3.93/166 Reverse Splitter Forum

[thand42292]

Hey guys! So law school predictor is super optimistic for me an LSN is not...at all.

I have a 3.93 UGPA and just got a 166 LSAT. I have TA'd, I'm doing research for a professor, I'm graduating in 3 years and I have 5 years of part-time work experience. I'm not URM and I haven't served in the military. I know those softs aren't awesome but, what do you guys think? Am I in for T14?

http://www.lawschoolpredictor.com/wp-co ... ograms.htm so optimistic
http://www.hourumd.com/?lsat=166&gpa=3. ... o&range=no mediocre
http://mylsn.info/dispresults.php meh

Which forecast looks the most reliable?

[thand42292]

Bump! I was actually really looking for Stanford, Columbia, Berkeley, UVa, Duke and Cornell stats particularly.

[thand42292]

Bueller?

[rebexness]

[wert3813]

.

[thand42292]

OK, if you were me and couldn't retake where would you ED?

[Rahviveh]

Bump! I was actually really looking for Stanford, Columbia, Berkeley, UVa, Duke and Cornell stats particularly.

Stanford - Out
Columbia - Out
Berkeley - Possible, who knows with them
UVa - WL
Duke - WL
Cornell - In

[thand42292]

Bump! I was actually really looking for Stanford, Columbia, Berkeley, UVa, Duke and Cornell stats particularly.

Stanford - Out
Columbia - Out
Berkeley - Possible, who knows with them
UVa - WL
Duke - WL
Cornell - In

By WL do you think I could get in with ED?

[Rahviveh]

Bump! I was actually really looking for Stanford, Columbia, Berkeley, UVa, Duke and Cornell stats particularly.

Stanford - Out
Columbia - Out
Berkeley - Possible, who knows with them
UVa - WL
Duke - WL
Cornell - In

By WL do you think I could get in with ED?

Yes

[TheGreatWait]

I know this is a late response but I don't think you should let anyone definitively tell you you're not getting in somewhere based on just your GPA, LSAT, and a few details about your experiences.

I am currently a Stanford 1L with stats close to yours (3.95 GPA, 166 LSAT, non URM). When I was applying, I found it really depressing that people would feel comfortable telling a stranger that they were not going to get in somewhere just based on their numbers alone. Remember that while sometimes helpful, the statistical analysis available on here is just educated guesswork and not a complete picture of the factors considered during the admissions process. Admissions offices (especially the one at Stanford) care much more about the people they are selecting than the numbers that represent them. Certainly there are people here with astronomically high LSAT scores, but I also know I am not alone with my 166 in our class.

I know it can be helpful to use the data on here to temper your expectations, but don't hold back on applying somewhere just because someone you have never met says you won't get in. You could be just the person that a school is looking for to complete a well-balanced class, and nobody on here can tell you ahead of time if that is the case.

Best of luck in your applications-- I am sure that whichever school you attend will be lucky to have you.

[wert3813]

.

[Tiago Splitter]

When I was applying, I found it really depressing that people would feel comfortable telling a stranger that they were not going to get in somewhere just based on their numbers alone. Remember that while sometimes helpful, the statistical analysis available on here is just educated guesswork and not a complete picture of the factors considered during the admissions process.

Really depressing? Get over yourself. Having a GPA above the median and a respectable LSAT score gives you some chance at Stanford. Anyone looking at LSN can see that. It's still very unlikely, and a retake provides tons of upside without any downside.

[JustJack2012]

When I was applying, I found it really depressing that people would feel comfortable telling a stranger that they were not going to get in somewhere just based on their numbers alone. Remember that while sometimes helpful, the statistical analysis available on here is just educated guesswork and not a complete picture of the factors considered during the admissions process.

Really depressing? Get over yourself. Having a GPA above the median and a respectable LSAT score gives you some chance at Stanford. Anyone looking at LSN can see that. It's still very unlikely, and a retake provides tons of upside without any downside.

Don't be rude, man. GreatWait was just trying to make the point that people shouldn't be completely discouraged from applying somewhere just because someone on the internet tells them they won't get in. LSN is an incomplete data set, and numbers are only part of the picture. LSN can give people a sense of their odds, which is useful, but numbers aren't completely dispositive in the admissions process.

Telling people they have absolutely no shot somewhere when you don't know their full background/are not an admissions officer at the law school they want to attend is a cheap and dishonest way of bringing them down. I would hate to be responsible for discouraging someone so much that they didn't apply to a school where they had a legitimate chance.

[FloridaCoastalorbust]

ED n stuff n things

[catholicgirl]

As someone with similar numbers

Retake, please retake. I wish I had retaken so often. You can get so much more scholarship money at a decent school if you get even a 170.

[FloridaCoastalorbust]

i had precisely the same numbers, applied and accepted, retook lsat, got $$$ from schools where i originally had no money. the retake effectively gave me a free porsche. or downpayment on mortgage. or...well, you get the idea.

[Rahviveh]

When I was applying, I found it really depressing that people would feel comfortable telling a stranger that they were not going to get in somewhere just based on their numbers alone. Remember that while sometimes helpful, the statistical analysis available on here is just educated guesswork and not a complete picture of the factors considered during the admissions process.

Really depressing? Get over yourself. Having a GPA above the median and a respectable LSAT score gives you some chance at Stanford. Anyone looking at LSN can see that. It's still very unlikely, and a retake provides tons of upside without any downside.

Don't be rude, man. GreatWait was just trying to make the point that people shouldn't be completely discouraged from applying somewhere just because someone on the internet tells them they won't get in. LSN is an incomplete data set, and numbers are only part of the picture. LSN can give people a sense of their odds, which is useful, but numbers aren't completely dispositive in the admissions process.

Telling people they have absolutely no shot somewhere when you don't know their full background/are not an admissions officer at the law school they want to attend is a cheap and dishonest way of bringing them down. I would hate to be responsible for discouraging someone so much that they didn't apply to a school where they had a legitimate chance.

How is it bringing someone down? The OP asked for a forecast. Non-URM's reverse splitters do have a chance, buts its extremely unlikely. OP can always judge for himself based off LSN if its worth sending an application or not. If I were in his position I'd apply everywhere but Yale. App fees dont cost much in the grand scheme of things.

[Doorkeeper]

This is what you're looking at:
http://myLSN.info/vblf9r

Not bad if you just want T14 at sticker, but if you can bump your LSAT up to a 170+, you're T6 secure with money.

[gguuueessttt]

Bump! I was actually really looking for Stanford, Columbia, Berkeley, UVa, Duke and Cornell stats particularly.

Stanford - Out
Columbia - Out
Berkeley - Possible, who knows with them
UVa - WL
Duke - WL
Cornell - In

By WL do you think I could get in with ED?

You should definitely re-take. I agree that there's no way you're going to get in to Stanford and probably not anywhere in the top 5. But if you re-take and get a 170+ then you have a good shot at getting into the top 5, so I think it's worth re-taking. If you re-take in February, then the places that wait listed you will get your new score and will probably take you off the wait list. But at this point you are probably going to get flat-out rejected at Stanford and Columbia. (You might not, but it is likely that you will). So if those are your dream schools, then if I were you I would probably wait until June, study my ass off, re-take the test, get a 172+, and then ED to Stanford for the next cycle.

Your entire career will be better if you wait a year and go to Stanford than if you go to Cornell (or UVA or Duke) this year. I personally would not throw out a 3.93 GPA to go to anywhere out of the top 5.

[indo]

I know this is a late response but I don't think you should let anyone definitively tell you you're not getting in somewhere based on just your GPA, LSAT, and a few details about your experiences.

I am currently a Stanford 1L with stats close to yours (3.95 GPA, 166 LSAT, non URM). When I was applying, I found it really depressing that people would feel comfortable telling a stranger that they were not going to get in somewhere just based on their numbers alone. Remember that while sometimes helpful, the statistical analysis available on here is just educated guesswork and not a complete picture of the factors considered during the admissions process. Admissions offices (especially the one at Stanford) care much more about the people they are selecting than the numbers that represent them. Certainly there are people here with astronomically high LSAT scores, but I also know I am not alone with my 166 in our class.

I know it can be helpful to use the data on here to temper your expectations, but don't hold back on applying somewhere just because someone you have never met says you won't get in. You could be just the person that a school is looking for to complete a well-balanced class, and nobody on here can tell you ahead of time if that is the case.

Best of luck in your applications-- I am sure that whichever school you attend will be lucky to have you.

what is your secret for getting to stanford ? My GPA is 4.12 and LSAT 158 and 167

[RSterling]

FWIW, I got in to UVA ED with a 4.0/166 in the 2010-2011 cycle. I retook and got a 169, and I'm currently 4/4 on T14s this cycle, something that would not have been possible two years ago.

In response to your question though: I'd say in via ED at either UVA or Duke. Almost certainly out at stanford, but worth an app as a super-reach. Berkeley might also show you some love. Don't expect $$ anywhere though. A retake would definitely help those prospects.

[PickledPanda]

FWIW, I got in to UVA ED with a 4.0/166 in the 2010-2011 cycle. I retook and got a 169, and I'm currently 4/4 on T14s this cycle, something that would not have been possible two years ago.

In response to your question though: I'd say in via ED at either UVA or Duke. Almost certainly out at stanford, but worth an app as a super-reach. Berkeley might also show you some love. Don't expect $$ anywhere though. A retake would definitely help those prospects.

How did you ED to UVA in 2010 then retake and an apply to new schools?