168, 171, 3.92 for HYSCCN Forum

[r6_philly]

I definitely do not know 100% the answer. But, IMO, it wouldn't make sense for this to hurt your app. Why would it hurt? I mean I guess maybe you could be YP pwned if they notice and think you might do it again?

If you had a really good reason to not attend before - and I mean you are going to write an addendum and/or "why I would attend if admitted this time", then I don't feel that it would hurt you. But if you just simply don't mention it, how could it not? If the school was not good enough for you to attend in a previous year, why would it be now? What changed? This, of course, depends on the school actually reading your application. If everything is index based maybe it will just go through. Although many apps if not all ask if you applied before regardless of outcome, I suspect they are going to look it up. It has to matter, I just don't know how.

[sven]

-

[D-ROCCA]

assuming just your highest score is considered...
realistic reach: stanford, yale
target: harvard, columbia
strong target: chicago
safety: nyu

3.9 and 171 and you think H is a target? I'd have thought it was a reach without game-changing softs. I don't think the above median GPA would offset the below median LSAT.
I'd say YHSC are reaches, having a good shot at S because of the strong GPA.

[capitalacq]

assuming just your highest score is considered...
realistic reach: stanford, yale
target: harvard, columbia
strong target: chicago
safety: nyu

3.9 and 171 and you think H is a target? I'd have thought it was a reach without game-changing softs. I don't think the above median GPA would offset the below median LSAT.
I'd say YHSC are reaches, having a good shot at S because of the strong GPA.

it's a reach and nyu is not a safety. dunno how he came up with that..

[thecilent]

assuming just your highest score is considered...
realistic reach: stanford, yale
target: harvard, columbia
strong target: chicago
safety: nyu

3.9 and 171 and you think H is a target? I'd have thought it was a reach without game-changing softs. I don't think the above median GPA would offset the below median LSAT.
I'd say YHSC are reaches, having a good shot at S because of the strong GPA.

umm This is completely misquoted. That wasn't me who said that

[thecilent]

I definitely do not know 100% the answer. But, IMO, it wouldn't make sense for this to hurt your app. Why would it hurt? I mean I guess maybe you could be YP pwned if they notice and think you might do it again?

If you had a really good reason to not attend before - and I mean you are going to write an addendum and/or "why I would attend if admitted this time", then I don't feel that it would hurt you. But if you just simply don't mention it, how could it not? If the school was not good enough for you to attend in a previous year, why would it be now? What changed? This, of course, depends on the school actually reading your application. If everything is index based maybe it will just go through. Although many apps if not all ask if you applied before regardless of outcome, I suspect they are going to look it up. It has to matter, I just don't know how.

Yeah, I'd say you should def mention somewhere (addendum or PS) why this year you will actually be attending law school or talk about the year off and what you did

[najumobi]

assuming just your highest score is considered...
realistic reach: stanford, yale
target: harvard, columbia
strong target: chicago
safety: nyu

3.9 and 171 and you think H is a target? I'd have thought it was a reach without game-changing softs. I don't think the above median GPA would offset the below median LSAT.
I'd say YHSC are reaches, having a good shot at S because of the strong GPA.

it's a reach and nyu is not a safety. dunno how he came up with that..

NYU medians: 171, 3.72....if you do a lsn filter of applicants with 171, 3.85+ , it shows that 27/28 applicants were accepted...that's 96.4% acceptance rate so i classify that as a safety.

Harvard medians: 173, 3.89...filter with 171, 3.89+ shows 16/29 accepted...55% acceptance rate so i classify it as a target.

it's pretty obvious that nyu is a safety since OP has stats at or above both medians. for harvard they are quite forgiving of lower lsaters if their gpa is above harvard's median.

[Na_Swatch]

assuming just your highest score is considered...
realistic reach: stanford, yale
target: harvard, columbia
strong target: chicago
safety: nyu

3.9 and 171 and you think H is a target? I'd have thought it was a reach without game-changing softs. I don't think the above median GPA would offset the below median LSAT.
I'd say YHSC are reaches, having a good shot at S because of the strong GPA.

it's a reach and nyu is not a safety. dunno how he came up with that..

NYU medians: 171, 3.72....if you do a lsn filter of applicants with 171, 3.85+ , it shows that 27/28 applicants were accepted...that's 96.4% acceptance rate so i classify that as a safety.

Harvard medians: 173, 3.89...filter with 171, 3.89+ shows 16/29 accepted...55% acceptance rate so i classify it as a target.

it's pretty obvious that nyu is a safety since OP has stats at or above both medians. for harvard they are quite forgiving of lower lsaters if their gpa is above harvard's median.

you're filtering LSN wrong... basically grouping all of 3.89 to 4.1 as if they were equivalent.. theyre not.

NYU is a strong target, Harvard a slight reach for these numbers.

[najumobi]

3.9 and 171 and you think H is a target? I'd have thought it was a reach without game-changing softs. I don't think the above median GPA would offset the below median LSAT.
I'd say YHSC are reaches, having a good shot at S because of the strong GPA.

it's a reach and nyu is not a safety. dunno how he came up with that..

NYU medians: 171, 3.72....if you do a lsn filter of applicants with 171, 3.85+ , it shows that 27/28 applicants were accepted...that's 96.4% acceptance rate so i classify that as a safety.

Harvard medians: 173, 3.89...filter with 171, 3.89+ shows 16/29 accepted...55% acceptance rate so i classify it as a target.

it's pretty obvious that nyu is a safety since OP has stats at or above both medians. for harvard they are quite forgiving of lower lsaters if their gpa is above harvard's median.

you're filtering LSN wrong... basically grouping all of 3.89 to 4.1 as if they were equivalent.. theyre not.

NYU is a strong target, Harvard a slight reach for these numbers.

3.89 and above is equivalent (and OP has 3.92). above median is all that matters

[booboo]

Above 75th as well...

[Na_Swatch]

it's a reach and nyu is not a safety. dunno how he came up with that..

NYU medians: 171, 3.72....if you do a lsn filter of applicants with 171, 3.85+ , it shows that 27/28 applicants were accepted...that's 96.4% acceptance rate so i classify that as a safety.

Harvard medians: 173, 3.89...filter with 171, 3.89+ shows 16/29 accepted...55% acceptance rate so i classify it as a target.

it's pretty obvious that nyu is a safety since OP has stats at or above both medians. for harvard they are quite forgiving of lower lsaters if their gpa is above harvard's median.

you're filtering LSN wrong... basically grouping all of 3.89 to 4.1 as if they were equivalent.. theyre not.

NYU is a strong target, Harvard a slight reach for these numbers.

3.89 and above is equivalent (and OP has 3.92). above median is all that matters

3.92, 171 is definitely not 50 or 55% chance at HLS this past cycle... if you search 171, ~3.9 for 09-10 you see about 2/3 of applicants as rejected or pending.

[najumobi]

3.92, 171 is definitely not 50 or 55% chance at HLS this past cycle... if you search 171, ~3.9 for 09-10 you see about 2/3 of applicants as rejected or pending.

what's your range for gpa? if your range includes below 3.89 (harvards median gpa) then that will account for those rejections....a 171, 3.82 basically has no chance of getting into harvard. for the most part gpa values at or above median are treated the same and gpa values below median are treated the same.

[sven]

-

[najumobi]

Thanks for all the optimistic assessments, but I retook a 168. That's gotta hurt me somehow at H and S, no?

well i made projections for what your chances would be if they decide to average your scores. schools are moving away from averaging though....they may say they're averaging but it looks like their actions evidence that they're just taking the highest score into consideration.

either way, for stanford your 168 won't hurt you at all. averaged with your 171 you have a 170 which is stanford's median lsat which is all you need for it to remain a realistic reach.

[Na_Swatch]

3.92, 171 is definitely not 50 or 55% chance at HLS this past cycle... if you search 171, ~3.9 for 09-10 you see about 2/3 of applicants as rejected or pending.

what's your range for gpa? if your range includes below 3.89 (harvards median gpa) then that will account for those rejections....a 171, 3.82 basically has no chance of getting into harvard. for the most part gpa values at or above median are treated the same and gpa values below median are treated the same.

I did 3.89 to 3.95 which is a lot more accurate then 3.89 to 4.1... Median GPA, submedian LSAT is just not going to be a 50/50 shot at HLS.

[najumobi]

3.92, 171 is definitely not 50 or 55% chance at HLS this past cycle... if you search 171, ~3.9 for 09-10 you see about 2/3 of applicants as rejected or pending.

what's your range for gpa? if your range includes below 3.89 (harvards median gpa) then that will account for those rejections....a 171, 3.82 basically has no chance of getting into harvard. for the most part gpa values at or above median are treated the same and gpa values below median are treated the same.

I did 3.89 to 3.95 which is a lot more accurate then 3.89 to 4.1... Median GPA, submedian LSAT is just not going to be a 50/50 shot at HLS.

i just ran your filter. 7/18 (39%) were accepted outright and 2/18 (11%) were accepted in may after being on the waitlist. that isn't reaching in the least. also these are about the same percentages i got for 171, 3.89-4.333 particularly b/c for harvard, all gpa values at or above 3.89 are looked at the same.

[Na_Swatch]

I did 3.89 to 3.95 which is a lot more accurate then 3.89 to 4.1... Median GPA, submedian LSAT is just not going to be a 50/50 shot at HLS.

i just ran your filter. 7/18 (39%) were accepted outright and 2/18 (11%) were accepted in may after being on the waitlist. that isn't reaching in the least. also these are about the same percentages i got for 171, 3.89-4.333 particularly b/c for harvard, all gpa values at or above 3.89 are looked at the same.

Yes there are 8 accepted or wl/accepted and 13 rejected or pending indefinitely (rejected but not updated).

8/21 = approximately 33~37% accepted which is accurate for those stats in my opinion.

[najumobi]

I did 3.89 to 3.95 which is a lot more accurate then 3.89 to 4.1... Median GPA, submedian LSAT is just not going to be a 50/50 shot at HLS.

i just ran your filter. 7/18 (39%) were accepted outright and 2/18 (11%) were accepted in may after being on the waitlist. that isn't reaching in the least. also these are about the same percentages i got for 171, 3.89-4.333 particularly b/c for harvard, all gpa values at or above 3.89 are looked at the same.

Yes there are 8 accepted or wl/accepted and 13 rejected or pending indefinitely (rejected but not updated).

8/21 = approximately 33~37% accepted which is accurate for those stats in my opinion.

woops sorry....ic what you're saying....i didn't take into account those that seem to be pending indefinitely.

[Na_Swatch]

I did 3.89 to 3.95 which is a lot more accurate then 3.89 to 4.1... Median GPA, submedian LSAT is just not going to be a 50/50 shot at HLS.

i just ran your filter. 7/18 (39%) were accepted outright and 2/18 (11%) were accepted in may after being on the waitlist. that isn't reaching in the least. also these are about the same percentages i got for 171, 3.89-4.333 particularly b/c for harvard, all gpa values at or above 3.89 are looked at the same.

Yes there are 8 accepted or wl/accepted and 13 rejected or pending indefinitely (rejected but not updated).

8/21 = approximately 33~37% accepted which is accurate for those stats in my opinion.

woops sorry....ic what you're saying....i didn't take into account those that seem to be pending indefinitely.

oh actually i miscounted too, i think its 8/20.. so closer to 40% shot which is definitely worth the application. Just know that you'll be on the shorter side of the coinflip (plus the 168 might lower chances a little bit too).

[D-ROCCA]

umm This is completely misquoted. That wasn't me who said that

Sorry, hope it's not a catastrophic blow to your TLS rep.

OP, you have a good shot at Stanford, Harvard is a slight reach but definitely worth applying, and NYU should accept you.

[rklafehn]

Based on what I have seen from applicants, this is my take on the situation.

Y = Out!
H = Basically out (they have enough applicants that have 171+ that did not retake; however, if OP went to HYP undergrad or has some ground-breaking softs, I will up his chances to slim)
S = I understand S as much as I understand Y (a.k.a. not at all), so maybe (just have some cool softs)
C = 40% ish chance; I would recommend EDing because even with the retake, you are below median at the school
C = 60% ish chance; Chicago acceptances seem fairly erratic (IMHO)
N = In!; a second LSAT only seems to hurt chances at the top 3 schools