Who has underperformed their numbers? Forum
-
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:45 am
Who has underperformed their numbers?
TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?
-
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:46 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
169/ 3.75oregon000 wrote:TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?
WL at Cornell, Vandy, UCLA, USC, BU, Duke, Michigan. Duke and Michigan probably aren't anomalies, however.
I don't really have decent "softs" and got a minor in consumption during UG. That's about all I can think of.
- AntipodeanPhil
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:02 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
I came across this person while browsing LSN last night:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Hercules14/jd
I hope it's okay to post the link here - information on LSN is hardly private. With 177 / 3.82, you would have thought he was auto admit almost everywhere, but I guess there must be something else going on.
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Hercules14/jd
I hope it's okay to post the link here - information on LSN is hardly private. With 177 / 3.82, you would have thought he was auto admit almost everywhere, but I guess there must be something else going on.
-
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:46 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
Not too surprising. Yale and Harvard are almost always toss-ups and the other schools were probably engaging in some form of YP knowing Hercules would end up with much better offers.AntipodeanPhil wrote:I came across this person while browsing LSN last night:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Hercules14/jd
I hope it's okay to post the link here - information on LSN is hardly private. With 177 / 3.82, you would have thought he was auto admit almost everywhere, but I guess there must be something else going on.
-
- Posts: 849
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:08 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
HY rejected for GPA, I buy that.AntipodeanPhil wrote:I came across this person while browsing LSN last night:
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/Hercules14/jd
I hope it's okay to post the link here - information on LSN is hardly private. With 177 / 3.82, you would have thought he was auto admit almost everywhere, but I guess there must be something else going on.
UPenn, UVA WL for no targetted essay probably
Berk ding because it's Berk.
The guy got into Columbia and NYU, and also received sizable schollies in the 15-25 range. Seems like a standard cycle to me
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:45 am
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
that is brutal. Maybe he didn't do anything after undergrad. It looks like the lower schools could have been YP, but the top schools didn't cooperate. Columbia with money is nothing to scoff at though...
- AntipodeanPhil
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:02 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
I hope Bhan is right. It would make me very anxious if he was rejected by top 10 places for yield protect. If you look at the Harvard decision graph on LSN, he stands out as by far the best number-qualified rejection.
-
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:45 am
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
Another theory: I feel that it might be tempting to rely on your numbers when applying ( i.e. 177 LSAT). Perhaps he didn't put as much time and thought into his apps as he would have with a 170.
- Patriot1208
- Posts: 7023
- Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
That is a bad cycle. How late did you apply? I'd reapply with more targeted essays at Cornell and the rest. And, if you didn't mind paying sticker, i'd ED to Mich because you are at both medians.TheOcho wrote:169/ 3.75oregon000 wrote:TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?
WL at Cornell, Vandy, UCLA, USC, BU, Duke, Michigan. Duke and Michigan probably aren't anomalies, however.
I don't really have decent "softs" and got a minor in consumption during UG. That's about all I can think of.
-
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:17 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
171, 3.86
Waitlisted: Duke, UChicago, USC, Cornel, UVA, UCLA, Columbia, UWash
Highest ranked school I was accepted to was Georgetown (with no money)
I am not the most interesting person and I went to an undergrad with no history of anyone having applied to law school after graduating. Multiple LSAT- previous scores 157, 159- so that was hopefully the reason and not that I am just a terrible person/essay writer Or maybe I just really screwed something up.
Waitlisted: Duke, UChicago, USC, Cornel, UVA, UCLA, Columbia, UWash
Highest ranked school I was accepted to was Georgetown (with no money)
I am not the most interesting person and I went to an undergrad with no history of anyone having applied to law school after graduating. Multiple LSAT- previous scores 157, 159- so that was hopefully the reason and not that I am just a terrible person/essay writer Or maybe I just really screwed something up.
- ahduth
- Posts: 2467
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
Yeah I'm not buying this. 177 / 3.82 at H?AntipodeanPhil wrote:I hope Bhan is right. It would make me very anxious if he was rejected by top 10 places for yield protect. If you look at the Harvard decision graph on LSN, he stands out as by far the best number-qualified rejection.
Maybe Rubenstein started playing rookie ball up there. But... I kinda doubt it.
- ahduth
- Posts: 2467
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
Sweetheart, you've got great numbers. Wait out the wait list, and you'll get in somewhere good.leapincamelleopard wrote:171, 3.86
Waitlisted: Duke, UChicago, USC, Cornel, UVA, UCLA, Columbia, UWash
Highest ranked school I was accepted to was Georgetown (with no money)
I am not the most interesting person and I went to an undergrad with no history of anyone having applied to law school after graduating. Multiple LSAT- previous scores 157, 159- so that was hopefully the reason and not that I am just a terrible person/essay writer Or maybe I just really screwed something up.
-
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:17 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
Aw thanks! thats what I'm hoping for.ahduth wrote:
Sweetheart, you've got great numbers. Wait out the wait list, and you'll get in somewhere good.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:32 am
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
h
Last edited by mezzoitaliano702 on Thu May 09, 2013 2:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1505
- Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:56 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
I agree it's a horrible cycle. Did he interview at Vandy? Write a why MICH?Patriot1208 wrote:That is a bad cycle. How late did you apply? I'd reapply with more targeted essays at Cornell and the rest. And, if you didn't mind paying sticker, i'd ED to Mich because you are at both medians.TheOcho wrote:169/ 3.75oregon000 wrote:TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?
WL at Cornell, Vandy, UCLA, USC, BU, Duke, Michigan. Duke and Michigan probably aren't anomalies, however.
I don't really have decent "softs" and got a minor in consumption during UG. That's about all I can think of.
I've heard that Why Cornell doesn't matter.
-
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 1:58 am
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
I'm curious about the question but if a different way. Whether somebody has been above both medians and done very poorly (bottom half of their class) in law school.
-
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:45 am
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
I feel like a consumption minor would be a positive soft if you were interested in environmental lawTheOcho wrote:169/ 3.75oregon000 wrote:TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?
WL at Cornell, Vandy, UCLA, USC, BU, Duke, Michigan. Duke and Michigan probably aren't anomalies, however.
I don't really have decent "softs" and got a minor in consumption during UG. That's about all I can think of.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- AntipodeanPhil
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:02 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
+1oregon000 wrote:I feel like a consumption minor would be a positive soft if you were interested in environmental law
LOL. I read it the same way the first time. I started thinking about what sort of material the subject would cover.
- Hannibal
- Posts: 2211
- Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:00 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
<---This guy
Highest ranked school I got into is WUSTL (with significant money), WLed everywhere from Columbia on down. Except Texas.
Highest ranked school I got into is WUSTL (with significant money), WLed everywhere from Columbia on down. Except Texas.
- AntipodeanPhil
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:02 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
Ouch! 174 is high for WUSTL. But I guess you're a splitter. Is that an exceptionally bad result, by splitter standards?Hannibal wrote:<---This guy
Highest ranked school I got into is WUSTL (with significant money), WLed everywhere from Columbia on down. Except Texas.
- Hannibal
- Posts: 2211
- Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:00 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
Nah, splitters with my numbers have been WL pwned pretty often this cycle.AntipodeanPhil wrote:Ouch! 174 is high for WUSTL. But I guess you're a splitter. Is that an exceptionally bad result, by splitter standards?Hannibal wrote:<---This guy
Highest ranked school I got into is WUSTL (with significant money), WLed everywhere from Columbia on down. Except Texas.
So I guess I didn't underperform my numbers so much as "my combination of numbers did worse than you'd expect this year."
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
- Grizz
- Posts: 10564
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
Yes.deltasigbn wrote:I'm curious about the question but if a different way. Whether somebody has been above both medians and done very poorly (bottom half of their class) in law school.
- SilverE2
- Posts: 929
- Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:04 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
169/3.5. I applied in September, The only T20 I got into was GW, and at sticker. WL at Mich, Vandy, and BU. Rejected at BC, Cornell, GULC (part time) USC.
I'm a 4 time test taker though, so who knows. Maybe about standard.
I'm a 4 time test taker though, so who knows. Maybe about standard.
- Bildungsroman
- Posts: 5529
- Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:42 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
I didn't think I underperformed until I saw all the people I was following as #s twins get into Chicago RD.
-
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 9:46 pm
Re: Who has underperformed their numbers?
I wrote "Why" essays for UVA (rejected), Duke, and Michigan. I did not interview at Vandy. I applied early, before Thanksgiving.FiveSermon wrote:I agree it's a horrible cycle. Did he interview at Vandy? Write a why MICH?Patriot1208 wrote:That is a bad cycle. How late did you apply? I'd reapply with more targeted essays at Cornell and the rest. And, if you didn't mind paying sticker, i'd ED to Mich because you are at both medians.TheOcho wrote:169/ 3.75oregon000 wrote:TLS often says its all about the numbers, I am just curious who thinks they have underperformed theirs. I d be curious what schools you expected, what schools you got and reasons why you think it worked out that way. Any horror stories?
WL at Cornell, Vandy, UCLA, USC, BU, Duke, Michigan. Duke and Michigan probably aren't anomalies, however.
I don't really have decent "softs" and got a minor in consumption during UG. That's about all I can think of.
I've heard that Why Cornell doesn't matter.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login