Your results vs Law School Predictor? Forum

[pppokerface]

I couldn't find too many threads on LSP vs actual individual cycles (other than updates on LSP), so I am curious
Did you get into any/all the LSP's admits, considers, weak considers, denials?
I thought that it would be cool to see a thread listing these lol

[JoeShmoe11]

If you don't get any responses here you could look at last cycle's LSN profiles and punch their numbers into the Law School Predictor and then compare it to whether or not they actually got in? Just a suggestion.

[Tanicius]

If you don't get any responses here you could look at last cycle's LSN profiles and punch their numbers into the Law School Predictor and then compare it to whether or not they actually got in? Just a suggestion.

LSP is based off the data from LSN.

[Hannibal]

According to YCrev, the "weak considers" are typically a little weaker than the percentages and the "strong considers" are typically a little stronger than the percentages. Otherwise they tend to be on.

[r6_philly]

It's more accurate if you submit early, since waitlists are excluded from the data.

[IAFG]

ways it's inaccurate:

*UVA is harder than it looks on LSP without either residency or ED
*it sometimes gives you a decent chance at a school when you're under both medians when, in reality, you need to be above one or the other
*it doesn't pick up on GPA or LSAT floors some schools seem to have

otherwise it's a pretty good tool.

[r6_philly]

It predicts by an index formula that schools don't always stick to because other issues are at play. So it can't be accurate. As an indication of probability it is ok, with a large margin of error. It should be used to determine target/reach/safety tiers, nothing more.

[Ragged]

Also I hear its inaccurate for splitters and retakers.

[CMDantes]

Was inaccurate for me. I think, contrary to TLS knowledge, there really is more at play than just numbers.

[whymeohgodno]

Was inaccurate for me. I think, contrary to TLS knowledge, there really is more at play than just numbers.

Mind me asking what your numbers were and how your cycle went?

[CMDantes]

Was inaccurate for me. I think, contrary to TLS knowledge, there really is more at play than just numbers.

Mind me asking what your numbers were and how your cycle went?

My cycle is over because I got into UT on the first wave of admissions.

LSP predicted a flat deny for my numbers. I think my softs (which were deemed average on this site) and the fact that I perfected my personal statement over the course of about a year helped.

Don't swear by LSP is all I'm saying.

Edited for the sake of privacy.

[whymeohgodno]

Was inaccurate for me. I think, contrary to TLS knowledge, there really is more at play than just numbers.

Mind me asking what your numbers were and how your cycle went?

My cycle is over because I got into UT on the first wave of admissions.

LSP predicted a flat deny for 3.4/166. I think my softs (which were deemed average on this site) and the fact that I perfected my personal statement over the course of about a year helped.

Don't swear by LSP is all I'm saying.

That's pretty impressive. Grats on the acceptance.

[MyNameIsYou]

Are your odds for each school on the site meant to be independent of each other? Because if you look at "Consider" as flipping a coin 50/50 for each school, I think it's overly optimistic. Take for example someone with a 3.8/167--they are a "Consider" at Berkeley through Northwestern. If independent, with a 50% shot at each of these six schools, the odds of getting in to one or more are ~98%.

[beach_terror]

I got into 2 schools that were rejects according to LSP.

[whymeohgodno]

I got into 2 schools that were rejects according to LSP.

Splitter? URM?

[beach_terror]

I got into 2 schools that were rejects according to LSP.

Splitter? URM?

Neither. My PS was probably the reason, wrote about how growing up with my mentally disabled brother influenced me as a person. If so, obviously pretty unique/rare circumstances.

[plenipotentiary]

Was inaccurate for me. I think, contrary to TLS knowledge, there really is more at play than just numbers.

Mind me asking what your numbers were and how your cycle went?

My cycle is over because I got into UT on the first wave of admissions.

LSP predicted a flat deny for 3.4/166. I think my softs (which were deemed average on this site) and the fact that I perfected my personal statement over the course of about a year helped.

Don't swear by LSP is all I'm saying.

I just put your stats + URM status in LSP and Texas is a Consider. I do think LSP is a little conservative for URMs.

[CMDantes]

Yes I forgot to mention that.

[osalinas44]

Yeah so far inaccurate for me too. I also think that the admissions process is more than just straight numbers.

[CMDantes]

Thank you very much

Good luck to you guys on your cycles

[Ragged]

I got WLed at my strong consider, consider and admit.

[fastforward]

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 0#p2948732

[Ragged]

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 0#p2948732

Damn.

[URMdan]

It is definitely inaccurate for splitters and most URMs. LSP tends to be less generous for NA and AA URMs because it doesn't distinguish between which types of URMs you are when it calculates your chances.

[fastforward]

LSP is based off the data from LSN.

This is true. http://www.lawschoolpredictor.com/?page_id=173 And this explains why it's not always accurate. LSN participants self-report; if you read enough profiles, you'll see that, often, the numbers are deliberately reported inaccurately to avoid being outed to adcomms (who, some of them admit, put some time and effort into figuring out who's who on these sites). I've seen notations such as "real #'s disclosed after my cycle is complete." So while LSP can be a fun toy, a great motivator, and a pretty good prediction tool, don't take it as gospel.

One thing that seems fairly certain from anecdotal accounts on this board is that is that the earlier one applies, the more likely LSP will be close to accurate.