Harvard 2010! Forum

[Dignan]

Thanks for this - I've been lurking on this thread trying to get a better feel for my chances next year (median GPA, only one LSAT and its over 75th, so I should have a good shot), but the data out there can be a little misleading, so it is always appreciated when people explain their numbers or their application a little better. I'm not sure if I understand the rationale for even considering a data point 13 points below your high score - the low score clearly has nothing to do with intellectual ability - but the information is helpful and appreciated.

In Harvard's defense, I think it's fair to hold a lower first score against an applicant. Not surprisingly, I think my 176 is more reflective of my abilities than my 163, which was more than 10 points below my PT average before that test. Still, it's reasonable for a school to wonder about someone who needs to take a test twice to perform up to his or her abilities. As a 1L, for example, you don't get to retake your Contracts final if you are sick or had a bad night's sleep the night before.

I mean, I would have been more impressed if I had scored the 176 on the first try. It's more than fair for Harvard to have a similar take.

[BenJ]

Similarity to avatar, duh. I mean, you're obviously the guy with his hair styled into the shape of the Golden Gate Bridge.

And you, good sir, are a kitten.

Yale-thread deja-vu.

If you see Ryan Reynolds (or now, Jon McLaughlin) at an ASW, it's not me, but I'd prefer you delay them so I can ogle.

I think I can come up with a reason to delay Jon McLaughlin, but my motivations might be selfish. I miss the long hair, though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eWDZqc7 ... re=channel

[Kretzy]

Similarity to avatar, duh. I mean, you're obviously the guy with his hair styled into the shape of the Golden Gate Bridge.

And you, good sir, are a kitten.

Yale-thread deja-vu.

If you see Ryan Reynolds (or now, Jon McLaughlin) at an ASW, it's not me, but I'd prefer you delay them so I can ogle.

I think I can come up with a reason to delay Jon McLaughlin, but my motivations might be selfish...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eWDZqc7 ... re=channel

It's all about this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQnrupaTqFU

Remarkably, he's more attractive in person. Bastard.

[JohnnyTrojan08]

Machine gun e-mails have begun. Fallout ensues.

[februaryftw]

Thanks for this - I've been lurking on this thread trying to get a better feel for my chances next year (median GPA, only one LSAT and its over 75th, so I should have a good shot), but the data out there can be a little misleading, so it is always appreciated when people explain their numbers or their application a little better. I'm not sure if I understand the rationale for even considering a data point 13 points below your high score - the low score clearly has nothing to do with intellectual ability - but the information is helpful and appreciated.

In Harvard's defense, I think it's fair to hold a lower first score against an applicant. Not surprisingly, I think my 176 is more reflective of my abilities than my 163, which was more than 10 points below my PT average before that test. Still, it's reasonable for a school to wonder about someone who needs to take a test twice to perform up to his or her abilities. As a 1L, for example, you don't get to retake your Contracts final if you are sick or had a bad night's sleep the night before.

I mean, I would have been more impressed if I had scored the 176 on the first try. It's more than fair for Harvard to have a similar take.

Fair enough, I can see the usefulness for predicting exam success. I suppose the interesting point, though, is that a 163 - 176 doesn't say much about your score band for the 176 (you might be a 178 who had a bad day, and didn't take the first test seriously), whereas someone who has 173-175 looks like they really are somewhere in the 173-175 range, and so averaging makes a ton of sense.

In any event, good luck finishing up your cycle, looks like you'll have some great opportunities regardless.

[tomhobbes]

To be honest, there were a couple of times yesterday when I thought to myself "I wonder if that's X," but I think it would have been be a bit obnoxious to directly ask the person if they're really TomHobbes (or whomever) on TLS.

Blatant anti- (pro-?) tomhobbes trolling.

He's just a well-known TLS poster who I knew was at Columbia's ASW. If I end up going to Berkeley's ASW, I'll be sure to use your screenname if I need to make a similar point.

Hmm were we in Morrison's class together? I was being pretty low-key but I remember making a joke or two. If you're an older applicant who was sitting a couple rows in front of me, I think I may have said a sentence or two to you. Now that I think of it, there was another guy nearby in that class who referenced me having a Hamilton or something, and I don't see how he could have possibly known that unless he had IDed me. I didn't really think about it at the time; I assumed he was making some subtle joke. It's hard to believe I could have given myself away with a single sentence less than ten words long.

By the way, if any TLSers are at the Harvard ASW, I'll totally reveal my true identity. We should hang out. I don't mind if anyone asks me if I'm tomhobbes, either. It would actually be really amusing.

[nixxers]

By the way, if any TLSers are at the Harvard ASW, I'll totally reveal my true identity. We should hang out. I don't mind if anyone asks me if I'm tomhobbes, either. It would actually be really amusing.

lol +1
are you going to the later one?

[tomhobbes]

By the way, if any TLSers are at the Harvard ASW, I'll totally reveal my true identity. We should hang out. I don't mind if anyone asks me if I'm tomhobbes, either. It would actually be really amusing.

lol +1
are you going to the later one?

Unfortunately I'm going to the one that starts tomorrow.

[Dignan]

Hmm were we in Morrison's class together? I was being pretty low-key but I remember making a joke or two. If you're an older applicant who was sitting a couple rows in front of me, I think I may have said a sentence or two to you.

Yes, I was in Morrison's class. And, yes, I am older. But I have no idea if I was sitting in front of you or not. There appeared to be at least three or four students in the class who looked 30+, so you might've been talking to one of the other older students.

[Sogui]

Never been to a Columbia ASW (wait isn't this the Harvard thread?) but I was able to sneak in a visit during January and casually wandered around.

Even as Freshmen in HS or Undergrad (where age gaps are more apparent due to puberty, etc...) I didn't feel as young as I did when I stepped into CLS and every guy looked like they were in their late 20's or at least had facial hair that made them look that way.

Was actually a little unsettling.

[Core]

Hopefully we see a bunch of admits today.

[notanumber]

Hopefully we see a bunch of admits today.

Yeah. How long has it been since JR gave anybody a followup call? LSN shows almost a month. This is getting tedious.

[Kretzy]

Hopefully we see a bunch of [strike]admits[/strike] JR1 emails today.

[georgina]

Hopefully we see a bunch of admits today.

Yeah. How long has it been since JR gave anybody a followup call? LSN shows almost a month. This is getting tedious.

i get the feeling a bunch of people on LSN have hidden profiles. i was at CLS ASW, and i met a significant number of people already in at HLS. of course, the rest were all held.

did you already have JR1?

[swimbrad]

Hopefully we see a bunch of admits today.

Yeah. How long has it been since JR gave anybody a followup call? LSN shows almost a month. This is getting tedious.

i get the feeling a bunch of people on LSN have hidden profiles. i was at CLS ASW, and i met a significant number of people already in at HLS. of course, the rest were all held.

did you already have JR1?

Between NYU and CLS this is the part that made me nervous, there were a TON of people on hold at H... there's wasn't a bunch of admits or rejects, but the majority of people I talked to that had applied to H were on hold......

[notanumber]

Hopefully we see a bunch of admits today.

Yeah. How long has it been since JR gave anybody a followup call? LSN shows almost a month. This is getting tedious.

i get the feeling a bunch of people on LSN have hidden profiles. i was at CLS ASW, and i met a significant number of people already in at HLS. of course, the rest were all held.

did you already have JR1?

Yes. I had a JR1 a couple of weeks ago. JR1 calls have been trickling in here and there, though certainly at a slower pace than in January and early Feb. It's the JR2 calls that seem to have stopped cold.

[somewhatwayward]

well i was looking at last year on LSN, and march was basically all rejections with the very occasional acceptance april was rejections and waitlists, again with the occasional acceptance

maybe this year will be different because there are so many JR1s-with-no-JR2s

[of Benito Cereno]

looking at years past harvard waitlisted a huge number of applicants. given that all future waitlists are likely first 'held' I guess I've been really underestimating the hold pool.

[Sogui]

Hopefully we see a bunch of [strike]admits[/strike] JR1 emails today.

Seconded.

Also, happy 200th page everybody.

Let's hope that our neurosis, anxiety, and endless speculation drive this baby to 300!

[crackberry]

looking at years past harvard waitlisted a huge number of applicants. given that all future waitlists are likely first 'held' I guess I've been really underestimating the hold pool.

Yeah, I'm beginning to think that "hold" at HLS = WL. No one has yet reported a WL and we're already at March 8. Whereas at CLS there is a (relatively) clear distinction between "hold" and "reserve," at HLS, it seems "hold" = WL.

[Kronk]

looking at years past harvard waitlisted a huge number of applicants. given that all future waitlists are likely first 'held' I guess I've been really underestimating the hold pool.

Yeah, I'm beginning to think that "hold" at HLS = WL. No one has yet reported a WL and we're already at March 8. Whereas at CLS there is a (relatively) clear distinction between "hold" and "reserve," at HLS, it seems "hold" = WL.

This is probably only true for the JR1 -> no JR2 people. I'm sure all the JR1-less people are getting admitted. hth

[iminlstrick]

looking at years past harvard waitlisted a huge number of applicants. given that all future waitlists are likely first 'held' I guess I've been really underestimating the hold pool.

Yeah, I'm beginning to think that "hold" at HLS = WL. No one has yet reported a WL and we're already at March 8. Whereas at CLS there is a (relatively) clear distinction between "hold" and "reserve," at HLS, it seems "hold" = WL.

This is probably only true for the JR1 -> no JR2 people. I'm sure all the JR1-less people are getting admitted. hth

What makes you think this pray tell?

[crackberry]

looking at years past harvard waitlisted a huge number of applicants. given that all future waitlists are likely first 'held' I guess I've been really underestimating the hold pool.

Yeah, I'm beginning to think that "hold" at HLS = WL. No one has yet reported a WL and we're already at March 8. Whereas at CLS there is a (relatively) clear distinction between "hold" and "reserve," at HLS, it seems "hold" = WL.

This is probably only true for the JR1 -> no JR2 people. I'm sure all the JR1-less people are getting admitted. hth

What makes you think this pray tell?

He's being an idiot.

Edit: that was over the line, but seriously, neither of us is getting into HLS. hth

[Amelie]

.

[Kronk]

He's being an idiot.

Edit: that was over the line, but seriously, neither of us is getting into HLS. hth

Finnnnnne.