Feb Waiters: is TODAY the DAY? [New Poll] Forum
-
- Posts: 313
- Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 9:47 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
That's nice ^
- MS415
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:02 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
How many more days? It feels like forever.
- kmc
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 7:22 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
--ImageRemoved--MS415 wrote:How many more days? It feels like forever.
-
- Posts: 2578
- Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 7:33 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
Who are you?kmc wrote:[img]girl[/img]MS415 wrote:How many more days? It feels like forever.
- finnandjake2
- Posts: 170
- Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 1:41 am
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
This thread is boring.
Last edited by finnandjake2 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 8:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- kmc
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 7:22 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
i'm new. i've been lurking for a bit. didn't really know how to introduce myself, but then i couldn't help posting my version of a countdown calendar.wannabelawstudent wrote:Who are you?kmc wrote:[img]girl[/img]MS415 wrote:How many more days? It feels like forever.
hi folks!
-
- Posts: 2578
- Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 7:33 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
I was making a joke about our avatarskmc wrote:i'm new. i've been lurking for a bit. didn't really know how to introduce myself, but then i couldn't help posting my version of a countdown calendar.wannabelawstudent wrote:
Who are you?
hi folks!
- kmc
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 7:22 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
derp. yay first day here and i've already failed!wannabelawstudent wrote:I was making a joke about our avatarskmc wrote:i'm new. i've been lurking for a bit. didn't really know how to introduce myself, but then i couldn't help posting my version of a countdown calendar.wannabelawstudent wrote:
Who are you?
hi folks!
but really, it just always wigs me out when we meet ourselves.
- OliveBC
- Posts: 490
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:41 am
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
Is everyone in this thread a guy? I mean I like boobs as much as the next person, but can't we balance out all the boob gifs with some David Beckham or something?
-
- Posts: 313
- Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 9:47 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
No one's stopping you. Kudos to "Dusters" for the last post on pg 24.
- kmc
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 7:22 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
i'm a woman. i'm just also a lesbian. so. boobs.
- OliveBC
- Posts: 490
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:41 am
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
Embarrassingly... I don't know how to use gifs 

-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 6:16 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)

Waiting, waiting...
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 4:12 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
I had LG-LR-RC-RC-LR. I'm not sure which reading comp passage was experimental but I'm hoping it was the second
- TheThriller
- Posts: 2282
- Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:12 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
Karate Kid is on TV.
-
- Posts: 242
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 8:28 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
Checking in after (FINALLY) taking the test yesterday. Didn't see anything on here about it, but it was quite an old test. The LG were still in the old format (1 to a page) which I thought would suck, but they were much older-type games (very very few hypotheticals). It seemed to be a test from the early 50s in terms of how it was written and question types.
LG was a cinch, 3 of the first 4 sections were LR, and I think the experimental was on the second of the 3 only because it was so odd. (And I think I got quite a few wrong in it.)
Weirdest part was that I got a question that I had literally done in my prep 2 days ago (LR, kids reactions to baseballs being thrown slow v fast). Maybe I had deja vu, but I even recognized the right answer and moved on... Not sure if I was going crazy during the test, but 99% sure I had seen that Q before, and quite recently.
Not a bad test-- RC was a bitch, but so, I hear, was the actual Feb administration...
LG was a cinch, 3 of the first 4 sections were LR, and I think the experimental was on the second of the 3 only because it was so odd. (And I think I got quite a few wrong in it.)
Weirdest part was that I got a question that I had literally done in my prep 2 days ago (LR, kids reactions to baseballs being thrown slow v fast). Maybe I had deja vu, but I even recognized the right answer and moved on... Not sure if I was going crazy during the test, but 99% sure I had seen that Q before, and quite recently.
Not a bad test-- RC was a bitch, but so, I hear, was the actual Feb administration...
- facile princeps
- Posts: 420
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:51 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
RC was a bitch indeed. I'm actually contemplating canceling because of that and the fact that I know I missed at least 2 questions on the last game (the first 3 games were easy). I'm thinking -4/5 on LR combined, -5/8 on that horrible RC, and -2/4 on games. Best case scenario -11 gets me a 170; worst case scenario -17 gets me less than my first score.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- chickpea
- Posts: 439
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:50 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
I also noticed some material that I had seen on my practice tests but only in the experimental section.
I really wish I hadn't had LG first since in retrospect the games were really easy and I think I could have aced them had I been more calm. I guess there's always something that doesn't go quite as planned though.
LG LR LG RC LR
LG -3/-6 (had to guess on the last two questions)
LR -1/-3
LG -0/-1
RC -1/-3
LR -1/-3
Best case scenario: 175
Worst case scenario: 166
Lol, two very different outcomes. Hoping for a 171-172 but would be happy with a 170.
I really wish I hadn't had LG first since in retrospect the games were really easy and I think I could have aced them had I been more calm. I guess there's always something that doesn't go quite as planned though.
LG LR LG RC LR
LG -3/-6 (had to guess on the last two questions)
LR -1/-3
LG -0/-1
RC -1/-3
LR -1/-3
Best case scenario: 175
Worst case scenario: 166
Lol, two very different outcomes. Hoping for a 171-172 but would be happy with a 170.
Last edited by chickpea on Sun Feb 17, 2013 4:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- chickpea
- Posts: 439
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:50 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
Are you applying this cycle? You may have done better than you think you did but if you're not feeling great about the test perhaps you could cancel and re-take in June?facile princeps wrote:RC was a bitch indeed. I'm actually contemplating canceling because of that and the fact that I know I missed at least 2 questions on the last game (the first 3 games were easy). I'm thinking -4/5 on LR combined, -5/8 on that horrible RC, and -2/4 on games. Best case scenario -11 gets me a 170; worst case scenario -17 gets me less than my first score.
- dusters
- Posts: 168
- Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:12 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
I can picwhore my puppy if that would make you feel any better.OliveBC wrote:Is everyone in this thread a guy? I mean I like boobs as much as the next person, but can't we balance out all the boob gifs with some David Beckham or something?
- OliveBC
- Posts: 490
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:41 am
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
dusters wrote:I can picwhore my puppy if that would make you feel any better.OliveBC wrote:Is everyone in this thread a guy? I mean I like boobs as much as the next person, but can't we balance out all the boob gifs with some David Beckham or something?

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
-
- Posts: 242
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 8:28 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
Well the test had 101 questions too, if I'm not mistaken. Why would they reuse questions from old PTs in an experimental? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose?chickpea wrote:I also noticed some material that I had seen on my practice tests but only in the experimental section.
I had a bit of a stressful beginning to the test - I forgot my ID and had to get someone to rush home for me and get it. Luckily they still allowed me to take the test but I sat down right before we started the first section and was pretty frazzled during the first 35 min (logic games, which is generally my weakest section). I really wish I hadn't had LG first since in retrospect the games were really easy and I think I could have aced them had I been more calm. I guess there's always something that doesn't go quite as planned though.
LG LR LG RC LR
LG -3/-6 (had to guess on the last two questions)
LR -1/-3
LG (EXP) -0/-1
RC -1/-3
LR -1/-3
Best case scenario: 174
Worst case scenario: 165
Lol, two very different outcomes. Hoping for a 171-172 but would be happy with a 170.
Do you remember the ball speed question? Or the vivvy one? I think that was the experimental so if you don't remember them I may be correct
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 6:16 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
Please! And what kind of puppy is it?dusters wrote:I can picwhore my puppy if that would make you feel any better.OliveBC wrote:Is everyone in this thread a guy? I mean I like boobs as much as the next person, but can't we balance out all the boob gifs with some David Beckham or something?

-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 6:16 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
May everyone have this much confidence while waiting for their score and thinking about the LSAT:


- chickpea
- Posts: 439
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:50 pm
Re: Feb Waiters (ATTENTION: Discuss LSAT Qs → BANNED)
I don't remember the ball speed question or the vivvy one. In my experimental LG section there were definitely two LGs I had solved before (more than once). Perhaps they didn't have enough material for the experimental section. Thanks for letting me know that the test had 101 questions. Hopefully that will work in my favor.gobosox wrote:Well the test had 101 questions too, if I'm not mistaken. Why would they reuse questions from old PTs in an experimental? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose?chickpea wrote:I also noticed some material that I had seen on my practice tests but only in the experimental section.
I had a bit of a stressful beginning to the test - I forgot my ID and had to get someone to rush home for me and get it. Luckily they still allowed me to take the test but I sat down right before we started the first section and was pretty frazzled during the first 35 min (logic games, which is generally my weakest section). I really wish I hadn't had LG first since in retrospect the games were really easy and I think I could have aced them had I been more calm. I guess there's always something that doesn't go quite as planned though.
LG LR LG RC LR
LG -3/-6 (had to guess on the last two questions)
LR -1/-3
LG (EXP) -0/-1
RC -1/-3
LR -1/-3
Best case scenario: 174
Worst case scenario: 165
Lol, two very different outcomes. Hoping for a 171-172 but would be happy with a 170.
Do you remember the ball speed question? Or the vivvy one? I think that was the experimental so if you don't remember them I may be correct
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login