Should I retake? Forum

[FutureEsquire91]

So I've already taken the LSAT twice.

I first took the LSAT last October. I didn't take a prep course ; I just studied the Powerscore Bibles and took old LSATs. I was scoring 158-161 before the exam and ended up getting a 158.

I decided to retake in December because I was originally shooting for a 160. I signed up for Testmasters course online ( the real one ) and was scoring between 164-167 before the exam. However, my nerves were really terrible and I ended up with a 156.


I really regret not canceling my score.

I took a PT yesterday and after 2 months of not studying I got a 160. I'm also planning taking Testmasters Live Course for the June exam since I'd recieve the re-takers discount.

I'm in the LA area and my top 3 schools are USC, Pepperdine, and Loyola.

I know my scores are no where close enough , and even my higher scores probably won't cut it for USC. However, I'm just worried my nerves will cause me to screw up again in June. :/

[mindarmed]

whats your gpa

[dusters]

Yeah we need a GPA. Pepperdine and Loyola are possibilities with your current score if you have an above average GPA. Otherwise, I would think about buying the Manhattan Bundle for guides. I think they have some really good strategies and it might help just to compare and see what works better for you.

[FutureEsquire91]

whats your gpa

My GPA is pretty unremarkable

3.43

[FutureEsquire91]

I'm willing to bet that going in, you knew you had a lot of weak areas and the nerves was that apprehension that those weaknesses would be exploited.

The solution is to sure yourself up, if you want a 160, you need to be PTing 165+. You have to go in there knowing that in the worst case scenario, you will still meet your goal.

If you really put in the effort then I might suggest a new prep company. Most people around here swear by Manhattan/Blueprint, myself, I'm a Velocity guy (especially good for those of us with game inference problems). Either way GL and remember, you dont want a score good enough to get in, you want a score where they're going to toss you bags and bags of money.

Hows Blueprint for Reading comp? That tended to be my worst performing section.

[John_rizzy_rawls]

A 2-4 point increase makes you a lock for Pepperdine and Loyola. Retake.

http://myLSN.info/f1wh08

[FutureEsquire91]

I'm willing to bet that going in, you knew you had a lot of weak areas and the nerves was that apprehension that those weaknesses would be exploited.

The solution is to sure yourself up, if you want a 160, you need to be PTing 165+. You have to go in there knowing that in the worst case scenario, you will still meet your goal.

If you really put in the effort then I might suggest a new prep company. Most people around here swear by Manhattan/Blueprint, myself, I'm a Velocity guy (especially good for those of us with game inference problems). Either way GL and remember, you dont want a score good enough to get in, you want a score where they're going to toss you bags and bags of money.

Hows Blueprint for Reading comp? That tended to be my worst performing section.

I can see that.

That was a typo.
If insulting people on the internet over their spelling is your thing , please do it elsewhere.

[bizzybone1313]

I would make sure you add Manhttan's LR and RC books to your pile of studying material. I have got much better at LR after reading Manhattan's book. Manhattan LR + Powerscore LR = perfect LR attack strategy.

[FutureEsquire91]

I would make sure you add Manhttan's LR and RC books to your pile of studying material. I have got much better at LR after reading Manhattan's book. Manhattan LR + Powerscore LR = perfect LR attack strategy.

Thanks. How would you compare Manhattan's Books to the Powerscore Bibles? I found the Powerscore Bibles helpful overall but somewhat outdated.

[bizzybone1313]

I would make sure you add Manhttan's LR and RC books to your pile of studying material. I have got much better at LR after reading Manhattan's book. Manhattan LR + Powerscore LR = perfect LR attack strategy.

Thanks. How would you compare Manhattan's Books to the Powerscore Bibles? I found the Powerscore Bibles helpful overall but somewhat outdated.

Manhattan= What is this argument about? + "Core" of Argument= Correct Answer
Powerscore LR= Step 1 + Step 2 + Step 3= Correct Answer

Manhattan's approach to a lot of questions is more intuitive than Powerscore's approach. Powerscore is real mechanical in their approaches, which is useful for certain questions. Manhattan, on the other hand, is a lot more helpful in teaching you how to pick apart arguments. Trust me, Manhattan's LR book is a very good use of your time. Lurk around in a bunch of LSAT threads and you will find that it is frequently recommended. I didn't really understand sufficient and assumption questions until I read their book. I have also got much better at flaw questions. Manhattan is a lot more about teaching you to understand what a certain question is trying to test, while Powerscore is trying to give you the tools to answer LR questions correctly. The problem with Powerscore is if you do not understand the reasoning behind a certain question type in the first place, then you are not going to be able to answer them correctly with their tools. This is where Manhattan comes into play.

[FutureEsquire91]

I would make sure you add Manhttan's LR and RC books to your pile of studying material. I have got much better at LR after reading Manhattan's book. Manhattan LR + Powerscore LR = perfect LR attack strategy.

Thanks. How would you compare Manhattan's Books to the Powerscore Bibles? I found the Powerscore Bibles helpful overall but somewhat outdated.

Manhattan= What is this argument about? + "Core" of Argument= Correct Answer
Powerscore LR= Step 1 + Step 2 + Step 3= Correct Answer

Manhattan's approach to a lot of questions is more intuitive than Powerscore's approach. Powerscore is real mechanical in their approaches, which is useful for certain questions. Manhattan, on the other hand, is a lot more helpful in teaching you how to pick apart arguments. Trust me, Manhattan's LR book is a very good use of your time. Lurk around in a bunch of LSAT threads and you will find that it is frequently recommended. I didn't really understand sufficient and assumption questions until I read their book. I have also got much better at flaw questions. Manhattan is a lot more about teaching you to understand what a certain question is trying to test, while Powerscore is trying to give you the tools to answer LR questions correctly. The problem with Powerscore is if you do not understand the reasoning behind a certain question type in the first place, then you are not going to be able to answer them correctly with their tools. This is where Manhattan comes into play.

Thanks. I'm definitely going to look into them.