Kretzy, you are rocking this cycle!!!! congrats!!! that is awesome! do you think you'll go?Kretzy wrote:HOLY SHIT, I'm in!!!!!!!!!!!
Missed the call while in the shower this morning, but just got the email. I'm shaking.
Stats, because I'm the most notorious in asking for them:
Complete 11.11
170
3.89
Softs are on LSN.
I think my cycle's over.
Stanford 2010!!! Forum
- tintin
- Posts: 952
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 12:26 am
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 12:51 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
if we applied really early in the season (first wk of october) and still havent heard back from stanford...do you think that's a bad sign?!
175
3.8
good softs
175
3.8
good softs
-
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:52 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Congrats!!Kretzy wrote:HOLY SHIT, I'm in!!!!!!!!!!!
Missed the call while in the shower this morning, but just got the email. I'm shaking.
Stats, because I'm the most notorious in asking for them:
Complete 11.11
170
3.89
Softs are on LSN.
I think my cycle's over.
- ConMan345
- Posts: 577
- Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 1:08 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Curse yooouuu, Kretzy, for taking the one spot at SLS for ~170, ~3.9 public-speaking gay-rights activist guys who think Ryan Reynolds is hot!! Cuuurrrse yooouu....Kretzy wrote:HOLY SHIT, I'm in!!!!!!!!!!!
Missed the call while in the shower this morning, but just got the email. I'm shaking.
Stats, because I'm the most notorious in asking for them:
Complete 11.11
170
3.89
Softs are on LSN.
I think my cycle's over.
*shakes limp-wristed fist*
(totally kidding, CONGRATS!

-
- Posts: 1437
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
ROFL. I hope to god they have multiple spots for our demographic.ConMan345 wrote:Curse yooouuu, Kretzy, for taking the one spot at SLS for ~170, ~3.9 public-speaking gay-rights activist guys who think Ryan Reynolds is hot!! Cuuurrrse yooouu....Kretzy wrote:HOLY SHIT, I'm in!!!!!!!!!!!
Missed the call while in the shower this morning, but just got the email. I'm shaking.
Stats, because I'm the most notorious in asking for them:
Complete 11.11
170
3.89
Softs are on LSN.
I think my cycle's over.
*shakes limp-wristed fist*
(totally kidding, CONGRATS!)
And thanks all! Tintin, to answer your question, yes, I'm pretty positive I'll be at SLS in the fall. It'd probably take Yale to sway me (in part because my family lives in CT).
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- fidesverita
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:04 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Yay congrats! You must be so relievedKretzy wrote:HOLY SHIT, I'm in!!!!!!!!!!!
Missed the call while in the shower this morning, but just got the email. I'm shaking.
Stats, because I'm the most notorious in asking for them:
Complete 11.11
170
3.89
Softs are on LSN.
I think my cycle's over.

- CardinalRules
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
In by email (and voicemail)!
Choices, choices...
Choices, choices...
- fidesverita
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:04 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
I wonder if Stanford will consider accepting those with LSAT <170s before xmas??
Hopeful thinking?
Hopeful thinking?
-
- Posts: 196
- Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 10:49 am
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Already happened.fidesverita wrote:I wonder if Stanford will consider accepting those with LSAT <170s before xmas??
Hopeful thinking?

- fidesverita
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:04 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Whoa, really? I've been glued to the LSN graph.. and all i see is 170+! Any chance that person was URM?protokurios wrote: Already happened.Not me, but someone we all know.
- gotmilk?
- Posts: 204
- Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 2:25 am
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
nope. twas crackberry. 169. but it says 170 on lsn.fidesverita wrote:Whoa, really? I've been glued to the LSN graph.. and all i see is 170+! Any chance that person was URM?protokurios wrote: Already happened.Not me, but someone we all know.
- CardinalRules
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
He was a Stanford UG like me, which could have helped. Also, he had great LORs and softs.gotmilk? wrote:nope. twas crackberry. 169. but it says 170 on lsn.fidesverita wrote:Whoa, really? I've been glued to the LSN graph.. and all i see is 170+! Any chance that person was URM?protokurios wrote: Already happened.Not me, but someone we all know.
- Dignan
- Posts: 1110
- Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 5:52 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
No. The person fudged their LSAT score slightly; in reality, they had a 169.fidesverita wrote:Whoa, really? I've been glued to the LSN graph.. and all i see is 170+! Any chance that person was URM?protokurios wrote: Already happened.Not me, but someone we all know.
The acceptance pattern I'm noticing is that those with (relatively) low LSAT #s have excellent softs, and those without excellent softs have high numbers. But that's nothing new for Stanford, which is probably the most holistic of the top schools, save for perhaps Yale and Berkeley.
I was complete in late November. It looks like, with these early calls, that Stanford has made its way through early November. I hope I at least have a chance of hearing from them before Christmas break, but it looks doubtful.
Last edited by Dignan on Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- gotmilk?
- Posts: 204
- Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 2:25 am
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
yeah managamy is probably right. stanford sure hasn't been shy at chasing lower lsats (for HYS) and good softs.managamy wrote:He was a Stanford UG like me, which could have helped. Also, he had great LORs and softs.gotmilk? wrote:nope. twas crackberry. 169. but it says 170 on lsn.fidesverita wrote:Whoa, really? I've been glued to the LSN graph.. and all i see is 170+! Any chance that person was URM?protokurios wrote: Already happened.Not me, but someone we all know.
- fidesverita
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:04 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Oh yeah... how could I forget crackberrygotmilk? wrote:nope. twas crackberry. 169. but it says 170 on lsn.fidesverita wrote:Whoa, really? I've been glued to the LSN graph.. and all i see is 170+! Any chance that person was URM?protokurios wrote: Already happened.Not me, but someone we all know.

- CardinalRules
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Dean Deal came through as a private caller on my caller ID, with no "Stanford" identification. Just a friendly heads-up!
- Dignan
- Posts: 1110
- Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 5:52 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Thanks for the heads up. Yesterday morning, I got a call from the 650 area code on my cell as I was getting dressed. I literally tripped over my pants--I had one leg in and one leg out--as I scrambled to answer the phone. It turned out to be an IT consultant who was fishing for some contracting work. I respectfully, but with what I'm sure was a disappointed tone, informed him that we didn't have any money available to hire him right now.managamy wrote:Dean Deal came through as a private caller on my caller ID, with no "Stanford" identification. Just a friendly heads-up!
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- CardinalRules
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
I got a 650 call yesterday too, but I must admit that I was much, much less polite.Dignan wrote:Thanks for the heads up. Yesterday morning, I got a call from the 650 area code on my cell as I was getting dressed. I literally tripped over my pants--I had one leg in and one leg out--as I scrambled to answer the phone. It turned out to be an IT consultant who was fishing for some contracting work. I respectfully, but with what I'm sure was a disappointed tone, informed him that we didn't have any money available to hire him right now.managamy wrote:Dean Deal came through as a private caller on my caller ID, with no "Stanford" identification. Just a friendly heads-up!

- CardinalRules
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Fixed.Dignan wrote:
The acceptance pattern I'm noticing is that those with (relatively) low LSAT #s have excellent softs, and those without excellent softs have high numbers. But that's nothing new for Stanford, which is probably the most holistic of the top schools, save for [strike]perhaps[/strike] Yale and Berkeley.
Just responded to Dean Faye's email and wished her happy holidays.

- booby87
- Posts: 240
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:11 pm
- CardinalRules
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Clearly, as I posted on the Berkeley thread! Now I know what to do when things get slow.booby87 wrote:nice, congrats on getting in! must be the new 'tarmanagamy wrote:Fixed.Dignan wrote:
The acceptance pattern I'm noticing is that those with (relatively) low LSAT #s have excellent softs, and those without excellent softs have high numbers. But that's nothing new for Stanford, which is probably the most holistic of the top schools, save for [strike]perhaps[/strike] Yale and Berkeley.
Just responded to Dean Faye's email and wished her happy holidays.

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
- ConMan345
- Posts: 577
- Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 1:08 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
I actually sat next to Michelle Wie at Flicks a few weeks ago and didn't know it till my friend mentioned it after the movie. xD
- CardinalRules
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Wait, you think that my avatar is Michelle Wie?? Think again.ConMan345 wrote:I actually sat next to Michelle Wie at Flicks a few weeks ago and didn't know it till my friend mentioned it after the movie. xD
But she is cute.
- ConMan345
- Posts: 577
- Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 1:08 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Haha, I guess I put Stanford + female golfer together = Michelle Wie, hahamanagamy wrote:Wait, you think that my avatar is Michelle Wie?? Think again.ConMan345 wrote:I actually sat next to Michelle Wie at Flicks a few weeks ago and didn't know it till my friend mentioned it after the movie. xD
But she is cute.
I honestly have no idea who that is then, I'm not a golf fan...(obviously)
- CardinalRules
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
It's the 6-foot Serbian tennis player Ana Ivanovic, doing a golf promotional. She's pretty much my feminine ideal, as I mentioned on the Boalt thread.ConMan345 wrote:Haha, I guess I put Stanford + female golfer together = Michelle Wie, hahamanagamy wrote:Wait, you think that my avatar is Michelle Wie?? Think again.ConMan345 wrote:I actually sat next to Michelle Wie at Flicks a few weeks ago and didn't know it till my friend mentioned it after the movie. xD
But she is cute.
I honestly have no idea who that is then, I'm not a golf fan...(obviously)
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login