Top Law Schools

do you think that -4 will more or less guarantee at least a 176? i don't think i can get much more accurate than that. here are the scales:

http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/ls ... rsion.html

I don't think I've seen a test that has a harsher curve than -4 = 176.

Hannibal wrote:I don't think I've seen a test that has a harsher curve than -4 = 176.

This is still fresh in my mind as I just took the PT this past Sunday. PT 48: -4 = 175. I was so pissed with the curve that I created a thread just to express my disgust.

Cromartie wrote:

Hannibal wrote:I don't think I've seen a test that has a harsher curve than -4 = 176.

This is still fresh in my mind as I just took the PT this past Sunday. PT 48: -4 = 175. I was so pissed with the curve that I created a thread just to express my disgust.

is that some sort of cosmic joke?

-4 = 175? How is that even possible??

Adjudicator wrote:-4 = 175? How is that even possible??

Well, the overall curve for the test was -8. Don't have the slightest clue how that happened. Granted the LG section was easier than in most PT's, the LR and RC sections were filled with subtleties and misdirections, making them pretty challenging.

Cromartie wrote:

Adjudicator wrote:-4 = 175? How is that even possible??

Well, the overall curve for the test was -8. Don't have the slightest clue how that happened. Granted the LG section was easier than in most PT's, the LR and RC sections were filled with subtleties and misdirections, making them pretty challenging.

I did the LG section from that PT today and I didn't like it; I got -3. So I would have to have missed no more than 1 on the rest of that test to get a 175?

Outrageous!

Adjudicator wrote:

Cromartie wrote:

Adjudicator wrote:-4 = 175? How is that even possible??

Well, the overall curve for the test was -8. Don't have the slightest clue how that happened. Granted the LG section was easier than in most PT's, the LR and RC sections were filled with subtleties and misdirections, making them pretty challenging.

I did the LG section from that PT today and I didn't like it; I got -3. So I would have to have missed no more than 1 on the rest of that test to get a 175?

Outrageous!

Yup, it sucks. Missed 3 on the last LG (rock bands and folk bands) and 2 on RC. My reward for a -5? 174. I remember taking one of the earlier 40's where a -6 netted me a 176.