Post removed. Forum
-
- Posts: 784
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:50 am
Re: December 2013 Retakers
.
Last edited by dosto on Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Otunga
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:56 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
I'd take 171.
172/173 and I'm golden.
Always aiming for 180 though.
172/173 and I'm golden.
Always aiming for 180 though.
- rftdd888
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 3:08 am
Re: December 2013 Retakers
did any of you feel a difference in RC between the 40s-50s and the 60s? I was PT'ing in the low 170s in the 40s and 50s but had a bad RC section in Oct. in fact, I had plenty of bad RC sections in the 60s.
- mellow
- Posts: 296
- Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:07 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
Ideal would be 175+, I'd be ok with 174. 173 or 172 would mean a waste of $160 and a decrease in chances for applying later in the cycle. This is what happens when you prioritize work experience over GPA in college. /sigh
But then again, if you're working full time with two children, my answer would be completely different. I'm assuming you have a decent amount of time to study?
Nope. You underperformed, you know what your weakness is, especially under test day conditions. And even if you didn't underperform, I went from a 164 diagnostic to a 175 PT average after four weeks of cramming (a PT or two a day), so it's definitely possible.CookieDough wrote:Is it ridiculous to think I could get 6 more points in this short amount of time? I scored at least that under my PT average, so I'm hoping it's not crazy...
But then again, if you're working full time with two children, my answer would be completely different. I'm assuming you have a decent amount of time to study?
- Otunga
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:56 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
Absolutely. I essentially devoted much of prep to grasping 50s and 60s RC (especially 60s). That said, I thought 70 RC was tougher than any 60s section aside from 65, perhaps the toughest RC ever.rftdd888 wrote:did any of you feel a difference in RC between the 40s-50s and the 60s? I was PT'ing in the low 170s in the 40s and 50s but had a bad RC section in Oct. in fact, I had plenty of bad RC sections in the 60s.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- mellow
- Posts: 296
- Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:07 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
Yes to a difference. But not sure if I'd say the difference would be in difficulty exactly. I felt the questions changed slightly in their focus (more inferences, less find the answer word for word in the passage), but once I started looking at them as LR questions, the RC felt manageable again.rftdd888 wrote:did any of you feel a difference in RC between the 40s-50s and the 60s? I was PT'ing in the low 170s in the 40s and 50s but had a bad RC section in Oct. in fact, I had plenty of bad RC sections in the 60s.
And comparative passages are annoying as hell.
-
- Posts: 1846
- Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:11 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
.
Last edited by 062914123 on Thu Jul 03, 2014 1:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- NotASpecialSnowflake
- Posts: 470
- Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:15 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
I might be the low outlier but I'm just shooting for a 168 or above, which is 5 points above my PT70. I'd honestly take a 167 because I can make T-14 then.
I just tried some mid 90s Killer LGs. Didn't go so well.
I'm gonna review the power score system and get back on it, but its tough going from the new LGs (which I find easier and can just plug and chug) to the older ones (make all the inferences or you are screwed)
I'm hoping to get back on track with LGs before my trainer arrives.
I just tried some mid 90s Killer LGs. Didn't go so well.

I'm hoping to get back on track with LGs before my trainer arrives.
- action90
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 12:25 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
2 or more for a 172+Bajam wrote:Score 4 or more for 170+bee wrote:QUICK POLL: what score are you guys (realistically) hoping for in dec, now that you know what to expect from the lsat?
me: if i scored 3 or more points for 173+, i'd be deliriously happy
- FlyingNorth
- Posts: 408
- Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:25 am
Re: December 2013 Retakers
Shooting for that 170 threshold! 

- AAJD2B
- Posts: 871
- Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 12:37 am
Re: December 2013 Retakers
Ditto!FlyingNorth wrote:Shooting for that 170 threshold!
- tofuspeedstar
- Posts: 8121
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:54 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
180 ceiling, 175 floor. I will except nothing less and will even wait til June if need be.
“And so you touch this limit, something happens and you suddenly can go a little bit further. With your mind power, your determination, your instinct, and the experience as well, you can fly very high.”
-Aryton Senna.
If I can crank a 180 on this 3rd take who knows wtf else I can do.
“And so you touch this limit, something happens and you suddenly can go a little bit further. With your mind power, your determination, your instinct, and the experience as well, you can fly very high.”
-Aryton Senna.
If I can crank a 180 on this 3rd take who knows wtf else I can do.
- CookieDough
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:55 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
bee wrote:QUICK POLL: what score are you guys (realistically) hoping for in dec, now that you know what to expect from the lsat?
me: if i scored 3 or more points for 173+, i'd be deliriously happy

Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- FlyingNorth
- Posts: 408
- Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:25 am
Re: December 2013 Retakers
^Inspirationaltofuspeedstar wrote:180 ceiling, 175 floor. I will except nothing less and will even wait til June if need be.
“And so you touch this limit, something happens and you suddenly can go a little bit further. With your mind power, your determination, your instinct, and the experience as well, you can fly very high.”
-Aryton Senna.
If I can crank a 180 on this 3rd take who knows wtf else I can do.
Where do you guys typically get your PT's from? Cambridge?
- FlyingNorth
- Posts: 408
- Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:25 am
Re: December 2013 Retakers
Big ole' +1CookieDough wrote:bee wrote:QUICK POLL: what score are you guys (realistically) hoping for in dec, now that you know what to expect from the lsat?
me: if i scored 3 or more points for 173+, i'd be deliriously happy
I just want a 170...
- CookieDough
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:55 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
Thank you so much for this!dosto5 wrote:ftfybee wrote: the only thing keeping me going right now is imagining how many doors510 extra points is gonna open for me.
No, especially since you underperformed on test day. Now you have the experience of having taken the real thing and know what to expect from the experience. You have a month with a solid foundation to hone in and really polish your skills. You can also develop some good habits and and become more confident about your approach (I'm trying to do this for RC before test day).CookieDough wrote: Is it ridiculous to think I could get 6 more points in this short amount of time? I scored at least that under my PT average, so I'm hoping it's not crazy...
- tofuspeedstar
- Posts: 8121
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:54 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
lsatblog. Only place i know that has them in pdf formFlyingNorth wrote:^Inspirationaltofuspeedstar wrote:180 ceiling, 175 floor. I will except nothing less and will even wait til June if need be.
“And so you touch this limit, something happens and you suddenly can go a little bit further. With your mind power, your determination, your instinct, and the experience as well, you can fly very high.”
-Aryton Senna.
If I can crank a 180 on this 3rd take who knows wtf else I can do.
Where do you guys typically get your PT's from? Cambridge?

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- CookieDough
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:55 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
Working part time, no kids. I have time to study, I'm just trying to figure out a good balance. I studied a lot for October but clearly not as effectively as I needed to. Anyone want to hazard a guess as to the right amount of time to put in/week?melodygreenleaf wrote:Ideal would be 175+, I'd be ok with 174. 173 or 172 would mean a waste of $160 and a decrease in chances for applying later in the cycle. This is what happens when you prioritize work experience over GPA in college. /sigh
Nope. You underperformed, you know what your weakness is, especially under test day conditions. And even if you didn't underperform, I went from a 164 diagnostic to a 175 PT average after four weeks of cramming (a PT or two a day), so it's definitely possible.CookieDough wrote:Is it ridiculous to think I could get 6 more points in this short amount of time? I scored at least that under my PT average, so I'm hoping it's not crazy...
But then again, if you're working full time with two children, my answer would be completely different. I'm assuming you have a decent amount of time to study?
- tofuspeedstar
- Posts: 8121
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:54 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
CookieDough wrote:Working part time, no kids. I have time to study, I'm just trying to figure out a good balance. I studied a lot for October but clearly not as effectively as I needed to. Anyone want to hazard a guess as to the right amount of time to put in/week?melodygreenleaf wrote:Ideal would be 175+, I'd be ok with 174. 173 or 172 would mean a waste of $160 and a decrease in chances for applying later in the cycle. This is what happens when you prioritize work experience over GPA in college. /sigh
Nope. You underperformed, you know what your weakness is, especially under test day conditions. And even if you didn't underperform, I went from a 164 diagnostic to a 175 PT average after four weeks of cramming (a PT or two a day), so it's definitely possible.CookieDough wrote:Is it ridiculous to think I could get 6 more points in this short amount of time? I scored at least that under my PT average, so I'm hoping it's not crazy...
But then again, if you're working full time with two children, my answer would be completely different. I'm assuming you have a decent amount of time to study?
According to the 4 week schedule on the lsat trainer site it says 28-30 hours a week

But since you have solid foundation I would say 12-15 a week would suffice? And maybe a PT every 3 days? idk.
- lsatyolo
- Posts: 2403
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:17 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
Just realized I really don't have many fresh tests from the 50's and 60's to work with... Probably going to start off with the first test I took from my Powerscore full-length course. Too bad it's not letting me log in 

- Otunga
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:56 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
Is that number including full PTs? I think 2 PTs a week sounds about right. Maybe 3 each in the last two weeks of November, then just 1 or 2 the week leading into test day.tofuspeedstar wrote:CookieDough wrote:Working part time, no kids. I have time to study, I'm just trying to figure out a good balance. I studied a lot for October but clearly not as effectively as I needed to. Anyone want to hazard a guess as to the right amount of time to put in/week?melodygreenleaf wrote:Ideal would be 175+, I'd be ok with 174. 173 or 172 would mean a waste of $160 and a decrease in chances for applying later in the cycle. This is what happens when you prioritize work experience over GPA in college. /sigh
Nope. You underperformed, you know what your weakness is, especially under test day conditions. And even if you didn't underperform, I went from a 164 diagnostic to a 175 PT average after four weeks of cramming (a PT or two a day), so it's definitely possible.CookieDough wrote:Is it ridiculous to think I could get 6 more points in this short amount of time? I scored at least that under my PT average, so I'm hoping it's not crazy...
But then again, if you're working full time with two children, my answer would be completely different. I'm assuming you have a decent amount of time to study?
According to the 4 week schedule on the lsat trainer site it says 28-30 hours a week
But since you have solid foundation I would say 12-15 a week would suffice? And maybe a PT every 3 days? idk.
I might join the PT57 brigade. When are you guys reviewing? My disclaimer is that I've seen the LG section 3 times, and I've never hit -0 on it. I've seen the other sections once. It's really about shaking the rust away at this stage.
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
- Brettanomyces
- Posts: 410
- Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 6:08 am
Re: December 2013 Retakers
I haven't seen my October score yet.
I've improved since then and I don't want to get discouraged.

I've improved since then and I don't want to get discouraged.
- tofuspeedstar
- Posts: 8121
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:54 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
Here's the schedule:Otunga wrote:
Is that number including full PTs? I think 2 PTs a week sounds about right. Maybe 3 each in the last two weeks of November, then just 1 or 2 the week leading into test day.
I might join the PT57 brigade. When are you guys reviewing? My disclaimer is that I've seen the LG section 3 times, and I've never hit -0 on it. I've seen the other sections once. It's really about shaking the rust away at this stage.
--LinkRemoved--
You kind of just organize the work yourself throughout the week to best fit around everything else. It includes taking PT 52-61, I'm sure you might be able to sub in like 64-70 there at the end?
- CookieDough
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:55 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
I'm so worried about burning out though... Also I only have about 5 recent PTs that are totally fresh (thank goodness they are all in the 60s!) so should I save those until later, or do a fresh one a week, plus redo a few?tofuspeedstar wrote:CookieDough wrote:Working part time, no kids. I have time to study, I'm just trying to figure out a good balance. I studied a lot for October but clearly not as effectively as I needed to. Anyone want to hazard a guess as to the right amount of time to put in/week?melodygreenleaf wrote:Ideal would be 175+, I'd be ok with 174. 173 or 172 would mean a waste of $160 and a decrease in chances for applying later in the cycle. This is what happens when you prioritize work experience over GPA in college. /sigh
Nope. You underperformed, you know what your weakness is, especially under test day conditions. And even if you didn't underperform, I went from a 164 diagnostic to a 175 PT average after four weeks of cramming (a PT or two a day), so it's definitely possible.CookieDough wrote:Is it ridiculous to think I could get 6 more points in this short amount of time? I scored at least that under my PT average, so I'm hoping it's not crazy...
But then again, if you're working full time with two children, my answer would be completely different. I'm assuming you have a decent amount of time to study?
According to the 4 week schedule on the lsat trainer site it says 28-30 hours a week
But since you have solid foundation I would say 12-15 a week would suffice? And maybe a PT every 3 days? idk.
-
- Posts: 1957
- Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:16 pm
Re: December 2013 Retakers
You're being ludicrous. Open the score and realize that the 3 numbers inside mean very little in the scheme of your retake. More importantly you'll see which sections you struggled with on test day, and you'll be able to target your studies better.Brettanomyces wrote:I haven't seen my October score yet.![]()
I've improved since then and I don't want to get discouraged.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login