoples expectations going into the process are more realistic.

PS: Of all the helpful things you said, I think the below quoted part deserves emphasis because it is super important and a vital part of achieving a high score at the top end of ones ability level. Being emotionally involved in thinking about the ultimate potential possible score on the particular test you're taking section by section as you go with on the fly estimates of accuracy/performance is a common disabling mindset of people seeking a high score that mostly impedes overall performance.

With almost every high scoring student I've worked with over many years of teaching/tutoring, getting them fully into the 'I don't really give a shit about overall score, just gonna do my best with each question and only care/think about that during the test' mindset while taking PTs (and of course on test day) was one of the big keys to making their final score range jump and then consistently scoring at/near the top of the range. Evaluating overall score potential/performance while taking a test only serves to get you to alter strategies/steps to supposedly 'make-up' for a previous section/questions that didn't feel great, which means inconsistent application of your overall set of methods and habits that leads to dumb mistakes. I really think people being in the mindset you describe of evaluating their performance while taking the test and doing that on test day is largely responsible for most of the significant test day drop from PT avg range instances people report after every score release. It really is a test day score killer since it messes with your head and emotions.

Anyway, sorry for the long rant, just trying to put more attention on these issues so others can benefit from your experiences. Hopefully this thread will get a lot of reads as the new LSAT crowd of the year arrives due to the thread title.

Congrats on getting your 170 btw!

I stopped counting/guessing how many Q I could get wrong and still get a 170+ after every section during prep tests and just tried to do what I can, and skipping/guessing what I don’t know. I trusted a lot more on my instincts, because, these instincts were built through drilling. There was no time to doubt, and often, my second-guessing produced more errors. I really stuck to changing my answer only if I was absolutely sure that the new answer was better.

[Nova]

Excellent contribution.

Congratulations on your achievement.

[MDJ2588]

[I just quickly type this up for about two hours, if there is any dramatic issues or holes in any areas of my argument I am open to all input, as it will help me in my Preparation as well. I am writing this response with a strong lack of sleep, and recovering from a very short period of discouragement to the transition of pure motivation…. but I am still exhausted. I just felt it necessary to instill some inspiration to those who may have lost their s after reading this “Guide”.]

I must say that I read your article, and for a small amount of time I let your perspective truly affect my confidence within my abilities to "Conquer The LSAT". It's truly interesting the diverse opinions and/or Study Plans that many TLS members use in order to obtain a 160-180 Score. Even those who obtained "The Coveted 180" (i.e. Perfect Score), have varying, and at times contradictive methods in their Study Plans. I’ve only been working on my Prep Work for a short time, approximately one month now; I scored a 129 in my cold diagnostic, and have seen marginal improvements within the rest of my PTs.

In the vicarious world of TLS, many of the members would post horribly degrading, and demoralizing perspectives, while boasting their own scores relative to these “dramatically inferior intellectual beings (Cold Diagnostic 120ers). While perhaps those who score mid-drastically high on their initial diagnostic PTs are perhaps predisposed to logical thinking (Reasoning, Analytics, Interpretation, Comprehension) by no means does that make them a successful law student, nor Attorney. It’s even noted by the LSAC that this test is an inequitable determination of a student’s ability to successfully obtain their JD Degree, as well as become a successful Attorneys. The design of the LSAT, as I have ascertained through listing to various podcasts, and reading countless articles/forums (YES I CAN READ, noted to all TLS members who have demoralized perspective Law Students), is to procure the determination of the test takers ability to develop a train of thought that the said individual is not use to using. The test is extremely learnable, that’s the point of it. Can the student change their thought processes, so radically that they would achieve a 40-60 PT increase from an initial cold diagnosis, to “The Perfect Score-180” Does the student have the academic determination to ascertain such a score despite the statics, and at times demoralizing results? Does the said student have the capabilities to self-analyze their faults, and thus make the necessary corrections in order develop their proper skill set.? These are all questions reflecting the mind of the LSAC. Also, in contrast, the LSAC seeks to scale the ability of those who are adapted to this train of though, and the depth of that ability to apply their knowledge under the timed pressure conditions. Can that student just simply walk in the test, after a small time frame of preparation and achieve a high score, perhaps. Is that student any more creditable intellectually then the student that had to study a rigorous five months, perhaps? Also it could perhaps be vice versa. In the eyes of the LSAC, HYS, and other T14 Schools, this test reflects on YOUR SCORE in comparison to THE OTHER TEST TAKERS on that date. In essence the main time scale of measurement this test uses in comparison to ones ability of success/dropout of Law School only pertains to their Freshmen Year (the validity of my sources is from the “Conquering LSAT”- Law School Podcast, as stated by an actual LSAC test designer). So in light of the LSAT I have now presented my Premise, the LSAT is no measure of one’s success in Law School, especially their initial diagnosis, and that any individual can achieve “The Perfect Score”, through a concise Preparation Plan, catered to their abilities as an individual not as a whole. The correlation of studying v. preparing is drastically different. ONE STUDIES FOR CHEMISTRY “vis -a- vis” ONE must PREPARE FOR THE LSAT. Hence, why there is such a wide variety of Prep Plans from various individuals who evidently score exactly the same. There is no definitive RIGHT WAY to achieve a high score on the LSAT, and there is a definitive WRONG WAY.

It of my conclusion, that although you’re apparent “Guide” is of great length and detail, it is implicitly invalid, and completely misses the overall purpose of the LSAT. I digress to the fact that the overall time you involved in achieving your leap from a 140-170 score is certainly lengthy, and that the amount of Prep Materials you utilized were extremely wide in range, giving you a valid insight into certain aspects of preparation in regards to material/time spent in preparing on your basis. With all due respect those two properties are just a small constitute of the overall concept of the LSAT especially regards to your own experiences. The nature of the exam, as various individuals, accredited tutors, high-scorers, and the LSAC have stated through various research I’ve conducted, is the very nature of the test is to create a unique dynamic within the test-taker, in other words fundamentally adapt to their own sensibility, understanding, and enviably create a contingency of reinforcement to effectively tackle, any and all questions. It is true the plan in order to achieve these goals is easier for some, and harder for others. The successful scorer, and potential law student exhibits all the Prep Material, Study Guides, Advice, Comments (Positive or Negative), into their own form of conventional thinking. This is what makes the strong Attorneys, Law Students, Politicians, and Leaders of tomorrow. This is through the rise of the individual through his or her own proclamation and strength. It is of my opinion that those who achieve the 180 and work feverishly for that goal, overcoming various boundaries, un-wavered by the words of others, “Eyes’ On the Prize” attitude vs. your naturally sound test-taker, with minimal preparation, and a keen sense of “I AM SO GREAT AT THE LSAT WHO NEEDS ANY VALIDATION BUT MY FINAL SCORE” has a much less success rate then the latter. My evidence is shown in the career as an Attorney. The LSAT isn’t anything like it in a material aspect, but in the conventional realm of independent research, and competitive motivation, the wants to be better then the next, despite all the odds is must, in a court room you must have the natural drive to overcome all hurdles, and commit to the research, as well as development in order to achieve a successful victory. I look at life as, “the higher the odds, the more challenging, and the more challenging the more fun”! So finally after my lengthy words, I commend you for your fantastic resilience, and overall achievement of your commendable score. With those words, I respectfully, as well as firmly disagree with your stance, and I urge those who read your “GUIDE” to not take it at face value. Use the word for encouragement and preparation, find the faults, such as perhaps more PT’s prior to the day of the test, find the strategies that work best for you and tailor your methods accordingly. This test is extremely difficulty especially in obtaining the top 90% to “The Perfect Score-180”. I openly challenge your “Guide”, by saying in my 4 Months, 1 Day, 7 Hours, 24 Minutes, 51 seconds, I will achieve a higher score than you despite my lower cold diagnostic, and I will still pursue my overall goal of achieving a 180, on the June 9th, 2014 LSAT. I hope that my progress, and achievement of this challenge will be a TESTAMENT OF TRUTH, that anyone can achieve a high score; it’s a matter of determination, and range of intellectual adaptability, for these are the true gifts of knowledge. I wont cry, nor stress about me achieving a high score, I will know I have a high score on the test day. Perhaps others are different and need another train of thought, but I am certainly and individual who is a perfectionist/over-achiever, and for those who share in my persona understand that this “take whatever I get perception” is not applicable. I work off of this is “WHAT I AM GOING TO GET”, I have nothing to stress about because I already have a 180 score before I even walked through the doors on the day of the test. In my life having confidence, and a conviction achieving limitless success is vital, if I set myself up for 2nd place that’s all I will be is just second place.

(Just to note I do apologize if this comes off a bit aggressive, I just don’t believe in doubt in one’s self, it’s my opinion that this is the root of failure. I wrote this because your guide truly made me think twice about this test, though only for a brief time, I felt you put certain aspects into perspective, but the same way you criticize certain TLS members/Prep Material on an incorrect basis, as well as the overall point to many of the major publications/ posts aren’t geared for “Religious Devotion” as you put it, but to be applied with the individuals own understanding and methodology. Perhaps some are even worded in such a manner, but one who believes the LSAT is like a “Get Rich Quick Scheme” and you just follow a specific set of rules you’ll score high, should reconsider their career aspirations, if their not willing to think for themselves. I will keep people posted on my progress, and lawschool2014hopeful, I hope I can still come to you for specific advice on certain strategic implementation, in all fairness to my gentleman like challenge haha)

Just a word of Inspiration from Thucydides, as quoted from In Pericles’ Funeral Oration, “But the pam of courage will surely be adjudged most justly to those who best know the difference between hardship and pleasure and yet are never tempted to shrink from danger”

[charles_monster]

Thank you so much. this is hands down the best guide I've ever read on TLS.
I myself am from China where not really a lot of people are taking this test, but I have couple of friends who are going to take LSAT in June, yet haven't started prepping yet. I advised them to come visit TLS out of good expectations that they could possibly get very good suggestions on how to efficiently prepare for this. But what astonishes me is that most, if not all, of them came to me and said: Hey, you know what, scoring 170+ isn't that hard, it seems like everyone who is talking on that forum has seen massive progress after prepping for like 2 months, like from 140 to 175. I have told them the classical LSAT fallacy that the sample being representative or not thing, but they seemed not to agree with me and still were quite stubborn of being able to, and will, score a 170+ if they "try". Things have been a bit different here in China since our dominant language is Chinese which LSAT does not have a version with. So the language barrier is another important thing we need to consider, let's take RC as an example, native English speakers would need to focus on the logic flow of the passage, yet we have to focus on the logic, as well as the language itself. So I said to my friends again, don't compare ourselves to those people, will you think it's appropriate for them to compare themselves to us when we are all taking a test in Chinese, say college entrance examination? I bet the answer would be no. But we are pretty damn good at Logic Games, that should earn us some points. What I'm trying to say is that everyone has their own weakness and strength, do not compare yourself randomly to another person who scored a 180 even if with a 140 diagnostic.
I like one sentence from this guide a lot, you said and I quote, "That you can do it does not necessarily mean you will do it"(maybe not in original words, but the similar meaning). The most dangerous thing during our prep is the overwhelming arrogance and self-cheating. I very much agree with you on the part that nobody wants to be a outliner. That's actually what I did at the first stage, unfortunately. I cheated myself during PT, I gave myself a couple of more minutes, I turned to the answer key page too early, I kept telling myself that was just another misread, this was just another rushing, I would be fine if I don't make the same mistake the next time. But gradually, I really started to understand that all of this is part of the prep itself, you cannot guarantee you will have a good day on test day, you cannot guarantee you will not make the same dumb mistakes, you cannot guarantee that you will pay attention to detailed words on real test as you said to yourself earlier.
Sometimes, it hurts so bad to fall from the top of your fantasy, but it does happen all the time. Set your goal high, but don't set it unrealistically high. In case someone forgets this, a 173 is a 99%, a 99% means if you are randomly chosen from 100 test takers, you beat 98 of them. That is really not something we call easy.
But I'm not here to tell everyone that "no, you cannot possibly score that high, just go for a 160, that should be your realistic goal". I bet no one actually does this, what we need to do is work hard efficiently. Sometimes you get better results when you set your goal realistic. For example, two test takers, all other factors aside, have the same ability to score a 170 on test. One of them says to himself, "I am good enough to score a 170, that's what I'm gonna do, I let myself miss a couple of hard questions, I skip those I find impossible, I get every score I could get", another one says to himself,"I have been PTing for so long, my average score is 170, but I need more, I have to go to HLS, so 175 is what I need, I cannot miss more than 6, in which case, -2 on RC, and -3 on LR and -1 on LG. That's all I can afford to lose, please don't fool me around God, I need that 175!" The second mindset has given you tremendous pressure, trust me, you are gonna disappoint yourself with a 160- if you let that pressure haunt you.
So my dear fellas, read this guide, set realistic goal, and work super hard, seriously, you will not achieve your "LSAT dream" if you do not work hard even if it's just a 130.
Btw, congratulations on your 170 and thanks again!

[lawschool2014hopeful]

@Jeffort, thanks again! Through my time here, you were always one of the most helpful/honest person about the test. I certainly hope as well that many people will get to see the reality. But so far, is definitely not attracting the same level of attention as Noodley's FoolProof Guide to 179 for Retakers, for reasons that I think that are pretty clear through my story.


@Nova, you have been here for me all for a very long time. You responded alot to my previous posts/questions. Thanks again!

@MDJ, warning, my response to you will be quite honest and harsh. Your post is quite full of contradictions, you might not realize it. In your initial paragraphs/argument, you seem to still want to hold on to the notion about how this test is completely beatable with enough effort. Yet, you seem to criticize the idea of "Follow this plan and get rich notion". But you see, when you believe a test is beatable through studying, you are just still holding on to the belief that with enough/practice, the right plan, you will somehow achieve 180. Quite frankly, given your low diagnostic score, for you to achieve a 180, which is next to impossible, you would have to be in this longer than I have. No amount of LSAT related books will get you there, you simply have to get "smarter", and that takes time, dedication to change your daily habits entirely. Quite frankly, you sound no different than I was when I just started studying for the test. I will accept your challenge for whatever its worth, but dont set yourself for disappointment, be honest with your abilities.

@Charles, I absolutely agree with everything you have said. I think is really great you are able to arrive that perspective before suffering for a long time. I feel for you, especially given your language barrier. Thanks alot, and good luck on your tests!

[MDJ2588]

@Jeffort, thanks again! Through my time here, you were always one of the most helpful/honest person about the test. I certainly hope as well that many people will get to see the reality. But so far, is definitely not attracting the same level of attention as Noodley's FoolProof Guide to 179 for Retakers, for reasons that I think that are pretty clear through my story.


@Nova, you have been here for me all for a very long time. You responded alot to my previous posts/questions. Thanks again!

@MDJ, warning, my response to you will be quite honest and harsh. Your post is quite full of contradictions, you might not realize it. In your initial paragraphs/argument, you seem to still want to hold on to the notion about how this test is completely beatable with enough effort. Yet, you seem to criticize the idea of "Follow this plan and get rich notion". But you see, when you believe a test is beatable through studying, you are just still holding on to the belief that with enough/practice, the right plan, you will somehow achieve 180. Quite frankly, given your low diagnostic score, for you to achieve a 180, which is next to impossible, you would have to be in this longer than I have. No amount of LSAT related books will get you there, you simply have to get "smarter", and that takes time, dedication to change your daily habits entirely. Quite frankly, you sound no different than I was when I just started studying for the test. I will accept your challenge for whatever its worth, but dont set yourself for disappointment, be honest with your abilities.

@Charles, I absolutely agree with everything you have said. I think is really great you are able to arrive that perspective before suffering for a long time. I feel for you, especially given your language barrier. Thanks alot, and good luck on your tests!

I certainly agree with you to the fullest extent that I need to "get smarter" when it comes to the LSAT, but thats the whole point no matter what your initial cold diagnostic. My life style in general has changed, and will utlimately will change even greater from this point till test day. Primarily due to your article, your overall premise/conclusion has truly inspire me, yet gave me a humble notion of what this test is truly about. Perhaps I was extremely exhausted when I wrote that post, but I will clarify that I don't believe that with enough studying, meaning enough in terms of the linear nature of time, I mean the term enough in the nature of overall knowledge. As for example purposes, you can have an individual study for 4-months, thus being "enough" to achieve a satisfactory score to be a competitive candidate for most T-14 schools, but the said person EFFECTIVELY PREPARED for the test, rather then ENOUGH STUDYING. To clarity further, from all the research I've conducted, the life style changes I have made, including but not less then hanging every 180ers study guide, purchasing the most effective/popular Prep Material, being a TLS member, conducting approximately two months prior to this day effectively learning the nature of this test, eating healthy, exercising when I can, reading as many academic scholarly articles as time will allow, and perhaps most of all devise a concise yet effective strategy to conquer this test with not just a logistical sense, but as in a systematic process of cognitive thought. In other words making the test questions 2nd nature to me, just as I have the ability to instantly know 2+2=4, I must instinctually know the nature of this test. I don't believe in a "Get Rich Quick Scheme", but I do believe in definitely if a person fully understand the mechanics, and design of the Test they will score above 90% of the rest of students. The one thing that every high-scorer, including yourself realized was rather then knowing the answer to the question, you know "HOW" to answer the question, you and your fellow high scorers knew precisely the answers not based off memory, but through repetitive conditioning, retrieving this information on instincts rather the short term memorization. I think its outrageous to statement that if you have a low cold diagnostic score your chances to increase this drastically is unlikely. I took the cold diagnostic to get a feel for the test, not to see what I was capable of. Of coarse I am not going to have a high score, because I never been test nor understood the requirements for such a test.

[lawschool2014hopeful]

I certainly agree with you to the fullest extent that I need to "get smarter" when it comes to the LSAT, but thats the whole point no matter what your initial cold diagnostic. My life style in general has changed, and will utlimately will change even greater from this point till test day. Primarily due to your article, your overall premise/conclusion has truly inspire me, yet gave me a humble notion of what this test is truly about. Perhaps I was extremely exhausted when I wrote that post, but I will clarify that I don't believe that with enough studying, meaning enough in terms of the linear nature of time, I mean the term enough in the nature of overall knowledge. As for example purposes, you can have an individual study for 4-months, thus being "enough" to achieve a satisfactory score to be a competitive candidate for most T-14 schools, but the said person EFFECTIVELY PREPARED for the test, rather then ENOUGH STUDYING. To clarity further, from all the research I've conducted, the life style changes I have made, including but not less then hanging every 180ers study guide, purchasing the most effective/popular Prep Material, being a TLS member, conducting approximately two months prior to this day effectively learning the nature of this test, eating healthy, exercising when I can, reading as many academic scholarly articles as time will allow, and perhaps most of all devise a concise yet effective strategy to conquer this test with not just a logistical sense, but as in a systematic process of cognitive thought. In other words making the test questions 2nd nature to me, just as I have the ability to instantly know 2+2=4, I must instinctually know the nature of this test. I don't believe in a "Get Rich Quick Scheme", but I do believe in definitely if a person fully understand the mechanics, and design of the Test they will score above 90% of the rest of students. The one thing that every high-scorer, including yourself realized was rather then knowing the answer to the question, you know "HOW" to answer the question, you and your fellow high scorers knew precisely the answers not based off memory, but through repetitive conditioning, retrieving this information on instincts rather the short term memorization. I think its outrageous to statement that if you have a low cold diagnostic score your chances to increase this drastically is unlikely. I took the cold diagnostic to get a feel for the test, not to see what I was capable of. Of coarse I am not going to have a high score, because I never been test nor understood the requirements for such a test.

I think the attitude in this response is better than the previous post you have made. But you have to understand, this is not only a test of logical mechanics, but your ability to handle stress in an extremely fast-paced/intense environment. By being completely obsessed with an insanely unrealistic target (not just for you, a 180 is extremely unrealistic for anyone) as your post indicates, you induce more stress, impede performance, introduce frustration, which most of the time ultimately leads to failure. If I were to guess I think you are a definite fan of Gladwell. Look, practice can get you so far, but with a such a baseline you have, its effect will have its limits. Changing habits and your life to become "smarter" is definitely going to help you reach the upper limits of your capabilities, but genetics and early childhood development will have a ceiling.

Be realistic with yourself, dont shoot for 180 right away. You dont aim to be a pro NHL player when you cant even walk.

One step at a time, master your mechanics, shoot for the 150s, then the 160s, then so forth.

Shooting for the stars in 1 go will only lead to frustration or insanity.

[moralsentiments]

I'm still curious why you paid $170 or whatever to sit for the LSAT the first time when you wanted to score a 170+ but you were only PTing high 150s-low160s. Then to then turn around and do it again when you were only PTing high 160s. Seems like a waste of a few hundred bucks to me. I think if I were shooting for HYS, I wouldn't even sit for the exam until I was regularly PTing mid-high 170s.

I get the idea of wanting real test day experience to lessen the nerves, but I'm sure there are other ways to do it without wasting the money/attempt.

[lawschool2014hopeful]

I'm still curious why you paid $170 or whatever to sit for the LSAT the first time when you wanted to score a 170+ but you were only PTing high 150s-low160s. Then to then turn around and do it again when you were only PTing high 160s. Seems like a waste of a few hundred bucks to me. I think if I were shooting for HYS, I wouldn't even sit for the exam until I was regularly PTing mid-high 170s.

I get the idea of wanting real test day experience to lessen the nerves, but I'm sure there are other ways to do it without wasting the money/attempt.

I thought this was clear,

I was delusional in that I thought I could pull off a test day miracle.

[moralsentiments]

No I got that. Saying you were delusional is one thing, understanding why you were delusional considering you had been lurking TLS for so long prior to taking the test is another. It seems that there is never short supply of people on TLS that would tell you that kind of thinking is irresponsible, so I'm wondering what made you do it anyway?

Also you didn't address the second attempt. I gather from what you said in the book, "It is important to note that most of my practice involved retaking old tests I did a year ago, so I was well aware of the score inflation issue" that you acknowledged that because you recycled so many tests, your test day score might be less than what you were PTing (at least that's what I took from that). If that's the case, then even scoring in the high 160s regularly is not likely to get you a HYS-worthy score on test day. So why sit for it again?

I'm just having a hard time understanding what compelled you to attempt the exam multiple times before you were adequately prepared?

This seems to feed into what a lot of TLS posters lecture 0Ls about all the time. They come into the forum asking what schools they have a shot at attending with a 3.8x, 157. They get nailed to the wall for not preparing properly and urged to retake, retake, retake. I'm glad to see you did the smart thing by retaking, I just don't understand why it took such financial resources and (likely) unnecessary time to get to the desired score. I don't understand the thought process behind paying to take an exam multiple times when you're not prepared to get the score you want.

I hope that brings clarity to what I'm asking. I just see people taking the LSAT 2, 3, 4 times all the time on TLS, and can't figure out why they pay the money to do it. Unless one is PTing 175 and gets insane test day anxiety and bombs, or gets diarrhea midway through, I don't get why one would take it if they aren't regularly getting the score they want on PTs.

[lawschool2014hopeful]

No I got that. Saying you were delusional is one thing, understanding why you were delusional considering you had been lurking TLS for so long prior to taking the test is another. It seems that there is never short supply of people on TLS that would tell you that kind of thinking is irresponsible, so I'm wondering what made you do it anyway?

Also you didn't address the second attempt. I gather from what you said in the book, "It is important to note that most of my practice involved retaking old tests I did a year ago, so I was well aware of the score inflation issue" that you acknowledged that because you recycled so many tests, your test day score might be less than what you were PTing (at least that's what I took from that). If that's the case, then even scoring in the high 160s regularly is not likely to get you a HYS-worthy score on test day. So why sit for it again?

I'm just having a hard time understanding what compelled you to attempt the exam multiple times before you were adequately prepared?

This seems to feed into what a lot of TLS posters lecture 0Ls about all the time. They come into the forum asking what schools they have a shot at attending with a 3.8x, 157. They get nailed to the wall for not preparing properly and urged to retake, retake, retake. I'm glad to see you did the smart thing by retaking, I just don't understand why it took such financial resources and (likely) unnecessary time to get to the desired score. I don't understand the thought process behind paying to take an exam multiple times when you're not prepared to get the score you want.

I hope that brings clarity to what I'm asking. I just see people taking the LSAT 2, 3, 4 times all the time on TLS, and can't figure out why they pay the money to do it. Unless one is PTing 175 and gets insane test day anxiety and bombs, or gets diarrhea midway through, I don't get why one would take it if they aren't regularly getting the score they want on PTs.

Fair enough question

I will clarify

Test #1) Delusional and I didnt want miss a cycle
Test #2) By here I kind of gave up on HYS to be quite honest, and I was willing to settle for a mid 160s and call it a day. I was consistently in high 160s and low 170s, with a occasional mid 170s, the reason I didnt mention the higher end of the PT scores is because of the score inflation issue. There was a consistent internal struggle of shooting for the stars and looking at my realistic possibilities

Sometimes taking the LSAT could be as easy as one make it to be, dont take it until you score consistently 1-2 pts higher than your goal score. The problem arises when that is not possible. You start lying to yourself, shift your goals, eventually resulting in non-rational decisions

[moralsentiments]

Believe me, I get it. I was going to take the Oct. 2012 but didn't feel ready enough, so I decided to take the June 2013 instead. I wasn't happy about skipping a cycle either. I had to readjust my goals according to how much more LSAT prep I was willing to do (it is psychologically taxing, as you know).

I just thought I'd ask because like I mentioned, I see people taking it multiple time a lot on TLS and I have always wondered what circumstances led them to not getting the desired score on the first, or second, or even third try. Since you took the time to write the book, I thought I'd take the time to ask. Thanks for your response, and good luck on your cycle!

[lawschool2014hopeful]

Believe me, I get it. I was going to take the Oct. 2012 but didn't feel ready enough, so I decided to take the June 2013 instead. I wasn't happy about skipping a cycle either. I had to readjust my goals according to how much more LSAT prep I was willing to do (it is psychologically taxing, as you know).

I just thought I'd ask because like I mentioned, I see people taking it multiple time a lot on TLS and I have always wondered what circumstances led them to not getting the desired score on the first, or second, or even third try. Since you took the time to write the book, I thought I'd take the time to ask. Thanks for your response, and good luck on your cycle!

Fair questions, thanks for asking.