Top Law Schools

With the experimental section?
For example, if the 4th section comes up and you've already done a RC section and the 4th section is RC, knowing that there's a 50/50 chance that it will count you take the section off and conserve your brain power for the last section.

I was thinking that for a risk taker this might be an effective strategy, but it seems really likely that the experimental section will come earlier rather than later to prevent people from possibly bolstering their scores by doing this.

It would actually be cool to bet on LSATs. Like if I get >= X score then you give me $ and if I don't then I give you $. It would be very motivating.

Yeah... Actual gambling would be cool. You could get to bet on other posters too based on what they say they're getting on PTs and their posting habits.

I’m sure people have. I don’t think the “conserved brain power” is worth the 50%, or 33% chance you guess correctly though.

No, because fatigue was a non-factor for me. The LSAT isn't even half as long as the longest test I've ever taken.

Also, it's a terrible, stupid idea.

DaRascal wrote:Yeah... Actual gambling would be cool. You could get to bet on other posters too based on what they say they're getting on PTs and their posting habits.

Yeah. I could collect bets from people based on my actual LSAT score. I.e. a 175 and above would be a $100/$100 bet, while a 179 and up would be a $100/$25 bet. The only hurdle is finding a platform which would guarantee the bet would be paid out. Then of course you'd have to verify with an official LSAT doc. Hahah this could be fun.

rinkrat19 wrote:No, because fatigue was a non-factor for me. The LSAT isn't even half as long as the longest test I've ever taken.

Also, it's a terrible, stupid idea.

Rinkrat, what test do you refer to?

SBRForum, gambling website, has a points system. You earn points for your first post of the day and other shit, and then you can bet other users points, or use their sportsbook with points (but pay vig). Points can be redeemed for things like pizzas, gift cards and t-shirts.
It's quite evident TLS needs this feature.

Don't do this

BearState wrote:

rinkrat19 wrote:No, because fatigue was a non-factor for me. The LSAT isn't even half as long as the longest test I've ever taken.

Also, it's a terrible, stupid idea.

Rinkrat, what test do you refer to?

Fundamentals of Engineering. 8-hour* test. The test booklet is literally 1/2" thick.

*8a-12, 1 hr lunch break, 1-5p

I gambled on the LSAT (Dec11), and lost. LOL. I thght there was no way the RC section was real. It was.

Brutal. Hopefully it will make the bar seem like a cakewalk.

BearState wrote:Brutal. Hopefully it will make the bar seem like a cakewalk.

That would be nice, but I don't think I get to use a graphing calculator on the bar exam!

glucose101 wrote:I gambled on the LSAT (Dec11), and lost. LOL. I thght there was no way the RC section was real. It was.

Clearly, you will be repeating this strategy, since you can't possibly lose twice, right?

Mr.Binks wrote:

glucose101 wrote:I gambled on the LSAT (Dec11), and lost. LOL. I thght there was no way the RC section was real. It was.

Clearly, you will be repeating this strategy, since you can't possibly lose twice, right?

I won't, hahah. I think I gambled bc the RC was so hard to me that it didn't matter if I tried really hard bc I was pretty sure I wouldn't have gotten my target score and would've had to have retaken anyhow.

glucose101 wrote:

Mr.Binks wrote:

glucose101 wrote:I gambled on the LSAT (Dec11), and lost. LOL. I thght there was no way the RC section was real. It was.

Clearly, you will be repeating this strategy, since you can't possibly lose twice, right?

I won't, hahah. I think I gambled bc the RC was so hard to me that it didn't matter if I tried really hard bc I was pretty sure I wouldn't have gotten my target score and would've had to have retaken anyhow.

That was certainly an interesting reading section. At least it gave everyone who completed it a generous curve?

I had trouble w 2 RC passages, so even with a super generous curve, it wouldn't be worth it for me when you add other sections (which I knew I didn't get perfect on). Can't gamble Oct tho.

Pete Rose bet on the LSAT, look where it got him.

stillwater wrote:Pete Rose bet on the LSAT, look where it got him.

what hasn't Pete Rose bet on?

rinkrat19 wrote:

BearState wrote:

rinkrat19 wrote:No, because fatigue was a non-factor for me. The LSAT isn't even half as long as the longest test I've ever taken.

Also, it's a terrible, stupid idea.

Rinkrat, what test do you refer to?

Fundamentals of Engineering. 8-hour* test. The test booklet is literally 1/2" thick.

*8a-12, 1 hr lunch break, 1-5p

Fuck the FE. Way, way, way, more difficult than the LSAT.

glucose101 wrote:

Mr.Binks wrote:

glucose101 wrote:I gambled on the LSAT (Dec11), and lost. LOL. I thght there was no way the RC section was real. It was.

Clearly, you will be repeating this strategy, since you can't possibly lose twice, right?

I won't, hahah. I think I gambled bc the RC was so hard to me that it didn't matter if I tried really hard bc I was pretty sure I wouldn't have gotten my target score and would've had to have retaken anyhow.

Man, the RC was fucking ridiculous. It absolutely raped me.

Never gamble.

sometimes you dont need to gamble, you can know for a fact

for example:

if the first section is RC,
and your test booklet should so happen to fall on the floor, landing on section 5, showing that it too is RC

then you know for a fact that section 1 is an experimental section

presidentk1 wrote:sometimes you dont need to gamble, you can know for a fact

for example:

if the first section is RC,
and your test booklet should so happen to fall on the floor, landing on section 5, showing that it too is RC

then you know for a fact that section 1 is an experimental section

how?

the experiment section always shows up in 1 of the first 3 sections

there is only 1 graded RC section.

therefore, if you have 2 RC sections, 1 of them is def. going to be the experimental

and if one shows up in part 1,2, or 3 and the other in part 4 or 5

then you know for a fact that the first RC section was the experimental



this same thing applies to the games as well
but not for the LR sections