the infamous AM060459

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
am060459
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:14 am

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby am060459 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:48 pm

my train of thought and major in college had very little to do with reading and logic and thats why i scored a 134 (not to mention i freaked out and starting guessing out of panic). i mean its a cold diagnostic not a real LSAT presented to law schools.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby paratactical » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:48 pm

.
Last edited by paratactical on Wed Feb 13, 2013 9:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
eandy
Posts: 2725
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 7:07 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby eandy » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:49 pm

am060459 wrote:my train of thought and major in college had very little to do with reading and logic and thats why i scored a 134 (not to mention i freaked out and starting guessing out of panic). i mean its a cold diagnostic not a real LSAT presented to law schools.

on a practice?
You are piling on evidence to the "LS probably not a great choice" category.

What my argument is, in case you have not figured it out(think of it like a LR question--oh wait), is that your cold diagnostic is an indication of your raw ability. It was extremely low; you missed 70% of the questions. Bad omen. If you go to a second tier school, you will have to fight tooth and nail to be at the top of your class. If you panic on a practice test, the chance you will panic on an LS exam is high, and your raw ability is low. Add those together. Low chance of success and high risk.

Do what you want. Obviously you have your mind made up.
Last edited by eandy on Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
megaTTTron
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:26 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby megaTTTron » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:51 pm

eandy wrote:There is a hell of a big difference between 130s and 150s. I am not saying you can't do it. I am saying it is a red flag, and that it would be a very risky endeavor. I think (s)he should look at some other options because law school may not be the right choice.


I hear you. But moving from a 134 or w/e to 159 is telling. I had a 159. That means that OP was able to improve far more than I. But I understand your point.

am060459
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:14 am

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby am060459 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:51 pm

eandy wrote:
am060459 wrote:my train of thought and major in college had very little to do with reading and logic and thats why i scored a 134 (not to mention i freaked out and starting guessing out of panic). i mean its a cold diagnostic not a real LSAT presented to law schools.

on a practice?
You are piling on evidence to the "LS probably not a great choice" category.


yes practice.

srsly dude

2009 Prospective
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 12:32 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby 2009 Prospective » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:53 pm

am060459 wrote:
2009 Prospective wrote:I think you're going to have a tough time with all of those schools except for Miami and possibly Penn St. You'll probably need to be closer to a 163+ for many of the others. Also, beware of going to well-respected midwest schools with the intention of coming back for a job on the east coast. You probably won't encounter any east coast firms at OCI or be able to network in the area you want to practice.


true and this is one of the reasons i want to retake. i actually dont mind UMiami but scholly $$$$ would be great. thanks for ur input.


I'd even be weary of Miami with scholly money unless you're hoping to practice in South Florida. Also, the year I applied, lower 160s seemed to be a general LSAT cutoff for significant schollys there. Have you considered adding schools like St. John's or Hofstra if you're dead set on not retaking?

User avatar
eandy
Posts: 2725
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 7:07 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby eandy » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:54 pm

Yes, with practice anyone can improve. See my above post--I have added to it. My work is done here, as your mind is made up.

am060459
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:14 am

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby am060459 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:54 pm

eandy wrote:What my argument is, in case you have not figured it out(think of it like a LR question--oh wait), is that your cold diagnostic is an indication of your raw ability. It was extremely low; you missed 70% of the questions. Bad omen. If you go to a second tier school, you will have to fight tooth and nail to be at the top of your class. If you panic on a practice test, the chance you will panic on an LS exam is high, and your raw ability is low. Add those together. Low chance of success and high risk.

Do what you want. Obviously you have your mind made up.


yes my raw ability and i have obviously improved.

i paniced on a practice test. are u srsly making the jump that i will panic on future test just becuase i paniced on my practice test. i didnt panic on the REAL LSAT.

pocket herc
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:34 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby pocket herc » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:00 pm

diag doesn't mean much. I had a pretty strong diag, and did pretty well my 1L year. My gf had a high 140's dag, finished better than top 3%. Only anecdotal, I know, but hear things like this all the time. Also you should be proud of your tremendous improvement

am060459
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:14 am

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby am060459 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:01 pm

pocket herc wrote:diag doesn't mean much. I had a pretty strong diag, and did pretty well my 1L year. My gf had a high 140's dag, finished better than top 3%. Only anecdotal, I know, but hear things like this all the time. Also you should be proud of your tremendous improvement


thank you. i mean its a 25 point improvement lol.

miamiman
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:55 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby miamiman » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:12 pm

eandy, with due respect, who made you the official purveyor of tough talk? I hardly feel, as a fellow 0L, you're in a position to weigh in about his fitness as a practitioner.

more fundamentally, the only reason you're taking this position is because of his low diagnostic. if he had said he scored 155 initially and later scored 159 on test day, you wouldn't be having this conversation. it's because you make a somewhat liberal leap in logic (yes, LSAT testtakers, this shit does come up) that a low diagnostic necessarly correlates to poor performance in law school that you even decided to weigh in.

User avatar
eandy
Posts: 2725
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 7:07 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby eandy » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:14 pm

miamiman wrote:eandy, with due respect, who made you the official purveyor of tough talk? I hardly feel, as a fellow 0L, you're in a position to weigh in about his fitness as a practitioner.

more fundamentally, the only reason you're taking this position is because of his low diagnostic. if he had said he scored 155 initially and later scored 159 on test day, you wouldn't be having this conversation. it's because you make a somewhat liberal leap in logic (yes, LSAT testtakers, this shit does come up) that a low diagnostic necessarly correlates to poor performance in law school that you even decided to weigh in.

I don't think it is a good idea to pay sticker a second tier school. That is what would likely happen with this score. I only went further when the OP pissed me off.

am060459
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:14 am

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby am060459 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:19 pm

eandy wrote:
miamiman wrote:eandy, with due respect, who made you the official purveyor of tough talk? I hardly feel, as a fellow 0L, you're in a position to weigh in about his fitness as a practitioner.

more fundamentally, the only reason you're taking this position is because of his low diagnostic. if he had said he scored 155 initially and later scored 159 on test day, you wouldn't be having this conversation. it's because you make a somewhat liberal leap in logic (yes, LSAT testtakers, this shit does come up) that a low diagnostic necessarly correlates to poor performance in law school that you even decided to weigh in.

I don't think it is a good idea to pay sticker a second tier school. That is what would likely happen with this score. I only went further when the OP pissed me off.


how did i do that?

miamiman
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:55 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby miamiman » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:22 pm

eandy wrote:
miamiman wrote:eandy, with due respect, who made you the official purveyor of tough talk? I hardly feel, as a fellow 0L, you're in a position to weigh in about his fitness as a practitioner.

more fundamentally, the only reason you're taking this position is because of his low diagnostic. if he had said he scored 155 initially and later scored 159 on test day, you wouldn't be having this conversation. it's because you make a somewhat liberal leap in logic (yes, LSAT testtakers, this shit does come up) that a low diagnostic necessarly correlates to poor performance in law school that you even decided to weigh in.

I don't think it is a good idea to pay sticker a second tier school. That is what would likely happen with this score. I only went further when the OP pissed me off.

That's fine. Say simply that. Say: "Hey infamous (?) AM060459, congrats on taking the LSAT! (woot!) Here's the thing, though. ITE is rough. A 159 puts you, at best, in at a T2 and probably without much in the way of scholarship considerations. Might I suggest retaking so as to better position yourself for a T1?"

User avatar
BriaTharen
Posts: 750
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:17 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby BriaTharen » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:27 pm

Of the schools I have experience with, you'll probably get into Miami but definitely not into Bama. Bama has been trying to improve steadily in terms of the numbers they accept- I think this past cycle's average was a 164.

User avatar
alexonfyre
Posts: 425
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 3:00 am

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby alexonfyre » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:38 pm

am060459 wrote:my reading skills are good. its the time constraint of the LSAT that gets to me.


As someone pointed out already, 0Ls like myself have no place to tell you what your abilities are or what to expect. However, (there is always a however) I do know that the time constraint is there specifically to test your RC skills (on all portions of the test) and your ability to perform under pressure. Actually doing RC questions isn't hard in and of itself, unless you are not a native speaker or have some sort of developmental deficiency, having "good reading skills" in an LSAT sense means that you are able to read quickly and comprehend efficiently. So this statement is contradictory.

That said, if you can honestly say that you have the abilities to score 160+ you should definitely retake. Your prospects will open up tremendously and you can silence the haters.

am060459
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:14 am

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby am060459 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:38 pm

as the score is settling in i think a retake is in my best interest. i will spend the month of july writing my statements (i dont plan on finishing them but at least starting them).

i'll have august and september for PTing. i will leave some days for studying and going over sections individually every week.

am060459
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:14 am

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby am060459 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:40 pm

alexonfyre wrote:
am060459 wrote:my reading skills are good. its the time constraint of the LSAT that gets to me.


As someone pointed out already, 0Ls like myself have no place to tell you what your abilities are or what to expect. However, (there is always a however) I do know that the time constraint is there specifically to test your RC skills (on all portions of the test) and your ability to perform under pressure. Actually doing RC questions isn't hard in and of itself, unless you are not a native speaker or have some sort of developmental deficiency, having "good reading skills" in an LSAT sense means that you are able to read quickly and comprehend efficiently. So this statement is contradictory.

That said, if you can honestly say that you have the abilities to score 160+ you should definitely retake. Your prospects will open up tremendously and you can silence the haters.


i do believe i can score a 160+ (im only a point away which is one or two questions). my fear is i retake and score the same or lower. how does this look?

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby Grizz » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:42 pm

Miami without something resembling a full scholarship is a terrible decision ITE.

am060459
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:14 am

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby am060459 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:45 pm

rad law wrote:Miami without something resembling a full scholarship is a terrible decision ITE.


care to elaborate?

i dont want to pay sticker at any school and that is the reason im 75% sure i will retake.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby Grizz » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:50 pm

am060459 wrote:
rad law wrote:Miami without something resembling a full scholarship is a terrible decision ITE.


care to elaborate?

i dont want to pay sticker at any school and that is the reason im 75% sure i will retake.


Because Miami doesn't travel far outside of South FL, and Miami has strong competition in UF, plus a host of other schools (Barry, FIU, Nova... am I forgetting any S. FL ones? There are a ton) whose grads want Miami jobs. Add this to the fact that FL markets got extra hammered ITE, considering that a lot of the economy was in housing and tourism. Then, combine this with the fact that there weren't a lot of Miami big firm jobs anyways. $200k or $100k is lunacy. I wouldn't go without basically full tuition, considering that UF is only $14k ish in-state and has better statewide prospects.

miamiman
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:55 pm

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby miamiman » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:55 pm

Happy to elaborate.

80%+ of the students who will graduate from Miami are lifefucked. Hth.

am060459
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:14 am

Re: the infamous AM060459

Postby am060459 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:57 pm

wow. you both make good points. well a retake, i can safely say for now, is in the works. looking for a 160+ in october.




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests