141 Diagnostic. Is 165 or 170+ possible or even realistic? Forum

[Desert Fox]

The truth is, most people who end up scoring in the 170s study for about a year. I don't have anything but anecdata, but I have spent a long time researching some general trends. There seems to be 2 common types of people who get 170s and the most common are those who studied for about a year.

LOL. No way.

That was probably a bit hyperbolic and inaccurate. I re-read what I wrote, and my estimation is probably somewhere around 60% of 170ers probably study for about a year. Also, to be clear, I don't mean they are studying 365, but with time taken into account for their retake(s).

I would have thought that notion was ridiculous up until about a month and half ago when I branched out and started hanging on the 7Sage forums, Reddit LSAT forums, and Manhattan forums. I think TLS is just a small sample of LSAT takers. From what I have read on those sites, it seems like a lot more people than I would have originally thought end up studying for a lot longer than I thought. Perhaps a year is a bit or an exaggeration though.

My new corrected statement: Most people (~60%) who end up scoring in the 170s, study for over 3-4 months. This number includes those who retake and spend additional time prepping for said retake. I think this is a more fair assessment of what I am seeing on the interwebz.

My guess is the average 170+ did less than 10 pts.

Do you genuinely believe that? Very few people are natural high scorers on the LSAT.

Many people don't do much studying. 10 practices is a lot. Back when i applied 10 was way over average. My second PT got me into 170s but took me like 7-8 to get into 175+.

Hell I know someone who did two tests, both game time. 151 then 169.

[mukol]

I know a dude that went from 131 to 167. He put in work though, in a way most people aren't capable of doing.

[RamTitan]

Many people don't do much studying. 10 practices is a lot. Back when i applied 10 was way over average. My second PT got me into 170s but took me like 7-8 to get into 175+.

Hell I know someone who did two tests, both game time. 151 then 169.

It's going to be hard to prove one way or the other if most 170+ scorers are natty or not as there aren't a lot of comprehensive statistics (any?) that demonstrate either case, however I will say this; there are A LOT of posters on this forum who worked their way into the 170s. But as you said, most people do not study much, if at all, for the LSAT so TLS and 7sage may not be representative of your typical 170+ scorer.

With that said, since we're all throwing around anecdotal evidence (and don't have much else to go on), I only know of 5 people who scored 170+ IRL - only one of them was a "natural" who scored a 170 on his diagnostic. The others were all in the 155-161 range initially.

Edit - that's not super unusual to get a huge score boost after your first test (I improved 11 points), but your friend is probably either a good guesser or a liar if his diagnostic was a 151.

[oh lawd]

My friend from the prep course we took made the exact leap you described. He got a 141 on the diagnostic, considered dropping the course for a partial refund, stuck with it instead, and three months (and $1200 for the course) later he scored a 168. It's possible, just takes a ton of time/effort.

[ticklemesilly]

My LSAT diagnostic test was a 141. I honestly got lucky on a few so I'm guessing realistically it's a bit lower.

Everyone guesses and gets lucky on a few during the diagnostic. It's a diagnostic. It's not reflective of your ability to bunker down and work hard.

I was getting through maybe one logic game per test when I started studying (even several practice tests in). I ended up with a minus 2 for logic games on the real test. It's highly learnable.