Page 1 of 1

.

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 12:26 am
by beforethelaw
.

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 12:31 am
by fliptrip
Looking pretty bad for the T-14. You're going to have to retake the LSAT. I think I know what you mean by splitter-ish, but you're not close to being a splitter.

As is, you will probably get 1/2 scholarship from the top regional school in your area. For instance, if you're from Indiana, you'd be looking at great money from IU. You'd also get 1/2 scholarship-ish money from the WUSTL/Emory/GW set.

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 1:00 am
by beforethelaw
.

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 1:06 am
by fliptrip
beforethelaw wrote:Ok thanks. I guess by splitter I meant that my gpa is close to or below 25% and my LSAT is close to or above 75% at a lot of T1 schools. If the word implies a steeper split then that, well I guess I was unaware.

I think I would be quite happy with 1/2 off at Emory, WUSTL.
No, no. Usually when people call themselves a splitter, they are a splitter for a T-14 type school, meaning they have the GPA you have, but have a 170+ LSAT. You're quite correct that splitter life can be school specific and for a school like GW you are indeed a mild splitter.

Are you sure you don't want to re-take the LSAT? If you can get to 168, you're going to start touching the lower T-14.

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 1:09 am
by beforethelaw
I might see how the cycle goes and then retake in June.

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 9:57 am
by lymenheimer
beforethelaw wrote:I might see how the cycle goes and then retake in June.
You should plan to retake in June while seeing how this cycle goes as a backup. A 169 will get you some great options and more than half at Wustl (hint: you shouldn't settle for half at Wustl). Otherwise, check mylsn for chances......

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 3:47 pm
by totesTheGoat
Based on my personal experience, you'll be competitive at T-14s for scholarship money if you get your LSAT in the low 170s.

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 2:36 am
by beforethelaw
lymenheimer wrote:
beforethelaw wrote:I might see how the cycle goes and then retake in June.
You should plan to retake in June while seeing how this cycle goes as a backup. A 169 will get you some great options and more than half at Wustl (hint: you shouldn't settle for half at Wustl). Otherwise, check mylsn for chances......
Would you say that 1/2 off at WUSTL or Emory could still result in some sort of life-crippling debt?

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 9:11 am
by lymenheimer
beforethelaw wrote:
lymenheimer wrote:
beforethelaw wrote:I might see how the cycle goes and then retake in June.
You should plan to retake in June while seeing how this cycle goes as a backup. A 169 will get you some great options and more than half at Wustl (hint: you shouldn't settle for half at Wustl). Otherwise, check mylsn for chances......
Would you say that 1/2 off at WUSTL or Emory could still result in some sort of life-crippling debt?
Nothing that extreme, but the fact that a retake will get you more than half, and the fact that i doubt youve maxed out your score cause me to say you should retake. if wustl is your goal and youd be happy with half off, it just follows (to me) that you would be ecstatic wth more than half off. (I have a similar gpa but a slightly higher lsat)

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 9:55 am
by gsy987
lymenheimer wrote:
beforethelaw wrote:I might see how the cycle goes and then retake in June.
You should plan to retake in June while seeing how this cycle goes as a backup. A 169 will get you some great options and more than half at Wustl (hint: you shouldn't settle for half at Wustl). Otherwise, check mylsn for chances......
10000% agree with this. If you look at Wustl's stats this year, they basically threw huge amounts of money at anyone above a 167, regardless of GPA. For example, I am an actually serious splittler (3.31/169), and WashU gave me 40k a year.

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 10:03 am
by beforethelaw
lymenheimer wrote:
beforethelaw wrote:
lymenheimer wrote:
beforethelaw wrote:I might see how the cycle goes and then retake in June.
You should plan to retake in June while seeing how this cycle goes as a backup. A 169 will get you some great options and more than half at Wustl (hint: you shouldn't settle for half at Wustl). Otherwise, check mylsn for chances......
Would you say that 1/2 off at WUSTL or Emory could still result in some sort of life-crippling debt?
Nothing that extreme, but the fact that a retake will get you more than half, and the fact that i doubt youve maxed out your score cause me to say you should retake. if wustl is your goal and youd be happy with half off, it just follows (to me) that you would be ecstatic wth more than half off. (I have a similar gpa but a slightly higher lsat)

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 8:57 pm
by 03152016
.

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2016 5:46 pm
by Long shot hero
I literally have the same numbers as you. How did your cycle go/going? I also plan on doing the same plan of - seeing how cycle goes and retaking in June if I don't get the schools I want. Even though the idea of retaking is just..depressing.

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2016 5:49 pm
by ArtistOfManliness
Long shot hero wrote:I literally have the same numbers as you. How did your cycle go/going? I also plan on doing the same plan of - seeing how cycle goes and retaking in June if I don't get the schools I want. Even though the idea of retaking is just..depressing.
PM the OP. Otherwise, it's unlikely he's going to see this.

Re: Splitter-ish: 3.42, 165...Decent Softs

Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2016 5:52 pm
by Long shot hero
Shit, I meant to quote him. Mb