Page 3 of 3

Re: 167 PT with no prep, freshman in college

Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2015 7:08 pm
by Jeffort
Clyde Frog wrote:
OP is a freshman in college. Factored the philosophy major. Only logical reasoning problems would be the LSAT ones and that would count as prep. OP said they had no prior prep. Just calling it how I see it. Have seen many threads like this the past couple years.
Most have been lies.

Clyde Frog wrote:Not saying it's not possible to score a high diagnostic, for example a girl on here last year scored something like a 174 on hers and hit a 180 on the real thing, although they claimed to have been struggling with time. -25 minutes is blazing though.
I've just seen a ton of bullshit on here that makes me think otherwise.

I share the same suspicions as Clyde Frog for the same reasons. Many threads like this pop up every year on the forum where the users first TLS post makes this same really high first cold diagnostic timed PT score with no prep claim along with questions about how/when to prep, and almost all of them turn out to be BS.

Aside from the fact that historically threads like this have usually turned out to be BS, the main logically based reason I'm suspicious of them is due to the high level of raw (non LSAT prep enhanced) critical reading, logical reasoning and analysis skills/abilities and knowledge of certain heavily tested logical concepts a person must possess in order to achieve a high/top 5% LSAT score on first virgin run cold diagnostic timed PT with no prior prep. If one already possesses such high level critical reading, logical analysis and problem solving skills, they should easily be able to use those skills to figure out or already know the answer(s) to the really basic prep questions they ask without needing or feeling the need to seek advice/answers from random strangers on the internet.

With that said, it's possible OP is telling the truth and really is an exceptionally gifted well educated recent High School graduate that's possibly on the level of being one of the rare young 'prodigy'/LSAT naturals types.

I don't really care either way, so I'll just give important information to answer his/her question under the assumption that OP is for real.

OP, although LSAC considers valid and reports LSAT scores that are up to five years old to law schools people apply to, most top ranked and many other law schools only consider LSAT scores that are no older than three years. That being the case, if you prep for and take the LSAT within the next year in the time window you're asking about, by the time you graduate and are ready to apply to law school (if you still want to go to law school ~4 years from now), that score will probably be too old for most top law schools to consider and you'll have to prep again and re-take the LSAT again later.

As others already said, enjoy being an undergraduate, focus on maximizing your GPA, have fun, explore all sorts of different ideas about other possible career path options in order to make sure LS is really what you ultimately want to do after you've been exposed to and learned about all sorts of the new things UG classes and experiences will expose you to, etc. The LSAT and law schools are not going anywhere so you've got plenty of time in terms of several years to even decide whether or not you really want to or will need to prep for and take the LSAT.

If you're for real and actually achieved a 167 under strict test day conditions without even needing the full 35 minutes for some of the sections like you described, you shouldn't need to prep very hard or for more than 2-3 months if even that long to get yourself into good shape to achieve a 170+ score on an actual LSAT administration since a virgin run 167 demonstrates that you already have high level skills and abilities with the things the LSAT is designed to test/measure.

Re: 167 PT with no prep, freshman in college

Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2015 7:20 pm
by Traynor Brah
this kid is the fucking worst amirite

Re: 167 PT with no prep, freshman in college

Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2015 7:31 pm
by PoopNpants
Bet he can't make a left-handed lay-up

Re: 167 PT with no prep, freshman in college

Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2015 7:57 pm
by Traynor Brah
PoopNpants wrote:Bet he can't make a left-handed lay-up

This kid definitely has to look down to dribble.

Re: 167 PT with no prep, freshman in college

Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2015 8:21 pm
by RZ5646
Nulli Secundus wrote:I read through the Superprep book and took the Superprep A, B, C in that order. Superprep A was my diagnostic (but not entirely cold due to having read through the prep book obviously). I scored a 175 for Superprep A. I have two official LSAT scores, a 170 and a 176. I guess what I mean is, scoring high on a diagnostic is possible but it will not be directly indicative of the lower bound of your actual LSAT score, due to exam day conditions. But still, scoring high on your "diagnostic" feels good, so congratz.

Standardized tests are least predictive at the ends of the bell curve, so it's not unusual for top scorers to bounce around 180-170.

I'm not trying to attack OP in this thread, so I'm sorry if anyone got that impression. OP seems like a smart guy, and I think his story is plausible, and he can probably score 175+ if he puts the work in.

I'm just making fun of him because 1) his attitude invites it, and 2) people here overthink the LSAT way too much. Read the books, take PTs, take an official test, and move on with your life. Studying is not a "journey" and a high score does not make you a better person. TLS fetishes the LSAT way too fucking much and it gets irritating after a while.

Re: 167 PT with no prep, freshman in college

Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2015 9:22 pm
by Jeffort
RZ5646 wrote:
Standardized tests are least predictive at the ends of the bell curve, so it's not unusual for top scorers to bounce around 180-170.

This^ is 100% true.

The best evidence to prove its truth is the official LSAT scores record of Robin Singh, the world record holder for scoring 180 the most times on officially administered LSATs. Even with his ultimate unparallelled mastery of the test, his official scores fluctuated somewhat randomly over the years bouncing around from low-mid-high 170s to 180s. That pretty well illustrates that at the very top end of the scoring scale, extraneous factors (such as how you're feeling on test day, environmental factors, etc.) or just making a couple of careless mistakes/wrong split second on the fly judgements/decisions can play a significant role in whether you end up with a low-mid 170's, high 170's or perfect 180 score even if you solidly possess true 180 skills/ability level.

Given that in the 170's range each additional raw point usually increases your scaled score by 1 point and vice versa with missed raw points, just ending up seated next to somebody on test day that goes into one or two distracting 30 seconds or longer sneeze or coughing attacks during the test can throw off your concentration and focus enough to cost you a couple of questions and knock what could have been a perfect or near perfect score down by several scaled points.

When I took the LSAT and ended up scoring 177, one of the questions I got wrong was due to a really really stupid brain fart mistake. The only question I missed in the LG section was question #1 of the section and I got it wrong due to a dyslexic type brain fart I attribute to nerves cuz LG's was the only section I was a little scared of due to timing issues and it was my last/5th section. I had determined and circled the CR in the test book but my hand didn't listen to my brain and it decided to bubble in the oval for a different answer choice letter than my brain was telling it to bubble in!

For an LR question I got wrong, I had realized right away while starting the next question that I selected the wrong one of my two contenders (the other contender was the CR) for the previous question, knew I needed to change the answer on the bubble sheet, but stupidly decided to wait until I finished the next question I had already begun reading and analyzing since I didn't want to break my flow and waste precious seconds. By the time I finished the next question I forgot to change the answer for the previous one on the answer sheet and didn't remember that I needed to change that answer until seconds after the proctor called time's up.