How'd it go? Forum

[existenz]

3 basic linears and a grouping is suddenly hard now?

And honestly, i thought 59 was one of the easiest LSAT's in recent history. My friend agrees too. We're kicking ourselves that we didn't take it, cause we would've both scored in the mid 170's with that ridiculous curve.

Talk is cheap.

[bakemono]

3 basic linears and a grouping is suddenly hard now?

And honestly, i thought 59 was one of the easiest LSAT's in recent history. My friend agrees too. We're kicking ourselves that we didn't take it, cause we would've both scored in the mid 170's with that ridiculous curve.

Talk is cheap.

not sure what you mean. i did do it, and that test in no way shape or form deserved a -14 curve. Hell, PT 57 was literally harder than 59 section for section.

[JCougar]

3 basic linears and a grouping is suddenly hard now?

And honestly, i thought 59 was one of the easiest LSAT's in recent history. My friend agrees too. We're kicking ourselves that we didn't take it, cause we would've both scored in the mid 170's with that ridiculous curve.

Talk is cheap.

+1

Doing them at home and bragging about it on the internet is different from doing them in a test center. Send me a screenshot of your 175, and I'll shut my yapper. Until then, eat it.

[existenz]

3 basic linears and a grouping is suddenly hard now?

And honestly, i thought 59 was one of the easiest LSAT's in recent history. My friend agrees too. We're kicking ourselves that we didn't take it, cause we would've both scored in the mid 170's with that ridiculous curve.

Talk is cheap.

+1

Doing them at home and bragging about it on the internet is different from doing them in a test center. Send me a screenshot of your 175, and I'll shut my yapper. Until then, eat it.

Exactly. I've had 180s and 179s and 178s in PTs at home. It's a different story at the test center with a proctor breathing down your neck, people shuffling papers and coughing constantly, and knowing its for keeps.

[RCG37]

what about babbling babies in LR?

That one I don't remember. Might be experimental.

There was one question early on in one of the LR's about babies having keen hearing etc but losing it after the first yr etc.?

Oh yeah! That was real.

Right, I remember that one but this is a different one about babies babbling and linguistics and opening the right side of their mouth wider than the left... any memories? this was my first LR section and hopefully my experimental.

[sophia.olive]

questions 16-20 on the second LR gave me problems apart from that it seemed easy

[bango]

My order was: LG, LR, LG, LR, RC. The first logic games was significantly harder than the second and I froze it. If it isn't the experimental I'm in trouble. I thought the rest of it was pretty easy though.

That was my order, but I'm fairly certain the first LG was the experimental for me.

[somewhatwayward]

If i were to build a bridge... I would make it short, unless I could save more with other options...

Now as far as shipwrecks... I would be concerned about whether or not salt retards the process of decay.


By the way, RC had 2 of the same passages from the experimental RC of december.

yeah i agree with these

too bad i fucked up the LG

[lawschoollll]

these LGs were weird... for me, it wasn't so much that they were hard... they just took at lot of time. and what really threw me off was not being able to finish the first game in 4-5 minutes. rushed through the rest of the games after that and guessed on 1. hoping for -2.

[jjleague]

I took mine in the USVI and it went really well. RC, LR, G, RC, LR. That and there were only 4 of us and the proctor was hovering over my desk when I was doing the second game watching me diagram, distracted the heck out of me. I was really hoping for another Games since I choked on the last one and ran out of time on 3 of them. I think I got one right but towards the end I got hung up on one question which caused me to really break my stride and really screwed me up on the last one. I really felt like I was on my game which was good because I felt like crap the day before.

[becauseimaddicted]

.

[YCrevolution]

..

[GoTribe1]

I had the test with an experimental LG. Unfortunately, though I do a couple warm-up questions before going into the test, my Achilles' heel is having to do LG as the first section, and my nerves really took me for a ride. Had to guess on the last 3 and were not confident on a couple others. When I got to the second one, I breezed through it. I was so excited at what looked to be a possible chance at redemption I literally had to stifle my laughter during the test. But no such luck, sounds like I'm stuck with the first one.

However, even though I felt terrible about the LG, I am still feeling pretty good about the test as a whole because I thought both LR sections and the RC were easier than normal. Either that or I just got myself into the zone.

[tomwatts]

Right, I remember that one but this is a different one about babies babbling and linguistics and opening the right side of their mouth wider than the left... any memories? this was my first LR section and hopefully my experimental.

Sides of mouths, no. I'm 99% sure I saw nothing about that.

[monkeyboy]

3 basic linears and a grouping is suddenly hard now?

And honestly, i thought 59 was one of the easiest LSAT's in recent history. My friend agrees too. We're kicking ourselves that we didn't take it, cause we would've both scored in the mid 170's with that ridiculous curve.

Talk is cheap.

not sure what you mean. i did do it, and that test in no way shape or form deserved a -14 curve. Hell, PT 57 was literally harder than 59 section for section.

I took 57 as a PT and scored a 170. Then I took the real thing in December (59) and scored a 163.

[UTexas]

3 basic linears and a grouping is suddenly hard now?

And honestly, i thought 59 was one of the easiest LSAT's in recent history. My friend agrees too. We're kicking ourselves that we didn't take it, cause we would've both scored in the mid 170's with that ridiculous curve.

Talk is cheap.

not sure what you mean. i did do it, and that test in no way shape or form deserved a -14 curve. Hell, PT 57 was literally harder than 59 section for section.

Interesting. A minority opinion, to be sure. I thought the December 2009 test was the most difficult LSAT I had seen since the early 2000s, if not before. I scored a 180 on PT 57 (-1 on LG, -0 on RC and LR) and a 178 on the Dec. 2009 test. I think the June 2009 LR and RC were a joke in comparison to Dec. 2009.

[booboo]

3 basic linears and a grouping is suddenly hard now?

And honestly, i thought 59 was one of the easiest LSAT's in recent history. My friend agrees too. We're kicking ourselves that we didn't take it, cause we would've both scored in the mid 170's with that ridiculous curve.

Talk is cheap.

not sure what you mean. i did do it, and that test in no way shape or form deserved a -14 curve. Hell, PT 57 was literally harder than 59 section for section.

Interesting. A minority opinion, to be sure. I thought the December 2009 test was the most difficult LSAT I had seen since the early 2000s, if not before. I scored a 180 on PT 57 (-1 on LG, -0 on RC and LR) and a 178 on the Dec. 2009 test. I think the June 2009 LR and RC were a joke in comparison to Dec. 2009.

I agree with UTexas, 57 did some markedly easier than 59.

[keg411]

I took 58 as my real thing, so 57 and 59 were both PT's for me and while the LG's and RC on 59 were easier, the LR was significantly more difficult (and by significantly, I mean I ran out of time with like 4 questions to go on the second LR section I did (I did them in a completely weird order). Overall 59 was much harder simply because of the LR.

LG was not difficult on 59 (it wasn't difficult on 58 either, I just personally choked). LR was the hardest LR section I have ever seen and the -14 curve was all sorts of deserved because it was a much more difficult test than 57 or 58. It sounds like the Feb LG was the equivalent of some of those tests in the 30's; but if this is really the case than LR and RC were probably easier than they were for 59. We won't know the curve because Feb is undisclosed. If this test is really that impossible, the curve will be huge like it was in December or like some of the tests in the 30's with -12 and -13 curves.

I still am not sure if I'm happy that I get a "snow out" test or not. I guess I'll know in the next couple of weeks.

[goosey]

57 was the real deal for me, and I took 59 as a pt--I did really bad on that test. the lr was harder than usual. rc was weird too. games were...well, games. But overall, dec 09 was among the harder pts Ive taken, and Ive taken over 30 tests

[lawwschool]

took the feb 10 lsat. 2nd time taking it, first score was a 163. ivy league grad, 3.6 gpa, have been working at a major investment bank since college.

felt pretty good except i bombed the lg section, just got thrown off by the time suck in the first game that threw me off for the rest of the section. definitely ended up guessing on atleast 9/10 of the questions in the lg game.

want to get in a T10 law school so was hoping to get in the high 160s to average out atleast a 165/166.

should i cancel?, retake for a 3rd time? or just try to apply with a 163?

[dynomite]

felt pretty good except i bombed the lg section, just got thrown off by the time suck in the first game that threw me off for the rest of the section. definitely ended up guessing on atleast 9/10 of the questions in the lg game.

want to get in a T10 law school so was hoping to get in the high 160s to average out atleast a 165/166.

should i cancel?, retake for a 3rd time? or just try to apply with a 163?

How do you feel you did on the rest of the test? Percentages suggest you'll have gotten 1/2 of those 9/10 guesses correct. With a generous curve you could still get 4-7 other questions wrong on the rest of the test and be in the high 160s.

Have you played around on Law School Predictor? With your 163 T10 is going to be unlikely -- if you are dead set on going to T10 (an understandable but ultimately silly decision) I might cancel and retake in June. (Again, this depends on how hard you have been studying, how much time you'll have to study between now and June, etc. etc. etc.)

[baneofmyexistence]

My order was: LG, LR, LG, LR, RC. The first logic games was significantly harder than the second and I froze it. If it isn't the experimental I'm in trouble. I thought the rest of it was pretty easy though.

That was my order, but I'm fairly certain the first LG was the experimental for me.

I seriously hope you are right.. which games did you have in your first LG section? do we even know for sure that they give us the same experimental games, and the same real ones?

[existenz]

For those who haven't read the other threads, the real LG had juicers/mixers, hikers on trails (Spruces, Poplars, Oaks), and two others that I can't remember right now.

[oldfart]

My order was: LG, LR, LG, LR, RC. The first logic games was significantly harder than the second and I froze it. If it isn't the experimental I'm in trouble. I thought the rest of it was pretty easy though.

That was my order, but I'm fairly certain the first LG was the experimental for me.

ditto!

[imisscollege]

My order was: LG, LR, LG, LR, RC. The first logic games was significantly harder than the second and I froze it. If it isn't the experimental I'm in trouble. I thought the rest of it was pretty easy though.

That was my order, but I'm fairly certain the first LG was the experimental for me.

ditto!

pretty sure that was the realski dealski