Top Law Schools

Have a 3.5/172 or a 3.8/169? (same undergrad)

Asking because my best friend just got a 169 and has a 3.8 and we're arguing about which of us is top dog.

I'd rather have the 3.8 and the 172.

.

jonnodotsg wrote:3.8/169. Because you can retake the LSAT and possibly get a 172, but to go from a 3.5 to a 3.8 would entail a lot more time and effort, if at all possible before graduating.

+1.

But assuming retaking LSAT is not possible, I would rather have the 172. It will break a lot more score walls than the 3.8 will.

whitman wrote:Have a 3.5/172 or a 3.8/169? (same undergrad)

Asking because my best friend just got a 169 and has a 3.8 and we're arguing about which of us is top dog.

i'd rather have the 3.8/169

Depends on what you want. The 172 might give you (as in it's uncertain, not as in it's a point of consideration) a better opportunity to get into higher ranked schools, but the 3.8 will definitely give you a solid scholarship. I'd take the 3.8, plenty of 169s get into T10s. It'll probably also give you a solid fallback position w/ $$$ at Duke or Vandy. No one should want to be a splitter, I can vouch. A 167-8 with a 3.8 would probably make the other worth considering.

Depends on the school. Plug them into lawschoolpredictor.com and look at the indexes.

Edit: looks like the 169/3.8 bests you

Damn!

Seems like you should have made a poll. Also you biased everyone by telling which scores are yours. I think people have the tendency to want to say you lose

I think 172/3.5 makes you more of a wildcard, and there is a chance you could get into a better school than you could with 169/3.8 if you had a really impressive soft or something. On the other hand, 169/3.8 is a lot more predictable for your cycle. You would likely crack the T10 and get into UVA, Duke, or Michigan (or all three). Personally, I enjoyed the assurance that came along with having predictable numbers, and I really had no surprises in my cycle. And as stratocophic said, being a splitter is usually not a good thing for scholarships.

A lot of people on here seem to regard 170 as the "magic number," but I think the case can be equally made for 169 as a magic number. 168/3.8 probably keeps you out of T10 (or at the very best puts you at 50/50), whereas 169/3.8 likely gets you in to a couple T10s. So if we were talking about one less LSAT point, I'd go with the 172/3.5. But as it stands now, I'd take your friend's position over your own.

BigA wrote:Seems like you should have made a poll. Also you biased everyone by telling which scores are yours. I think people have the tendency to want to say you lose

Not necessarily true (regarding the bias), I'd say most splitters would say the splitter's top dog but secretly wish they were the other (myself included). OP can lord the LSAT over the other guy for pride's sake, but I'd take the ability to merit money at a T13 and Vandy over having a very small chance at CNP. Also, there are 169/3.8s in at Columbia, but no 172/3.5s

As a 3.8/169, I can say that it's a little frustrating sometimes because it feels like you are so close but not quite there... I really think a 3.8/170 or 3.9/169 would have gotten me into at least one more school (UVA appears to have a 3.85 or 170 wall this year, for example).

At the same time, it is a solid set of numbers and fairly predictable (outside of the T6). Depends on what schools you want. Michigan? then the 3.8/169. Northwestern? then the 3.5/172.

parker09 wrote:As a 3.8/169, I can say that it's a little frustrating sometimes because it feels like you are so close but not quite there... I really think a 3.8/170 or 3.9/169 would have gotten me into at least one more school (UVA appears to have a 3.85 or 170 wall this year, for example).

At the same time, it is a solid set of numbers and fairly predictable (outside of the T6). Depends on what schools you want. Michigan? then the 3.8/169. Northwestern? then the 3.5/172.

+100000

I'm also a 3.7-3.8/168, and I feel like one more LSAT point would have gotten me into my dream school (Michigan) and probably even Duke. The difference between 168/169 can essentially be Out at T10/In at T10. That's why I think with a good GPA, a 169 is crucial.

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/parker09

That profile should tell you all you need to know about this debate. In at CC, $$$ to DMv.

I think that guy either had great connections or is outrageously lucky, but of course I'm one of those who feigns splitter-superiority and would rather just not have effed up those couple of classes that brought me down....Oh well.

whitman wrote:I think that guy either had great connections or is outrageously lucky, but of course I'm one of those who feigns splitter-superiority and would rather just not have effed up those couple of classes that brought me down....Oh well.

Anyone that thinks getting a 170+ on the LSAT is harder than a 4.0 is crazy IMO. Getting a 170 on the LSAT was relatively easy for me, but getting a 3.9 last semester took far more time/effort. And I did both at the same time...

I honestly wish that I had paid more attention to my GPA. It is a huge regret, because I would have a lot more options. I think I'll be happy at the end of my cycle, but I could be happy and going to school for free had I paid more attention.

I like that the LSAT is almost like a second chance for splitters though, because if GPA was weighed more heavily I would be screwed.

romothesavior wrote:

parker09 wrote:As a 3.8/169, I can say that it's a little frustrating sometimes because it feels like you are so close but not quite there... I really think a 3.8/170 or 3.9/169 would have gotten me into at least one more school (UVA appears to have a 3.85 or 170 wall this year, for example).

At the same time, it is a solid set of numbers and fairly predictable (outside of the T6). Depends on what schools you want. Michigan? then the 3.8/169. Northwestern? then the 3.5/172.

+100000

I'm also a 3.7-3.8/168, and I feel like one more LSAT point would have gotten me into my dream school (Michigan) and probably even Duke. The difference between 168/169 can essentially be Out at T10/In at T10. That's why I think with a good GPA, a 169 is crucial.

same here! i HATE 168. i said to my husband before the LSAT "if i get a 169 i'll be pleased." damn it.

3.8/169 so I'd get into Stanford

kswiss wrote:

whitman wrote:I think that guy either had great connections or is outrageously lucky, but of course I'm one of those who feigns splitter-superiority and would rather just not have effed up those couple of classes that brought me down....Oh well.

Anyone that thinks getting a 170+ on the LSAT is harder than a 4.0 is crazy IMO. Getting a 170 on the LSAT was relatively easy for me, but getting a 3.9 last semester took far more time/effort. And I did both at the same time...

I honestly wish that I had paid more attention to my GPA. It is a huge regret, because I would have a lot more options. I think I'll be happy at the end of my cycle, but I could be happy and going to school for free had I paid more attention.

I like that the LSAT is almost like a second chance for splitters though, because if GPA was weighed more heavily I would be screwed.

It depends what natural skills and talents you were born with. Most people cannot get a 170 no matter how much effort they sink into it. They just aren't smart enough.

But yea my lsat score was easier than getting my 2.8 gpa.

I answered 172/3.5 but I take that back.

I'd rather have a low LSAT and high GPA, because you can not retake GPA. You can, however, retake the LSAT.


So I'd rather have a 140/3.8 than a 172/3.5. Retake get 170+ addendum about dead grandma and I win.

kswiss wrote:

whitman wrote:I think that guy either had great connections or is outrageously lucky, but of course I'm one of those who feigns splitter-superiority and would rather just not have effed up those couple of classes that brought me down....Oh well.

Anyone that thinks getting a 170+ on the LSAT is harder than a 4.0 is crazy IMO. Getting a 170 on the LSAT was relatively easy for me, but getting a 3.9 last semester took far more time/effort. And I did both at the same time...

I honestly wish that I had paid more attention to my GPA. It is a huge regret, because I would have a lot more options. I think I'll be happy at the end of my cycle, but I could be happy and going to school for free had I paid more attention.

I like that the LSAT is almost like a second chance for splitters though, because if GPA was weighed more heavily I would be screwed.

Yeah definitely. Getting my LSAT score felt about the same as cramming to get that A- in an average class.

BigA wrote:Seems like you should have made a poll. Also you biased everyone by telling which scores are yours. I think people have the tendency to want to say you lose

+1 for honesty

It's close, but I think I'd rather have the 3.5/172, assuming no retake. With those numbers, you'd be looking pretty good at MVP, Northwestern (depending on WE) and Georgetown.

The 3.8/169 would be fine at Michigan, but probably a WL everywhere else, and out at UVA, as that's below both medians.

Both would have a slim chance at CCN.

whitman wrote:I think that guy either had great connections or is outrageously lucky, but of course I'm one of those who feigns splitter-superiority and would rather just not have effed up those couple of classes that brought me down....Oh well.

If this was about me (girl, btw) - no great connections (no connections at all, in fact), but I definitely won't downplay the role of luck. I have no idea how CC happened. At any rate, though I wish I had answered just ONE more question correctly on the LSAT, I think given how things have gone, I'm okay with the 3.8/169.

Anyway, just for the sake of counter-examples, some 3.5/172s:
http://search.lawschoolnumbers.com/user ... Cycle=0910

stratocophic wrote:Depends on what you want. The 172 might give you (as in it's uncertain, not as in it's a point of consideration) a better opportunity to get into higher ranked schools, but the 3.8 will definitely give you a solid scholarship. I'd take the 3.8, plenty of 169s get into T10s. It'll probably also give you a solid fallback position w/ $$$ at Duke or Vandy. No one should want to be a splitter, I can vouch. A 167-8 with a 3.8 would probably make the other worth considering.

This. At least one school I'm in at cuts off GPA at 3.6 for scholly and plenty of 169s 3.8'ers get schollys whereas a 175 even with a 3.5 does not unless URM. Can apply to fewer school than a splitter as cyle will be somewhat more predictable.