LSN vs. LSP Forum

[Anaconda]

Testing different LSAT/GPA combos, many on Law School Predictor states "strong consider", whereas, on this website (http://www.hourumd.com/)that they state it is based off Law School Numbers, only 5% of people with the similar numbers were accepted (out of 50+ applicants). Anyone know which one is more accurate?

[Barbie]

Testing different LSAT/GPA combos, many on Law School Predictor states "strong consider", whereas, on this website (http://www.hourumd.com/)that they state it is based off Law School Numbers, only 5% of people with the similar numbers were accepted (out of 50+ applicants). Anyone know which one is more accurate?

I'm not sure but I've become more under the impression that LSN is more accurate. Hourumd actually shows people who attended in recent years, not the last cycle, so what I've found to be the best is the actual LSN website, and then looking at the graphs for the most recent cycle.

[Anaconda]

Testing different LSAT/GPA combos, many on Law School Predictor states "strong consider", whereas, on this website (http://www.hourumd.com/)that they state it is based off Law School Numbers, only 5% of people with the similar numbers were accepted (out of 50+ applicants). Anyone know which one is more accurate?

I'm not sure but I've become more under the impression that LSN is more accurate. Hourumd actually shows people who attended in recent years, not the last cycle, so what I've found to be the best is the actual LSN website, and then looking at the graphs for the most recent cycle.

LSP is way off and WAY too optimistic. This is actually really discouraging because it seems like the only people that get in with slightly below the median numbers are URM's.

[Na_Swatch]

lol you guys aren't talking about the same thing... here's how it works:

Optimism:
LSP (lawschoolpredictor.com) is LESS OPTIMISTIC than Hourumd

LSN (lawschoolnumbers.com) doesn't really have an "optimism" factor as your comparing case to case.

Accuracy:
LSN is most accurate, followed by LSP, with Hourumd Last

Hourumd is based off of older LSN numbers, and as medians have risen each cycle, it gives consistently more optimistic predictions. Best way to get accurate chances is to scour the latest cycle for people who match you on LSN.

[Anaconda]

How is LSP less optimistic than Hourmd? In all my scenarios that I tested, LSP gave me consider/strong consider, and Hourumd gave me dreadful numbers of students getting rejected in droves w/ similar numbers.

(Example, compare a 3.8, 164). On Hourmd (including WL) only 31% with similar stats got accepted, on LSP it's a "strong consider."

lol you guys aren't talking about the same thing... here's how it works:

Optimism:
LSP (lawschoolpredictor.com) is LESS OPTIMISTIC than Hourumd

LSN (lawschoolnumbers.com) doesn't really have an "optimism" factor as your comparing case to case.

Accuracy:
LSN is most accurate, followed by LSP, with Hourumd Last

Hourumd is based off of older LSN numbers, and as medians have risen each cycle, it gives consistently more optimistic predictions. Best way to get accurate chances is to scour the latest cycle for people who match you on LSN.

[capitalacq]

lawschoolnumbers.com is the best guide to use.. LSP is a good starting point to see the range of schools where you fall, but shouldn't be taken too seriously. Although LSN is a self-selectied group, it still provides you with the most accurate information

[romothesavior]

lawschoolnumbers.com is the best guide to use.. LSP is a good starting point to see the range of schools where you fall, but shouldn't be taken too seriously. Although LSN is a self-selectied group, it still provides you with the most accurate information

This.

LSN >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LSP

[Anaconda]

For Georgetown, LSN also has basically no non-URM 168/169 LSAT's getting in, even though the median LSAT score is a 169 and the 75th percentile is a 171. Only 170+ non-URM's seem to get in according to LSN, and it's the highest surveyed law school on the site.

If the LSN are a strong representative sample, then colleges are definitely making their class stats seem a bit weaker than they actually are. Or is it a possibility that LSN is more biased towards "overachievers"? It seems like I wouldn't able to get into any T-20's with a 165/166 and a 3.85.

[romothesavior]

LSN also has basically no non-URM 168/169 LSAT's getting in, even though the median LSAT score is a 169 and the 75th percentile is a 171. Only 170+ non-URM's seem to get in according to LSN.

What school are you talking about?

[Anaconda]

LSN also has basically no non-URM 168/169 LSAT's getting in, even though the median LSAT score is a 169 and the 75th percentile is a 171. Only 170+ non-URM's seem to get in according to LSN.

What school are you talking about?

Forgot to name the school haha. It's Georgetown.

[Na_Swatch]

How is LSP less optimistic than Hourmd? In all my scenarios that I tested, LSP gave me consider/strong consider, and Hourumd gave me dreadful numbers of students getting rejected in droves w/ similar numbers.

(Example, compare a 3.8, 164). On Hourmd (including WL) only 31% with similar stats got accepted, on LSP it's a "strong consider."

lol you guys aren't talking about the same thing... here's how it works:

Optimism:
LSP (lawschoolpredictor.com) is LESS OPTIMISTIC than Hourumd

LSN (lawschoolnumbers.com) doesn't really have an "optimism" factor as your comparing case to case.

Accuracy:
LSN is most accurate, followed by LSP, with Hourumd Last

Hourumd is based off of older LSN numbers, and as medians have risen each cycle, it gives consistently more optimistic predictions. Best way to get accurate chances is to scour the latest cycle for people who match you on LSN.

Are you sure you ran it right? I just compared 3.8, 164 and Hourumd is still slightly more optimistic than LSP. And also if you change your results you see very different things.. for example plugging in

3.8, 173

Hourumd: 88% at Columbia University
LSP: Consider at Columbia University

I find the consider at LSP to be way less optimistic than the 88% given by Hourumd & more accurate... last cycle i'd say 3.8, 173 is no better than a 50/50 shot at Columbia.

[Anaconda]

Well then, this might all depend on the specific school, which makes the more realistic predictor an absolute crap-shoot. Those stats for Notre Dame looked good on LSP, but terrible on Hourmd (31%) - including the Waitlists.

How is LSP less optimistic than Hourmd? In all my scenarios that I tested, LSP gave me consider/strong consider, and Hourumd gave me dreadful numbers of students getting rejected in droves w/ similar numbers.

(Example, compare a 3.8, 164). On Hourmd (including WL) only 31% with similar stats got accepted, on LSP it's a "strong consider."

lol you guys aren't talking about the same thing... here's how it works:

Optimism:
LSP (lawschoolpredictor.com) is LESS OPTIMISTIC than Hourumd

LSN (lawschoolnumbers.com) doesn't really have an "optimism" factor as your comparing case to case.

Accuracy:
LSN is most accurate, followed by LSP, with Hourumd Last

Hourumd is based off of older LSN numbers, and as medians have risen each cycle, it gives consistently more optimistic predictions. Best way to get accurate chances is to scour the latest cycle for people who match you on LSN.

Are you sure you ran it right? I just compared 3.8, 164 and Hourumd is still slightly more optimistic than LSP. And also if you change your results you see very different things.. for example plugging in

3.8, 173

Hourumd: 88% at Columbia University
LSP: Consider at Columbia University

I find the consider at LSP to be way less optimistic than the 88% given by Hourumd & more accurate... last cycle i'd say 3.8, 173 is no better than a 50/50 shot at Columbia.

[romothesavior]

LSN also has basically no non-URM 168/169 LSAT's getting in, even though the median LSAT score is a 169 and the 75th percentile is a 171. Only 170+ non-URM's seem to get in according to LSN.

What school are you talking about?

Forgot to name the school haha. It's Georgetown.

Some of those yellow dots will or already have been pulled in off the waitlist. It seems like later in the cycle, people are less likely to update their LSN profiles, so it could be that some high GPA 168s and 169s have gotten in.

Also, GT has a PT program with a lower LSAT median. Not sure how that affects LSN, but it is something to remember. GT's full time program median LSAT is 170, which means that it would be expected for most sub-170s to get rejected unless they have great GPAs. This is exactly what we see: 169s get in if they have 3.85s or higher, but most 168s and 169s get WL'd. That is pretty much the norm at any school.

[Anaconda]

Gahh, this is really depressing. A 170 means ~90%+ correct LSAT questions, and that's just the median at G'Town. I guess one pessimistic way of looking at it.

It's kind of ridiculous to think that just a couple LSAT questions could mean the difference between Stanford and Georgetown (not to knock GT), especially when you get to the point of getting a raw score of 90+.

LSN also has basically no non-URM 168/169 LSAT's getting in, even though the median LSAT score is a 169 and the 75th percentile is a 171. Only 170+ non-URM's seem to get in according to LSN.

What school are you talking about?

Forgot to name the school haha. It's Georgetown.

Some of those yellow dots will or already have been pulled in off the waitlist.

Also, GT's has a PT program with a lower LSAT median. Not sure how that affects LSN, but it is something to remember. GT's full time program median LSAT is 170, which means that it would be expected for most sub-170s to get rejected unless they have great GPAs. This is exactly what we see: 169s get in if they have 3.85s or higher, but most 168s and 169s get WL'd. That is pretty much the norm at any school.

[snapdragon]

I've found too that LSN gives me a better idea of what really happens vs. LSP - especially since I'm a splitter (3.1/167). For example, LSP gives me no shot at Emory or ND and a weak consider at WUSTL, but puts me at consider at BC and UNC. Looking at LSN, I can see that pretty much everyone with my numbers (or close to) was accepted at WUSTL and Emory with a few accepted at ND - my no shot or weak consider schools. However, my stats at UNC and BC seem to equal an auto-deny or, best case, WL. So in reality, I probably have a better shot at Emory or WUSTL than I do at BC or UNC, even though LSP would have had me think otherwise.

I can't say what's going to happen yet, obviously, but I agree so far with the other posters in this thread - LSP gave me a good place to start, LSN illustrated the reality of some of those numbers (for better and for worse). Finding my "numbers twins" (Hi twins!) has really helped, and some of them have been nice enough to discuss with me how their cycles went last time around. That's given me the best advice so far and really helped me shape my school list.

[romothesavior]

I've found too that LSN gives me a better idea of what really happens vs. LSP - especially since I'm a splitter (3.1/167). For example, LSP gives me no shot at Emory or ND and a weak consider at WUSTL, but puts me at consider at BC and UNC. Looking at LSN, I can see that pretty much everyone with my numbers (or close to) was accepted at WUSTL and Emory with a few accepted at ND - my no shot or weak consider schools. However, my stats at UNC and BC seem to equal an auto-deny or, best case, WL. So in reality, I probably have a better shot at Emory or WUSTL than I do at BC or UNC, even though LSP would have had me think otherwise.

I can't say what's going to happen yet, obviously, but I agree so far with the other posters in this thread - LSP gave me a good place to start, LSN illustrated the reality of some of those numbers (for better and for worse). Finding my "numbers twins" (Hi twins!) has really helped, and some of them have been nice enough to discuss with me how their cycles went last time around. That's given me the best advice so far and really helped me shape my school list.

LSP is atrocious for splitters. LSN is a much better tool for splitters.

Actually LSN is a much better tool for everyone.