The Official September 2017 Study Group

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.

Are you ready for tomorrow?!?!?!

FUCK YES
20
44%
Yeah, kind of
8
18%
Ehh, hoping for the best
6
13%
Not prepared but screw it
3
7%
HAHAHA I'M NOT EVEN TAKING THE LSAT, SUCKS FOR YOU GUYS
8
18%
 
Total votes: 45

Anon-e-miss

Bronze
Posts: 293
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 8:05 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Anon-e-miss » Wed May 17, 2017 6:32 pm

Alexandros wrote:
Anon-e-miss wrote:If PSLF gets capped or (god forbid) dismantled, do you think non-HYS+C T14 would transition to straight am LRAPs or just leave their current students and recent PI grads out to dry?

I get the feeling that many of them may not be in a position to afford to amortize the debt of current PI gunners and/or that of PSLF-hopefuls whose debt has been accumulating since graduation. What an awful situation that would be.

People asked about this at ASW and they said something independent would definitely be implemented. Don't recall the specific schools and obviously that should be taken with a grain of salt.

My past inquiry into this topic had a similar result. Apparently, people at NYU and UChicago said that, although I guess my question was actually more pertaining to those recent grads who are already on the integrated LRAPs.

PSLF/LRAP uncertainty would actually motivate me to take out greater debt at Columbia (or HYS where I'm very unlikely to be accepted) than T14s where I would be more likely to get money, or NYU which is undoubtedly slightly better for my specific PI interests.
Last edited by Anon-e-miss on Fri Jan 26, 2018 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Wed May 17, 2017 6:36 pm

dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
dj9i27 wrote:
Mikey wrote:
dj9i27 wrote:
Mikey wrote:taking new poll ideas!

Best rapper

Eeeeeeeh..

Best workout

^
such a bro.

[+] Spoiler
Image

Mikey?

MIKEY HAS BEEN FOUND.

User avatar
chewinggum

Bronze
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:00 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby chewinggum » Wed May 17, 2017 7:37 pm

Ahh. On my phone at HH. Whoops! :oops:

Ayo_mide

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 3:40 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Ayo_mide » Wed May 17, 2017 8:34 pm

dj9i27 wrote:why did lawschooli stop selling the mastermind?


They still sell it https://lawschooli.com/shop/lsat-study- ... astermind/

User avatar
twiix

Silver
Posts: 858
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:41 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby twiix » Wed May 17, 2017 9:27 pm

Mikey wrote:
dj9i27 wrote:
Mikey wrote:taking new poll ideas!

Best rapper

Eeeeeeeh..

[+] Spoiler
Image

ngogirl12

Silver
Posts: 803
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 8:05 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby ngogirl12 » Wed May 17, 2017 9:42 pm

oopsu812 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
oopsu812 wrote:So do you guys think that 7sage is miles ahead of simply using MH books, 7sage LG videos, and every PT?

No.

There is no silver bullet to this test. That's the only method that's going to work is learning the concepts and spending hours on hours for months practicing real LSAT questions.

Of course, but some materials teach concepts better than others. Just asking how people felt about 7sage vs. books. :wink:

Just to clarify, I meant 7sage + PTs vs. books + PTs. Just realized my original comment read differently.


I think Alex's point is that it is based on your individual learning style. I'm a visual and auditory learner. For me, the first time around I went through the Manhattan RC book, 7Sage curriculum, and Trainer only for the flaw chapters because I heard amazing things about it. That alone took me 6 months because I was also working and aimed at going really slowly. I thought I only was moving on when I was ready but I DO remember getting antsy with some of the LR types and wanting to move on quicker than I was.

This time around, I'm redoing the 7Sage curriculum using Cambridge 1-38 material (as I was before), rereading the Manhattan RC guide, and reading Trainer with the corresponding chapters for LR and RC. I'm skipping 7Sage's RC lessons. Also, like Twiix said, 7Sage is constantly updating their lessons. Another thing they did recently which I heard was REALLY helpful to some was a short LR course for people who were enrolled in the course with JY the creator of 7Sage. One of the major benefits to the course for me is the comments below each lesson. Many 7Sagers overanalyze the lesson and break apart each part, others pose questions, and reading through those comments can really assist one in understanding aspects of the LSAT one never even comprehended.

Some people find the 7Sage curriculum sufficient for prep study, others find the books Manhattan/Trainer enough.

Whatever you end up doing, just make sure it works for you!

User avatar
presidentspivey

Bronze
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:34 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby presidentspivey » Thu May 18, 2017 1:31 am

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/runner0913

#urmmotivation

Once again however, the strong UG concerns me.

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 18, 2017 1:54 am

presidentspivey wrote:http://lawschoolnumbers.com/runner0913

#urmmotivation

Once again however, the strong UG concerns me.

STANNY <3 8)

A lot of my LSN numbers twins this cycle were top private, trying to lower my cycle expectations a wee bit....

User avatar
chargers21

Gold
Posts: 3761
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby chargers21 » Thu May 18, 2017 2:07 am

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/meeseeks

this one's for DJ. Meeseeks is a TLSer, and while his cycle doesn't bode well in all ways, 90k from Columbia is a great outcome. I know you'll get Stanny :mrgreen: , but if I was a betting man, I would say you end up at Columbia. It seems like the landing spot for that type of split

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 18, 2017 2:17 am

chargers21 wrote:http://lawschoolnumbers.com/meeseeks

this one's for DJ. Meeseeks is a TLSer, and while his cycle doesn't bode well in all ways, 90k from Columbia is a great outcome. I know you'll get Stanny :mrgreen: , but if I was a betting man, I would say you end up at Columbia. It seems like the landing spot for that type of split

Damn. That is a solid outcome.
dj9i27 wrote:

User avatar
presidentspivey

Bronze
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:34 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby presidentspivey » Thu May 18, 2017 3:07 am

Alexandros wrote:
chargers21 wrote:http://lawschoolnumbers.com/meeseeks

this one's for DJ. Meeseeks is a TLSer, and while his cycle doesn't bode well in all ways, 90k from Columbia is a great outcome. I know you'll get Stanny :mrgreen: , but if I was a betting man, I would say you end up at Columbia. It seems like the landing spot for that type of split

Damn. That is a solid outcome.
dj9i27 wrote:

Can we just talk about Stanford's campus for a minute. Good God. It's the only T6 I've visited in any capacity, as I went up to see high school friends. Wow that is a beauty. Can't imagine New Haven or Cambridge measure up.

Alexandros

Platinum
Posts: 6478
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:46 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Alexandros » Thu May 18, 2017 3:31 am

presidentspivey wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
chargers21 wrote:http://lawschoolnumbers.com/meeseeks

this one's for DJ. Meeseeks is a TLSer, and while his cycle doesn't bode well in all ways, 90k from Columbia is a great outcome. I know you'll get Stanny :mrgreen: , but if I was a betting man, I would say you end up at Columbia. It seems like the landing spot for that type of split

Damn. That is a solid outcome.
dj9i27 wrote:

Can we just talk about Stanford's campus for a minute. Good God. It's the only T6 I've visited in any capacity, as I went up to see high school friends. Wow that is a beauty. Can't imagine New Haven or Cambridge measure up.

Same here. Ufff. <///3

User avatar
chewinggum

Bronze
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:00 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby chewinggum » Thu May 18, 2017 7:03 am

chargers21 wrote:http://lawschoolnumbers.com/meeseeks

this one's for DJ. Meeseeks is a TLSer, and while his cycle doesn't bode well in all ways, 90k from Columbia is a great outcome. I know you'll get Stanny :mrgreen: , but if I was a betting man, I would say you end up at Columbia. It seems like the landing spot for that type of split


This makes me so hopeful. I hope splitters do equally as well at NYU (for negotiation purposes)

dj9i27

Gold
Posts: 4367
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:37 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby dj9i27 » Thu May 18, 2017 8:41 am

Alexandros wrote:
chargers21 wrote:http://lawschoolnumbers.com/meeseeks

this one's for DJ. Meeseeks is a TLSer, and while his cycle doesn't bode well in all ways, 90k from Columbia is a great outcome. I know you'll get Stanny :mrgreen: , but if I was a betting man, I would say you end up at Columbia. It seems like the landing spot for that type of split

Damn. That is a solid outcome.
dj9i27 wrote:

[+] Spoiler
Image


That's pretty damn good, parallel offer with mich would make CLS hard to turn down. Stanny is still the unattainable goal....

Mikey

Platinum
Posts: 8047
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby Mikey » Thu May 18, 2017 9:33 am

I'M MR MEESEEKS LOOK AT ME

dj9i27

Gold
Posts: 4367
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:37 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby dj9i27 » Thu May 18, 2017 10:07 am

Mikey wrote:I'M MR MEESEEKS LOOK AT ME

EXISTENCE IS PAIN

User avatar
chewinggum

Bronze
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:00 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby chewinggum » Thu May 18, 2017 11:14 am

Is there any data out there about 3-3.4/sub 3 splitters admission and money to T6 schools?

User avatar
chargers21

Gold
Posts: 3761
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby chargers21 » Thu May 18, 2017 11:17 am

chewinggum wrote:Is there any data out there about 3-3.4/sub 3 splitters admission and money to T6 schools?

MyLSN

User avatar
twiix

Silver
Posts: 858
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:41 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby twiix » Thu May 18, 2017 11:18 am

chewinggum wrote:Is there any data out there about 3-3.4/sub 3 splitters admission and money to T6 schools?


T6 as sub 3? get outta town. I'd say for HYS - Barring a medal of honor, Olympic athlete, going through brain cancer during UG, or having 10+ years of work experience where you created snapchat and facebook, it's not at all plausible. CCN you might be able to pull some tom foolery with a 175+ and some incredibly strong softs + WE + LoR + addendum.

3.0-3.4 will have a reasonable shot at CN (not chicago - they don't play games with GPA this low) with a 175 + though without anything crazy unique on their app, but it usually comes at full sticker price.

User avatar
twiix

Silver
Posts: 858
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:41 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby twiix » Thu May 18, 2017 11:19 am

chargers21 wrote:
chewinggum wrote:Is there any data out there about 3-3.4/sub 3 splitters admission and money to T6 schools?

MyLSN


http://mylsn.info/wopi06/ 3.0-3.4 gpa with 170-180 lsat

http://mylsn.info/zldw5v/ 2.4-3.0 gpa with 170-180 lsat

User avatar
chargers21

Gold
Posts: 3761
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby chargers21 » Thu May 18, 2017 11:21 am

dj9i27 wrote:
Mikey wrote:I'M MR MEESEEKS LOOK AT ME

EXISTENCE IS PAIN

Excuse me, I'm a bit of a stickler Meeseeks, what about your short game?

User avatar
chargers21

Gold
Posts: 3761
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby chargers21 » Thu May 18, 2017 11:26 am

.
Last edited by chargers21 on Sat Aug 19, 2017 3:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
chewinggum

Bronze
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:00 am

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby chewinggum » Thu May 18, 2017 11:33 am

TWiiX wrote:
chewinggum wrote:Is there any data out there about 3-3.4/sub 3 splitters admission and money to T6 schools?


T6 as sub 3? get outta town. I'd say for HYS - Barring a medal of honor, Olympic athlete, going through brain cancer during UG, or having 10+ years of work experience where you created snapchat and facebook, it's not at all plausible. CCN you might be able to pull some tom foolery with a 175+ and some incredibly strong softs + WE + LoR + addendum.

3.0-3.4 will have a reasonable shot at CN (not chicago - they don't play games with GPA this low) with a 175 + though without anything crazy unique on their app, but it usually comes at full sticker price.

Not sure why reading this was so entertaining lol

But I'm always hesitant to trust LSN since they are self reports..
Last edited by chewinggum on Thu May 18, 2017 11:45 am, edited 2 times in total.

dj9i27

Gold
Posts: 4367
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:37 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby dj9i27 » Thu May 18, 2017 11:34 am

chargers21 wrote:
dj9i27 wrote:
Alexandros wrote:
chargers21 wrote:http://lawschoolnumbers.com/meeseeks

this one's for DJ. Meeseeks is a TLSer, and while his cycle doesn't bode well in all ways, 90k from Columbia is a great outcome. I know you'll get Stanny :mrgreen: , but if I was a betting man, I would say you end up at Columbia. It seems like the landing spot for that type of split

Damn. That is a solid outcome.
dj9i27 wrote:

[+] Spoiler
Image


That's pretty damn good, parallel offer with mich would make CLS hard to turn down. Stanny is still the unattainable goal....

I'm not entirely sure of your gpa, but it definitely seems like, from what I've been seeing, that Columbia is in play and if you get Harvard it will probably be financially justifiable. Would you take 105k from cornell or pay at or near sticker for Columbia, ignoring all other options? Just curious, as that seems like the type of decision many splitters have to make

it's good, not great. Lots of people if you +/-.2 have gotten into H with a 175+ and there are so few data points for S it's unrepresentative imo. CLS is in and a numbers twin got into Chi, equal funding I might lean toward chi (family).

In the Cornell v. CLS I would take Cornell. To hell with paying sicker unless it's S. I think I have a decent shot at 120-150g from mich and 135g from UVA. Duke is either going to low ball me or be a serious contender. My softs are what are keeping me alive lol and give me a snowballs chance at HS

User avatar
mwells56

Silver
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 9:08 pm

Re: The Official September 2017 Study Group

Postby mwells56 » Thu May 18, 2017 11:55 am

About to take PT70.

On my last 4 PTs I've been in a steady decline of 171(PT45)-167(PT46)-166(PT76)-163(PT69). This was not a boost to my confidence.

This is all after coming off the academic high of getting my first 4.0 semester. No idea how my junior year ended up this well. Bumped by LSAC GPA from a 3.69 to a 3.75. Never thought I would be able to get it that high. Based on the classes I'm taking first semester next year I could go as high as a 3.77. Not tryna brag, just venting a 'lil.

I neeeeeeed this LSAT to go well. My original top-end goal was Columbia but with this GPA hike I'm starting to think Harvard might be a possibility. In the 7 tests I've taken since I started studying again in January I've only broken 170 twice (both 171's, PTs 42 and 45) and I've been averaging 167. I'm currently a Michigan undergrad and would love to stay here for law school and a 168ish is probably enough to get in but I'd at the very least like to have options on the higher end of the T14.

My biggest problem is consistency. On LG I go -0 or I can go -5. RC -3 or -9. LG is all over the place, could be -0 on one section and then -5 on the other. I know it's not a lack of understanding or ability at this point, I almost never get a question wrong that I don't understand what the right answer is and why. I'm just always making the dumb mistakes. If I get lucky I could get a 178. If I get unlucky I could get a 160. Frustrating.

Remaining tests are 70, 71, and 77-80. Hopefully that and whatever questions/sections I have remaining will be enough.

Sorry for the rant, just starting to feel the pressure.



Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests