Top Law Schools

There was a thread for these applicants in 2010 and I was hoping to get an active one going for this current cycle!

Previously, the requirements were:

"An LSAT between 165 and 169.
An LSAC UGPA above 3.80 (lowered from 3.85 by popular demand)."

We can make adjustments to these parameters, though!
Post your results!

Personally, I'm LSAT 169, GPA 4.0+

In at Berkeley, NYU, GULC, Duke, USC.

Applied mid-January.

Looks like I qualify with 3.9X/168.

Priority reserved/WLed at Duke, in at BC and waiting on a few others (3 t14s, BU & WUSTL).

Most apps sent in December with one sent in Jan and another in Feb.

I love how specific this thread is!

Checking in as a semi reverse splitter and rocking that 167.

In at Duke, Georgetown, UCLA, GW, and UW. Waiting on just about every other T14 school. Applied in early January (mid-Jan for Berkeley and Harvard).

fkt18 wrote:I love how specific this thread is!

Checking in as a semi reverse splitter and rocking that 167.

In at Duke, Georgetown, UCLA, GW, and UW. Waiting on just about every other T14 school. Applied in early January (mid-Jan for Berkeley and Harvard).

I wanted to be specific for a selfish reason mainly, hahaa- to see how the cycles go for other people in this position and to get some support from the stress that comes from its lack of predictability!

NicCageOnline wrote:I wanted to be specific for a selfish reason mainly, hahaa- to see how the cycles go for other people in this position and to get some support from the stress that comes from its lack of predictability!

I definitely feel you, it's great to have a support network for us semi reverse splitters! So far it seems like a good cycle to have a strong GPA and sub-170 LSAT, but it's probably too early to tell.

NicCageOnline wrote:

fkt18 wrote:I love how specific this thread is!

Checking in as a semi reverse splitter and rocking that 167.

In at Duke, Georgetown, UCLA, GW, and UW. Waiting on just about every other T14 school. Applied in early January (mid-Jan for Berkeley and Harvard).

I wanted to be specific for a selfish reason mainly, hahaa- to see how the cycles go for other people in this position and to get some support from the stress that comes from its lack of predictability!

Additionally, a thread where RETAKE isn't mentioned over and over.

Did you guys write a Why Duke? It's not a top choice of mine, and I'm guessing my shitty softs are responsible for the WL, but obviously not writing one probably didn't help.

Otunga wrote:

NicCageOnline wrote:

fkt18 wrote:I love how specific this thread is!

Checking in as a semi reverse splitter and rocking that 167.

In at Duke, Georgetown, UCLA, GW, and UW. Waiting on just about every other T14 school. Applied in early January (mid-Jan for Berkeley and Harvard).

I wanted to be specific for a selfish reason mainly, hahaa- to see how the cycles go for other people in this position and to get some support from the stress that comes from its lack of predictability!

Additionally, a thread where RETAKE isn't mentioned over and over.

Did you guys write a Why Duke? It's not a top choice of mine, and I'm guessing my shitty softs are responsible for the WL, but obviously not writing one probably didn't help.

I didn't write a separate Why Duke, but I talked about it in my PS and that might have done the trick for me.

fkt18 wrote:

Otunga wrote:

NicCageOnline wrote:

fkt18 wrote:I love how specific this thread is!

Checking in as a semi reverse splitter and rocking that 167.

In at Duke, Georgetown, UCLA, GW, and UW. Waiting on just about every other T14 school. Applied in early January (mid-Jan for Berkeley and Harvard).

I wanted to be specific for a selfish reason mainly, hahaa- to see how the cycles go for other people in this position and to get some support from the stress that comes from its lack of predictability!

Additionally, a thread where RETAKE isn't mentioned over and over.

Did you guys write a Why Duke? It's not a top choice of mine, and I'm guessing my shitty softs are responsible for the WL, but obviously not writing one probably didn't help.

I didn't write a separate Why Duke, but I talked about it in my PS and that might have done the trick for me.

We should add the retake thing to the requirements. RETAKE SHALL NOT BE MENTIONED AS AN OPTION IN THIS THREAD.

I did write a Why Duke (at the last minute).

I feel like we're in the territory of 'it depends on your goals but probably retake' on TLS.

3.8x/166. In at UCLA, USC (hoping to get some money), Cornell, Vandy, GW (90k). Held at Northwestern and GULC. Still waiting on Berkeley, Michigan+ Duke. Good luck everyone!

Love it, I'm 168-170 and 3.9x. Had an amazing cycle so far: in at duke, UT Austin, gulc, UCLA, usc, vandy, Berkeley, penn, and nyu still haven't heard a peep from Columbia, Harvard and Stanford. Good luck everyone!

And so far UCLA and Texas have offered me more than $100k! There's a place for us after all. Seriously if I hear one more person tell me to retake...

teenybean wrote:And so far UCLA and Texas have offered me more than $100k! There's a place for us after all. Seriously if I hear one more person tell me to retake...

CONGRATS!!! For Harvard, have you had a JS1 yet?

.

NicCageOnline wrote:

teenybean wrote:And so far UCLA and Texas have offered me more than $100k! There's a place for us after all. Seriously if I hear one more person tell me to retake...

CONGRATS!!! For Harvard, have you had a JS1 yet?

Just re-read your original post. Not a peep = no JS1, hahaha sorry

teenybean wrote:Love it, I'm 168-170 and 3.9x. Had an amazing cycle so far: in at duke, UT Austin, gulc, UCLA, usc, vandy, Berkeley, penn, and nyu still haven't heard a peep from Columbia, Harvard and Stanford. Good luck everyone!

That's incredible, congrats!

BerkeleyMan5 wrote:3.9x with a 168-170. Somehow I have nyu and columbia but wait lists for the rest of the t-14 I've heard from.

Congrats on those! That's amazing!

.

BerkeleyMan5 wrote:3.9x with a 168-170. Somehow I have nyu and columbia but wait lists for the rest of the t-14 I've heard from.

WOW. Sorry about the WLs but that's still amazing!

NicCageOnline wrote:

teenybean wrote:And so far UCLA and Texas have offered me more than $100k! There's a place for us after all. Seriously if I hear one more person tell me to retake...

CONGRATS!!! For Harvard, have you had a JS1 yet?

Nope, haven't heard anything from any of those three :/


Edit: just saw your response a little higher on the page. Hahah

NicCageOnline wrote:There was a thread for these applicants in 2010 and I was hoping to get an active one going for this current cycle!

Previously, the requirements were:

"An LSAT between 165 and 169.
An LSAC UGPA above 3.80 (lowered from 3.85 by popular demand)."

We can make adjustments to these parameters, though!
Post your results!

Personally, I'm LSAT 169, GPA 4.0+

In at Berkeley, NYU, GULC, Duke, USC.

Applied mid-January.

I'm sorry, but can somebody explain to me how a 169 and a 4.0 is a splitter? Or how anything in the range you suggest is? A 165 is what, still 91-92 percentile, and that's meant to be the low metric? Do some of you actually think that a 3.9 or 4.0 means that you should be scoring in the 170s? A splitter has one high metric and one low metric, not two high metrics that don't perfectly match up to your own subjective interpretation of a perfect correlation.

Really not trying to be a jerk--so I'm sorry if my tone offends anybody--I just can't really wrap my head around that line of thinking.

3.8x166. in at GW (90k) and fordham. WL at Penn. waiting on about a million others.

No worries, I think this is why we're calling ourselves "semi" reverse splitters. Since many of the top 14 (or more like T6) schools care more about LSAT and we're often not in their range (I'm below 25% at some of them), we consider our LSAT score to be our weakness. Yes these scores are great, but the top schools in the nation are greater...

167-169, 3.9x

In at Duke, Michigan, Northwestern, Georgetown, UCLA w $$$, USC, Vandy, WUSTL fullride. WL at UVA, Cornell, and Penn. Waiting on the rest of the t14. FR at Berk.

hopeful 0L wrote:

NicCageOnline wrote:There was a thread for these applicants in 2010 and I was hoping to get an active one going for this current cycle!

Previously, the requirements were:

"An LSAT between 165 and 169.
An LSAC UGPA above 3.80 (lowered from 3.85 by popular demand)."

We can make adjustments to these parameters, though!
Post your results!

Personally, I'm LSAT 169, GPA 4.0+

In at Berkeley, NYU, GULC, Duke, USC.

Applied mid-January.

I'm sorry, but can somebody explain to me how a 169 and a 4.0 is a splitter? Or how anything in the range you suggest is? A 165 is what, still 91-92 percentile, and that's meant to be the low metric? Do some of you actually think that a 3.9 or 4.0 means that you should be scoring in the 170s? A splitter has one high metric and one low metric, not two high metrics that don't perfectly match up to your own subjective interpretation of a perfect correlation.

Really not trying to be a jerk--so I'm sorry if my tone offends anybody--I just can't really wrap my head around that line of thinking.

Specifically, 169 and 4.0 is a splitter at Harvard, Yale, Columbia- above 75th GPA , below 25th LSAT. I'd say those numbers make me a semi splitter at Stanford, NYU, Chicago where a 169 is below the median LSAT.

Perhaps I should have qualified this post to be "T14 semi-splitters" because the definition of a splitter is indeed relative.