Nah, there are some people with the softs to get into Yale but lacking the numbers for Harvard. You can get into Yale with a 170/3.8 if you're otherwise amazing, but Harvard probably won't admit you.blue5385 wrote:guess that answers the question of whether or not they YP.of Benito Cereno wrote:and hls just waitlisted a yls admit apparently.
Harvard 2010! Forum
-
- Posts: 1341
- Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:58 pm
Re: Harvard 2010!
- >insert witty name<
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:32 pm
Re: Harvard 2010!
of Benito Cereno wrote:don't get too upset. i think you are well set up for a mid-march JR2. it could be that he is just holding back on all new admits until they get a sense of their class and then will give out some jr2s to some people he recently spoke too.>insert witty name< wrote:blue5385 wrote:IIRC, you had a JR1 a couple weeks ago.>insert witty name< wrote:waitlisted just now.
that's just....cruel of them. I'm really sorry.
thanks guys. i'm still in a bit of shock from it all as well (the fact that i got a JR1 in the first place, the fact that they would do a JR1 so late and then do a WL, etc). but I'm making myself feel better by remember how much i LOVED boalt at the ASW the other week, so I'm going to commit there and still consider myself very lucky. I will withdraw from the WL today b/c I already know I need a deferment so the HLS WL is the end of this road for me. Best of luck to everyone still waiting!!
also, way to go with the JR1 to begin with.
that may be true, but because I know that I need to defer, and since you can't defer if admitted from the waitlist, I just sent my withdraw request. Berkeley has already said they will grant my deferment request when I submit it so I'm going to go with the sure bet as opposed to staying in limbo.
- BioEBear2010
- Posts: 745
- Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:05 pm
Re: Harvard 2010!
Guilty!BenJ wrote:Nah, there are some people with the softs to get into Yale but lacking the numbers for Harvard. You can get into Yale with a 170/3.8 if you're otherwise amazing, but Harvard probably won't admit you.blue5385 wrote:guess that answers the question of whether or not they YP.of Benito Cereno wrote:and hls just waitlisted a yls admit apparently.
-
- Posts: 1341
- Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:58 pm
Re: Harvard 2010!
I just might have been thinking of you when I posted thatBioEBear2010 wrote:Guilty!BenJ wrote:Nah, there are some people with the softs to get into Yale but lacking the numbers for Harvard. You can get into Yale with a 170/3.8 if you're otherwise amazing, but Harvard probably won't admit you.blue5385 wrote:guess that answers the question of whether or not they YP.of Benito Cereno wrote:and hls just waitlisted a yls admit apparently.
- of Benito Cereno
- Posts: 748
- Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:40 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
you're still hanging in there at hls though, right?BioEBear2010 wrote:Guilty!BenJ wrote:Nah, there are some people with the softs to get into Yale but lacking the numbers for Harvard. You can get into Yale with a 170/3.8 if you're otherwise amazing, but Harvard probably won't admit you.blue5385 wrote:guess that answers the question of whether or not they YP.of Benito Cereno wrote:and hls just waitlisted a yls admit apparently.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- BioEBear2010
- Posts: 745
- Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:05 pm
Re: Harvard 2010!
Yeah, I figure I might as well wait for the ding train to come a-rollin' rather than send them a letter. Postage is expensive these days.of Benito Cereno wrote: you're still hanging in there at hls though, right?
- clintonius
- Posts: 1239
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:50 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
This is my kinda play. If you wind up at CLS we definitely need to be cross-town drinking buddies.blue5385 wrote:that's a healthy way of dealing with it...I dealt with it by drinking myself retarded Friday night, and it sucked getting the WL email Sat. morning when I already felt like death.odiero wrote:damn. can't handle sitting here waiting for the email. going to the gym.
-
- Posts: 10751
- Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm
Re: Harvard 2010!
I want in on the drinking if nothing else!
- Lmao Zedong
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 12:10 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
just to confirm - harvard accepts withdrawals only by snail mail?
- somewhatwayward
- Posts: 1442
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:10 pm
Re: Harvard 2010!
i think they're taking a lunch break
- of Benito Cereno
- Posts: 748
- Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:40 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
not fair.somewhatwayward wrote:i think they're taking a lunch break
- swampthang
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 5:40 pm
Re: Harvard 2010!
Your LSN says you're 3.74/178 at a "good public" so...Cornell? I'm confused about the discrepancy. Don't get me wrong, I don't post my real stats, but at least I'm consistent about it. Did you have much in the way of softs? Because I would think you'd be an auto-admit on numbers alone.Lmao Zedong wrote:yeah not HYP, not sure if any boost is involved, but figured worth mentioning. I'm still in UGsomewhatwayward wrote:damn, non-HYP ivy?Lmao Zedong wrote:WL. 3.79/179 ivy. not sure about my play at this point.
- of Benito Cereno
- Posts: 748
- Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:40 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
wtf. why did like 5 people waitlisted over the weekend just post their WL on lsn in the last 50 seconds.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- of Benito Cereno
- Posts: 748
- Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:40 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
hls is being pretty strict about sub 3.8 gpas. It seems like the only sub 3.8s getting in are URM and HYP. Then again, probably only like 30% of the class is below 3.8 so URMs, HYP alums, and a bunch of people with great softs, can easily cover that.swampthang wrote:Your LSN says you're 3.74/178 at a "good public" so...Cornell? I'm confused about the discrepancy. Don't get me wrong, I don't post my real stats, but at least I'm consistent about it. Did you have much in the way of softs? Because I would think you'd be an auto-admit on numbers alone.Lmao Zedong wrote:yeah not HYP, not sure if any boost is involved, but figured worth mentioning. I'm still in UGsomewhatwayward wrote:damn, non-HYP ivy?Lmao Zedong wrote:WL. 3.79/179 ivy. not sure about my play at this point.
-
- Posts: 895
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 3:23 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
good, I'm going to need a drinking buddy to deal with the stress of 1L. r6, when you get into one of CLS or NYU, you are invited too.clintonius wrote:This is my kinda play. If you wind up at CLS we definitely need to be cross-town drinking buddies.blue5385 wrote:that's a healthy way of dealing with it...I dealt with it by drinking myself retarded Friday night, and it sucked getting the WL email Sat. morning when I already felt like death.odiero wrote:damn. can't handle sitting here waiting for the email. going to the gym.
- swampthang
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 5:40 pm
Re: Harvard 2010!
and what's your take on sub-75% LSATs (which I guess would now be under-171)? same story?of Benito Cereno wrote:HLS is being pretty strict about sub 3.8 gpas. It seems like the only sub 3.8s getting in are URM and HYP. Then again, probably only like 30% of the class is below 3.8 so URMs, HYP alums, and a bunch of people with great softs, can easily cover that.
- of Benito Cereno
- Posts: 748
- Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:40 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
I think Harvard probably has a lot more people with 169s and 170s than sub 3.8s in this class. From Harvard's perspective a 4.0 seems to compensate for a 169 or 170 more than a 179 compensates for a 3.65. But I think a very large percentage of the 15or20% let in with lsats under 170 are likely all URMs or 3.95 gpa +.swampthang wrote:and what's your take on sub-75% LSATs (which I guess would now be under-171)? same story?of Benito Cereno wrote:HLS is being pretty strict about sub 3.8 gpas. It seems like the only sub 3.8s getting in are URM and HYP. Then again, probably only like 30% of the class is below 3.8 so URMs, HYP alums, and a bunch of people with great softs, can easily cover that.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- swampthang
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 5:40 pm
Re: Harvard 2010!
Sadness. Can we redefine URM? Because I really think people who grew up in the middle of nowhere and are still numerically strong candidates for admission are both a M and UR. Here's hoping you're right about the "4.0 compensating for 169/170" bit.of Benito Cereno wrote:I think Harvard probably has a lot more people with 169s and 170s than sub 3.8s in this class. From Harvard's perspective a 4.0 seems to compensate for a 169 or 170 more than a 179 compensates for a 3.65. But I think a very large percentage of the 15or20% let in with lsats under 170 are likely all URMs or 3.95 gpa +.swampthang wrote:and what's your take on sub-75% LSATs (which I guess would now be under-171)? same story?of Benito Cereno wrote:HLS is being pretty strict about sub 3.8 gpas. It seems like the only sub 3.8s getting in are URM and HYP. Then again, probably only like 30% of the class is below 3.8 so URMs, HYP alums, and a bunch of people with great softs, can easily cover that.
And actually, I think conceptually I would disagree. While the talk about the LSAT being "the great equalizer" is a bit overstated, I definitely think and high LSAT-splitter is going to get the nod over a high GPA-splitter simply because the LSAT is a standardized measure vs. having to compare GPAs across schools, majors, time periods, etc.
Last edited by swampthang on Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- clintonius
- Posts: 1239
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:50 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
Would that it were so! I think my cycle would have been much more fruitful (though I'm still thrilled and grateful for the acceptances I've gotten).swampthang wrote:Sadness. Can we redefine URM? Because I really think people who grew up in the middle of nowhere and are still numerically strong candidates for admission are both a M and UR.
- forza
- Posts: 3208
- Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 10:32 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
Waitlisted today. 173/4.0 still in UG at a large state school.
Better than dinged.
/cycle
Better than dinged.
/cycle
-
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 4:23 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
Hope you're wrong, in a selfish way . And how many people have 3.95+ GPAs compared to, say, people in the 177-180 LSAT range? If the ratios are disproportional then Harvard's accepting more reverse splitters can be attributed to there just being a whole lot more of them in general.of Benito Cereno wrote:I think Harvard probably has a lot more people with 169s and 170s than sub 3.8s in this class. From Harvard's perspective a 4.0 seems to compensate for a 169 or 170 more than a 179 compensates for a 3.65. But I think a very large percentage of the 15or20% let in with lsats under 170 are likely all URMs or 3.95 gpa +.swampthang wrote:and what's your take on sub-75% LSATs (which I guess would now be under-171)? same story?of Benito Cereno wrote:HLS is being pretty strict about sub 3.8 gpas. It seems like the only sub 3.8s getting in are URM and HYP. Then again, probably only like 30% of the class is below 3.8 so URMs, HYP alums, and a bunch of people with great softs, can easily cover that.
Ah, already not liking purgatory.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- swampthang
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 5:40 pm
Re: Harvard 2010!
Yeah, you're not doing too badly. In at NYU and waiting on Col, Chi, and H? Congrats congrats. Did you apply late?clintonius wrote:Would that it were so! I think my cycle would have been much more fruitful (though I'm still thrilled and grateful for the acceptances I've gotten).swampthang wrote:Sadness. Can we redefine URM? Because I really think people who grew up in the middle of nowhere and are still numerically strong candidates for admission are both a M and UR.
- Lmao Zedong
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 12:10 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
LSN page is fudged, but now that my cycle is over i don't mind telling it straight. 3.79/179 is accurate. i'm not at cornell.swampthang wrote:Your LSN says you're 3.74/178 at a "good public" so...Cornell? I'm confused about the discrepancy. Don't get me wrong, I don't post my real stats, but at least I'm consistent about it. Did you have much in the way of softs? Because I would think you'd be an auto-admit on numbers alone.Lmao Zedong wrote:yeah not HYP, not sure if any boost is involved, but figured worth mentioning. I'm still in UGsomewhatwayward wrote:damn, non-HYP ivy?Lmao Zedong wrote:WL. 3.79/179 ivy. not sure about my play at this point.
by H standards, softs were probably below average, but not by any means nonexistent.
- Lmao Zedong
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 12:10 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
this is the case, yes? i need to mail in to their admissions office?Lmao Zedong wrote:just to confirm - harvard accepts withdrawals only by snail mail?
- someones alt
- Posts: 212
- Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:08 am
Re: Harvard 2010!
Retaker?forza wrote:Waitlisted today. 173/4.0 still in UG at a large state school.
Better than dinged.
/cycle
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login