Do you have to be a genius to get a elite score? Forum

[dba415]

I consider myself maybe above average intelligence wise. Maybe in the 90th percentile overall as dictated by my sat/act scores.

But elite scores for the LSAT are 99th percentile, which suggests supreme intelligence.

I'm just wondering, is there going to be a point where all the studying in the world will not help you improve anymore due to the limits of your own personal intelligence?

[Tiago Splitter]

An...

I think for a lot of people there is a cap, but it's probably a lot closer to the 170s then you are suggesting.

[mattviphky]

fwiw i'm dumb, and i'm pting at 170s.

[mattviphky]

it's all about proper prepping, i'm sure for the diagnostic intelligence is a major factor, yes. ps, intelligent people prep, that is where the 99th comes from

[Bronte]

No.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Not at all. I can't even remember my zipcode half the time.

[AffordablePrep]

You do need to have a baseline of intelligence. I have also found particularly on LR that people who are generally careful at making decisions, and don't "go with their gut" tend to do well, and respond better to guidance. Like when McDonalds claims that because they've sold more hamburgers then any other chain's burgers combined that they're America's burgers, most people would think the Big Mac beats In N' Out Burger in a taste test when elite scorers know there's no way this could be possible.

[Redzo]

I don't think you have to be a genius, but in my case, I think it definitely helped.

[MrPapagiorgio]

Buddy of mine took the LSAT for shits and giggles without prep or even looking at a question. Dude scored a 179. However, I know a lot of people who managed to get 99th percentile scores through months of practice. The LSAT is so learnable it's disgusting.

[bruss]

You don't have to be a genius but you have to NOT be a dumbass. Is the clear enough?

[birdlaw117]

I don't think you have to be a genius, but in my case, I think it definitely helped.

Awesome.

And no, you don't.

[JamMasterJ]

There are people that cannot break 160. But the number of people capable of breaking 175 is much greater than the number of geniuses

[THE_U]

I'm beginning to think so.

[imjustjoking22]

Buddy of mine took the LSAT for shits and giggles without prep or even looking at a question. Dude scored a 179. However, I know a lot of people who managed to get 99th percentile scores through months of practice. The LSAT is so learnable it's disgusting.

Srsly. I think the biggest things it tests are a) how hard you're willing to study b) doing well under pressure on test day.

I'm no genius, decent SATs only, I haven't dropped below the 170s more than once (rough curve) since my diagnostic (lots of studying between diagnostic and first PT). My cold diag was 157.

[$1.99]

i think the test is learnable so no

[Kabuo]

i think the test is learnable so no

OP, this is true. Just quoting it because it's kind of funny coming from the source.

[minnbills]

I'm a mouth breather and I snagged a 168.

[KibblesAndVick]

The difference between a 170 and a 180 isn't intelligence. It's more about speed, consistency, and doing well under pressure on test day. Once you start scoring around 170 you get questions wrong because of stupid mistakes not because you "don't get it" so to speak. Being a genius couldn't hurt but it isn't the determining factor.

[gavinstevens]

Fortunately, perfect grammar isn't necessary for an elite score either.

I have seen people, smart by non-TLS standards, study intensely and struggle to hit 160 though.

[Borhas]

I consider myself maybe above average intelligence wise. Maybe in the 90th percentile overall as dictated by my sat/act scores.

But elite scores for the LSAT are 99th percentile, which suggests supreme intelligence.

I'm just wondering, is there going to be a point where all the studying in the world will not help you improve anymore due to the limits of your own personal intelligence?

lots of people on here have 175+ plenty of them are still dumb as fuck, so no

[fosterp]

I'd say you need to be above average to get the highest scores but I doubt that being a genius would automatically get you into the 99th percentile nor is it required.

[westinghouse60]

Buddy of mine took the LSAT for shits and giggles without prep or even looking at a question. Dude scored a 179. However, I know a lot of people who managed to get 99th percentile scores through months of practice. The LSAT is so learnable it's disgusting.

Of course its learnable to an extent, but that doesn't mean that the process of learning it itself doesn't require/develop intelligence in its own right. E.g. someone who studies their way up to a 175 over several months maybe isn't as intelligent as someone who gets a 175 cold, but there are plenty of people for whom the LSAT is almost utterly unlearnable. The difference between someone who goes from a 160 diagnostic to a 175 vs. a 150 to a 155 may be due to their differences in their prepping/learning, but that's assuming that intelligence and ability to prep are (mostly) unrelated. While in the first instance, the person may have put in better quality prep, this may have been due to the fact that they were more intelligent to begin with.

Edit: not really talking about being a genius though, that's a different issue. I guess I'm talking more about someone with above average vs. average intelligence.

[totaltest.milan]

I've found with my students that there are definite differences in focus/concentration abilities, short-term memory, reading speed and accuracy, that sort of thing. Their cognitive abilities don't necessarily dictate what scores they'll get since I can improve pretty much anyone's score by teaching them the right techniques and making sure that they study appropriately and intensely; the ones that study more will generally do better, but the smarter ones tend to score higher (partly because they start out higher). Weaker cognitive abilities will shorten your reach. The good news is that things like memory/concentration, etc can be improved (partly through doing PTs).

[tehrocstar]

I almost think it's detrimental to think that you have to be a genius to achieve an elite score.

The variable I think that's important to achieving a high score is the time needed to prepare. Some people, given past experiences, whether that be in education or taking standardized tests, will require a shorter amount of preparation time. I find it difficult to believe that the vast majority of people couldn't score extremely well with time. Granted, some people will have to study for years to achieve a high score, but it's definitely not impossible.

Assuming that most people using this board is going to or has graduated college/university, I believe that the majority of us is capable of achieving an elite score in less than a year of dedicated study.

[Tiago Splitter]

I almost think am sure it's detrimental to think that you have to be a genius to achieve an elite score.

Fixed.

As soon as people put a cap on their own potential they shut themselves down. My initial goal was to break 170, but once I did that I came to the conclusion that someone scoring 170 knows how to answer every question correctly. At that point, why not just go for a 180?