3.3/178 Splitter Chances

[1017bricksquad]

First 2 years of UG with 2.8 GPA, last 2 years with 3.8 GPA. (I have a couple D's though from freshman/soph year)
3.3 Cumulative, 178 LSAT
Philosophy major, Math minor at top 25 private.
EC's are meh, but also upward trending in terms of jobs/internships
Great rec from former dean and current professor of Yale Law

I'm thinking ED to NU, Chicago, NYU or possibly even Yale (I know I probably have a .0001% chance of getting in but maybe my rec will count for a lot)

Thoughts on reach/target/safety schools?

[Errzii]

are you talking about next cycle? Because I think it's too late to ED to NU, especially since you need to have completed an on-campus interview before..today..

[Strange]

I'm in a similar situation as you except I have WE. I would say NYU is your best case scenario but will be tough, and might require ED. CLS and Chi are probably out.

If you have WE definitely apply to NU, but if you don't, you may not be able to get in. Also, don't ED there, it'll be a waste because of the new scholarship

You should get in somewhere in the T14, so just blanket everywhere from GULC to NYU

[1017bricksquad]

Next cycle. I'm a year removed from undergrad doing paralegal work.

[crumpetsandtea]

NYU is maybe your best shot for ED, though I'm not entirely sure. You'll need to be above both medians for NU because it comes with a full ride (or close to a full ride) scholly, and IIRC Chi's admissions are a smidge more competitive than NYU (dont quote me on that though ). You'll also probably get NU RD with not much $$$, so again, don't bother ED-ing.

Where do you want to work after graduation?

[1017bricksquad]

I went to NYU for UG if that matters and I took multiple philosophy classes with NYU Law professors. And I'm fairly set on going into corporate law.

[crumpetsandtea]

I went to NYU for UG if that matters and I took multiple philosophy classes with NYU Law professors. And I'm fairly set on going into corporate law.

It doesn't really AFAIK. Where do you want to work after graduation?

[1017bricksquad]

I went to NYU for UG if that matters and I took multiple philosophy classes with NYU Law professors. And I'm fairly set on going into corporate law.

It doesn't really AFAIK. Where do you want to work after graduation?

I'll probably be staying in NYC, although Chicago is an option too.

[crumpetsandtea]

I went to NYU for UG if that matters and I took multiple philosophy classes with NYU Law professors. And I'm fairly set on going into corporate law.

It doesn't really AFAIK. Where do you want to work after graduation?

I'll probably be staying in NYC, although Chicago is an option too.

Then ED to NYU. Also, I just re-read the OP and IDK if you meant it this way or not, but Yale doesn't have an ED program.

[kennethellenparcell]

OP, it's not too late to ED to NU if your heart desires. They extended the interview deadline to 12/8. So the question is now whether you can still get an interview before then.

[ColtsFan88]

Good luck super-splitter friend.

[1017bricksquad]

Woops, bad phrasing on my part, I meant RD to Yale. I'll probably still apply even though I'm a long, long, long shot.

[crumpetsandtea]

Woops, bad phrasing on my part, I meant RD to Yale. I'll probably still apply even though I'm a long, long, long shot.

Yeah, no harm in applying if you're not worried about the lost $.

[quiver]

Woops, bad phrasing on my part, I meant RD to Yale. I'll probably still apply even though I'm a long, long, long shot.

Yeah, no harm in applying if you're not worried about the lost $.

100% apply to Yale if you can spare the money. It's much better to apply and be rejected than to not apply and wonder if your 1% chance could have been enough. Especially since we don't know how your rec will play.

[American_in_China]

Question- what is with the negative approach to this level of splitter. I'm in essentially the same boat at him, but LSP shows both of us with at least 50% chance at each of CCN, with Chicago in the 60s.

Is there a reason this level of split seems to be looked down upon. Last time I posted people said I'd only be likely to get in at one of MVPD, even though LSP has me (and him) as an admit at all three. Obviously its preferable to use LSN, but the numbers like this are so rare that its impossible to draw a conclusion from the limited sample, where as LSP uses it regression.

Any thoughts or explanations on the pessimism for heavy splitters?

[Kabuo]

Woops, bad phrasing on my part, I meant RD to Yale. I'll probably still apply even though I'm a long, long, long shot.

Yeah, no harm in applying if you're not worried about the lost $.

100% apply to Yale if you can spare the money. It's much better to apply and be rejected than to not apply and wonder if your 1% chance could have been enough. Especially since we don't know how your rec will play.

1% is probably ~100 orders of magnitude too optimistic.

And to poster above, because there are hard GPA floors. Why do admissions officers look down at that? Good question. I wish they didn't. My experience and the experience of most 175+ <3.5 applicants is a small sample size perhaps, but it's also a pretty uniform sample size. LSP is way too optimistic about your chances when the LSAT is high enough to do wonky things to the index, because in reality, they don't care about your LSAT a whole lot once it's above the median, but they DO care about things like sub 3.5 GPAs.

And you very well could get all of MVP, but you could also miss out on all of them, especially V and P without ED. Seriously doubt you get all of CCN. You probably only get N, and probably only ED. Chi cared a lot about GPA last year.

[UnamSanctam]

Apply ED to NYU and prosper, young man.

[Strange]

Woops, bad phrasing on my part, I meant RD to Yale. I'll probably still apply even though I'm a long, long, long shot.

Yeah, no harm in applying if you're not worried about the lost $.

100% apply to Yale if you can spare the money. It's much better to apply and be rejected than to not apply and wonder if your 1% chance could have been enough. Especially since we don't know how your rec will play.

1% is probably ~100 orders of magnitude too optimistic.

And to poster above, because there are hard GPA floors. Why do admissions officers look down at that? Good question. I wish they didn't. My experience and the experience of most 175+ <3.5 applicants is a small sample size perhaps, but it's also a pretty uniform sample size. LSP is way too optimistic about your chances when the LSAT is high enough to do wonky things to the index, because in reality, they don't care about your LSAT a whole lot once it's above the median, but they DO care about things like sub 3.5 GPAs.

And you very well could get all of MVP, but you could also miss out on all of them, especially V and P without ED. Seriously doubt you get all of CCN. You probably only get N, and probably only ED. Chi cared a lot about GPA last year.

Just looking at your LSN your experience doesn't seem instructive (as you note) since you waited till February to apply.

I think you're being too pessimistic re: MVP, giving the impression he has a 50/50 chance at them.

There's only five LSN users with a 3.3-3.4 and a 175+ from last cycle and about 20 with a 3.3-3.5 and 175+, a few of them don't have anything filled out either.

[quiver]

Woops, bad phrasing on my part, I meant RD to Yale. I'll probably still apply even though I'm a long, long, long shot.

Yeah, no harm in applying if you're not worried about the lost $.

100% apply to Yale if you can spare the money. It's much better to apply and be rejected than to not apply and wonder if your 1% chance could have been enough. Especially since we don't know how your rec will play.

1% is probably ~100 orders of magnitude too optimistic.

And to poster above, because there are hard GPA floors. Why do admissions officers look down at that? Good question. I wish they didn't. My experience and the experience of most 175+ <3.5 applicants is a small sample size perhaps, but it's also a pretty uniform sample size. LSP is way too optimistic about your chances when the LSAT is high enough to do wonky things to the index, because in reality, they don't care about your LSAT a whole lot once it's above the median, but they DO care about things like sub 3.5 GPAs.

And you very well could get all of MVP, but you could also miss out on all of them, especially V and P without ED. Seriously doubt you get all of CCN. You probably only get N, and probably only ED. Chi cared a lot about GPA last year.

Possibly. My point was that s/he should apply if there is any chance above 0%.

[American_in_China]

I still dont understand this line of reasoning- why would admissions officers stop caring once you're above the 75th- any points above still pull up the median, and allow the school to take a number of reverse splitters (which are more common than splitters) and still balance at the medians.

[Kabuo]

Just looking at your LSN your experience doesn't seem instructive (as you note) since you waited till February to apply.

I think you're being too pessimistic re: MVP, giving the impression he has a 50/50 chance at them.

There's only five LSN users with a 3.3-3.4 and a 175+ from last cycle and about 20 with a 3.3-3.5 and 175+, a few of them don't have anything filled out either.

That is not the impression I intended re: MVP, nor the one I think comes across. Anyway, the rest of your app will matter a lot at MVP. Your numbers do not make you a lock by any means, even though LSP thinks it's close, is all I'm saying.

And about my cycle, I didn't apply in Feb to anything but Columbia, it was just my apps on hold until Feb so I might as well have for most schools. Had a pretty usual Mich ED app though, in on time and not on hold til they deferred me to the main applicant pool. UVA ED was in by 12/19 or something and rejected in a few days. For every other school though, I effectively applied in Feb.

All that matters for this thread though, is that OP understand that the rest of the app is what will make or break him at MVP. And to ED to NYU.

[Kabuo]

I still dont understand this line of reasoning- why would admissions officers stop caring once you're above the 75th- any points above still pull up the median, and allow the school to take a number of reverse splitters (which are more common than splitters) and still balance at the medians.

I think you're confusing median with average. And if not, I think you're proving my point. Someone at median and someone 12 pts higher both affect the median the same.

[American_in_China]

I still dont understand this line of reasoning- why would admissions officers stop caring once you're above the 75th- any points above still pull up the median, and allow the school to take a number of reverse splitters (which are more common than splitters) and still balance at the medians.

I think you're confusing median with average. And if not, I think you're proving my point. Someone at median and someone 12 pts higher both affect the median the same.

You are indeed correct; I was confusing median with mean. I see your rationale now. Question- is it also the median that matters for GPA? If so, wouldn't the same rationale work in reverse- once I'm below the 25th, why does it matter?

[Kabuo]

I still dont understand this line of reasoning- why would admissions officers stop caring once you're above the 75th- any points above still pull up the median, and allow the school to take a number of reverse splitters (which are more common than splitters) and still balance at the medians.

I think you're confusing median with average. And if not, I think you're proving my point. Someone at median and someone 12 pts higher both affect the median the same.

You are indeed correct; I was confusing median with mean. I see your rationale now. Question- is it also the median that matters for GPA? If so, wouldn't the same rationale work in reverse- once I'm below the 25th, why does it matter?

Well, for example, at most of the T14, the most generous floor is 3.0. Well below the median, but they'll at least look at you til you dip below 3. I think they think that if you're below 3, you're an incurable slacker. Other than that, I guess floors make more sense to enforce than ceilings? I think it's stupid obviously, but I'm biased.

[American_in_China]

I still dont understand this line of reasoning- why would admissions officers stop caring once you're above the 75th- any points above still pull up the median, and allow the school to take a number of reverse splitters (which are more common than splitters) and still balance at the medians.

I think you're confusing median with average. And if not, I think you're proving my point. Someone at median and someone 12 pts higher both affect the median the same.

You are indeed correct; I was confusing median with mean. I see your rationale now. Question- is it also the median that matters for GPA? If so, wouldn't the same rationale work in reverse- once I'm below the 25th, why does it matter?

Well, for example, at most of the T14, the most generous floor is 3.0. Well below the median, but they'll at least look at you til you dip below 3. I think they think that if you're below 3, you're an incurable slacker. Other than that, I guess floors make more sense to enforce than ceilings? I think it's stupid obviously, but I'm biased.

Hmmmm. Well I hope this cycle is different, lol. I tried to address my GPA problems thoroughly in my email, so we'll see if that fixes things better for me. I hope that what I did in college (outside of my academics) and after college will prove I'm not a slacker- but we'll see. I plan on busting my ass during lawl school, so hopefully that's enough...