Law School Discussion

LSAT Preparation => Studying for the LSAT => Topic started by: Tetris on June 14, 2007, 06:20:20 PM

Title: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Tetris on June 14, 2007, 06:20:20 PM
So I had about 10 minutes to burn when I got to the test center on Monday and I sat next to this guy and we made some small talk.  I asked him how much studying he did and he said...

HIM:  "I just read a book on how to setup the games.  God I hate the games.  The nice thing about the LSAT is that you don't have to study for it though except for the games." 

ME:  "So you didn't do any studying besides the game?"

HIM:  "No, did you?"

ME:  "Uhh... no....  good luck."

I didn't want to wreck his nerves just before taking the test.  Yes idiot, you are supposed to study EVERY section and practice EVERY section like a gazillion times before taking the test if you are serious about law school. 

Anyone have any similar stories of LSAT-takers that you almost pity because they will be lucky if they even get admitted into Cooley?
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Pop Up Video on June 14, 2007, 06:22:27 PM
After the proctor read the instructions, a guy in the back asked if there was a penalty for guessing and "How many sections did you say there were?"

I gathered he didn't do a whole lot of serious prep.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Tetris on June 14, 2007, 06:24:42 PM
After the proctor read the instructions, a guy in the back asked if there was a penalty for guessing and "How many sections did you say there were?"

I gathered he didn't do a whole lot of serious prep.

LOL. 

Actually now that you mention it, the guy I sat next to thought there were only 4 sections and one of them was experimental. 

Wah-wah. 
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: gowi on June 15, 2007, 06:19:12 AM
After the test, but before the writing sample, the girl next to me frantically whispered "Did you take a prep course?"  ???  Me: "Er, no."  Her: "You finished every section early." :-[  Me: Uncomfortable silence. Her: "How'd you study?"  ::)

All I could think was, "Maybe you'd be better off worrying about yourself and not me. I studied the only way I knew how, and just because I finished early it doesn't mean anything."
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Vapid Unicorn on June 15, 2007, 06:29:03 AM
Yes idiot, you are supposed to study EVERY section and practice EVERY section like a gazillion times before taking the test if you are serious about law school. 

Anyone have any similar stories of LSAT-takers that you almost pity because they will be lucky if they even get admitted into Cooley?

I think the condescension is really uneccessary.  There are plenty of people who are serious about law school, but who don't need to practice or study every section (some who don't need to practice or study at all).  For all you know this kid could have been scoring in the low 170s and was just trying to beef up his games skills to help his odds at YHS.  I know quite a few people here at Michigan, myself included, who never opened a prep book, took a prep course, or did more than a handful of practice exams. 
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: HerrHegel on June 15, 2007, 06:44:21 AM
Yes idiot, you are supposed to study EVERY section and practice EVERY section like a gazillion times before taking the test if you are serious about law school. 

Anyone have any similar stories of LSAT-takers that you almost pity because they will be lucky if they even get admitted into Cooley?

I think the condescension is really uneccessary.  There are plenty of people who are serious about law school, but who don't need to practice or study every section (some who don't need to practice or study at all).  For all you know this kid could have been scoring in the low 170s and was just trying to beef up his games skills to help his odds at YHS.  I know quite a few people here at Michigan, myself included, who never opened a prep book, took a prep course, or did more than a handful of practice exams. 

Good call. My undergraduate major was very rigorous in terms of logic and such. Combine that with the fact I am an avid reader of science and other nonfiction works, and you have a recipe for success on the LSAT. I did three practice tests; the scores were consistent (and pretty good). I browsed a prep book at B&N, read some of the stuff they wrote for LR, and just laughed at it. But then again, that's just me.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Tetris on June 15, 2007, 08:59:23 AM
Quote
I think the condescension is really uneccessary.  There are plenty of people who are serious about law school, but who don't need to practice or study every section (some who don't need to practice or study at all).  For all you know this kid could have been scoring in the low 170s and was just trying to beef up his games skills to help his odds at YHS.  I know quite a few people here at Michigan, myself included, who never opened a prep book, took a prep course, or did more than a handful of practice exams.

You don't understand the context.  First of all, he indicated that he did NO prepping.  None.  And he didn't know the number of sections there would be (he thought there were 4 sections one of which were experimental).  Also he went to a community college.  Plus we were in South Dakota... not that many geniuses in South Dakota.  There were 14 people in the class and I was scoring in the 170s so statistically speaking I should be the only one who even scored in the 160s+. 
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: vap on June 15, 2007, 09:53:35 AM
I think the condescension is really uneccessary.  There are plenty of people who are serious about law school, but who don't need to practice or study every section (some who don't need to practice or study at all).  For all you know this kid could have been scoring in the low 170s and was just trying to beef up his games skills to help his odds at YHS.  I know quite a few people here at Michigan, myself included, who never opened a prep book, took a prep course, or did more than a handful of practice exams. 

Very true.

You don't understand the context.  First of all, he indicated that he did NO prepping.  None.  And he didn't know the number of sections there would be (he thought there were 4 sections one of which were experimental).  Also he went to a community college.  Plus we were in South Dakota... not that many geniuses in South Dakota.  There were 14 people in the class and I was scoring in the 170s so statistically speaking I should be the only one who even scored in the 160s+. 

Get over yourself.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Supergirl on June 15, 2007, 10:51:55 AM

You don't understand the context.  First of all, he indicated that he did NO prepping.  None.  And he didn't know the number of sections there would be (he thought there were 4 sections one of which were experimental).  Also he went to a community college.  Plus we were in South Dakota... not that many geniuses in South Dakota.  There were 14 people in the class and I was scoring in the 170s so statistically speaking I should be the only one who even scored in the 160s+. 

 ::)
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Zam on June 15, 2007, 11:10:17 AM
Yes idiot, you are supposed to study EVERY section and practice EVERY section like a gazillion times before taking the test if you are serious about law school. 

Anyone have any similar stories of LSAT-takers that you almost pity because they will be lucky if they even get admitted into Cooley?

I think the condescension is really uneccessary.  There are plenty of people who are serious about law school, but who don't need to practice or study every section (some who don't need to practice or study at all).  For all you know this kid could have been scoring in the low 170s and was just trying to beef up his games skills to help his odds at YHS.  I know quite a few people here at Michigan, myself included, who never opened a prep book, took a prep course, or did more than a handful of practice exams. 

To be perfectly blunt, this statement is equally condescending.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Tetris on June 15, 2007, 03:00:54 PM
Whatever.  You guys are just stunned by my intelligence.  Send me a postcard from Cooley.  I'll be somewhere in Cambridge, MA 02138. 

And seriously what the hell crawled up everyone's a**.  This is an internet forum.  Who f*ing cares who says what.  Jesus.  Who called the arrogance police? 
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: TeresaPinfold on June 15, 2007, 03:11:10 PM
The ONLY reason I practiced any sections besides the Logic Games was so I could find my actual score on the test. If you really think you need special study to know how to do RC identical to a million standardized tests or trivial logic, you are the one to be pitied.

(Arrogant enough?)
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Tetris on June 15, 2007, 07:15:59 PM
The ONLY reason I practiced any sections besides the Logic Games was so I could find my actual score on the test. If you really think you need special study to know how to do RC identical to a million standardized tests or trivial logic, you are the one to be pitied.

(Arrogant enough?)

Ummm... I disagree with your premise that the LSAT RC is "identical" to "a million standardized tests."  First of all, the topic matter changes (science, art/culture, law).  Second of all, the question prompts are different. 

Also even if I did concede that your premise is true then I disagree with the assumed premise that "if a test section is similar to test sections in other standardized tests then you do not need to study for it."  That assumption is needed to make the conclusion "thus you should not have to study for the RC section" sound.  And ummm... no.  That's dumb.  Obviously training oneself to recognize elements in the structure and so forth will tend to give one an edge in answering questions quickly and effectively.  Even if all my training made it so I was able to get one more answer right on the test, that one answer will probably be 1 point on the test.  So it's worth it considering all the people applying to law schools.

There's some more flaws with your argument but instead of wasting my time pointing them out to you I will let you try to figure them out.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: TeresaPinfold on June 15, 2007, 09:24:03 PM
The additional information I offered was not intended to be complete explanations of just why exactly RC and LR are so ridiculously easy, but they do give at least a hint. I guess I'll put it simpler terms for you: RC and LG are easy for smart people, so your belief in necessary study shows you must be dumb.

Not that I necessarily believe that, but the information available certainly defines limits on your intelligence much more conclusively than it does on his. It's at least in doubt whether he may be a smart person who can already get perfect, but it's not in any doubt that you are too dull to do well without huge amounts of study, and, in fact, you seem to be so far away that it doesn't even occur to you that not all are so weak-minded.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Thistle on June 15, 2007, 09:34:09 PM
i pity your future classmates.

you sir, are a trollhole.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Hank Rearden on June 16, 2007, 12:53:52 AM

You don't understand the context.  First of all, he indicated that he did NO prepping.  None.  And he didn't know the number of sections there would be (he thought there were 4 sections one of which were experimental).  Also he went to a community college.  Plus we were in South Dakota... not that many geniuses in South Dakota.  There were 14 people in the class and I was scoring in the 170s so statistically speaking I should be the only one who even scored in the 160s+. 

 ::)

Tetris obviously doesn't know you, Shanny.   :-*
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Tetris on June 16, 2007, 08:46:48 AM
The additional information I offered was not intended to be complete explanations of just why exactly RC and LR are so ridiculously easy, but they do give at least a hint. I guess I'll put it simpler terms for you: RC and LG are easy for smart people, so your belief in necessary study shows you must be dumb.

Not that I necessarily believe that, but the information available certainly defines limits on your intelligence much more conclusively than it does on his. It's at least in doubt whether he may be a smart person who can already get perfect, but it's not in any doubt that you are too dull to do well without huge amounts of study, and, in fact, you seem to be so far away that it doesn't even occur to you that not all are so weak-minded.

Your argument SO isn't supported.  Jesus.  What about my argument that even increasing one's score 1 point is worthy enough of an endeavor to pursue (and in all likelihood the 1 point is more like 5 or 10 points with practice)?  If you believe that "intelligent" people must be able to score as high on the LG and RC sections on their first practice test as they will on their real test regardless of the amount of practice they put in then I am going to call you on your B.S.  That is B.S. and you know it. 
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Vapid Unicorn on June 16, 2007, 12:37:12 PM
If you believe that "intelligent" people must be able to score as high on the LG and RC sections on their first practice test as they will on their real test regardless of the amount of practice they put in then I am going to call you on your B.S.  That is B.S. and you know it. 

I took 5 practice tests and the LSAT once.  I've never missed a logic game question.  I've never missed more than one LR on any test.  My first-ever practice score was a 176.  Not all people need to study/practice every section.  Deal with it.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: JusAccrescendi on June 16, 2007, 12:57:09 PM
This thread is sad.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Vapid Unicorn on June 17, 2007, 06:12:48 AM
If you believe that "intelligent" people must be able to score as high on the LG and RC sections on their first practice test as they will on their real test regardless of the amount of practice they put in then I am going to call you on your B.S.  That is B.S. and you know it. 

I took 5 practice tests and the LSAT once.  I've never missed a logic game question.  I've never missed more than one LR on any test.  My first-ever practice score was a 176.  Not all people need to study/practice every section.  Deal with it.


Interesting that you don't reference RC.  And, of course, you don't want to miss that one LR if you can help it.

Nothing interesting about it.  I've missed as many four RC questions on a single exam.  Of course, there have been exams where I missed none.  The points were that, contrary to the OP's continued assertions, (1) not every person needs to study every section and (2) some students naturally begin at scores such that the extra effort of studying has no commensurate benefit.  Given my GPA (~3.0) and the fact that I won't live in NYC or Chicago, Michigan was the best school that I had a shot at, regardless of LSAT score.  The difference between the 176 I started with and the 180 I could have guaranteed by studying is truly insignificant in my case.  Other students may have factual circumstances that similarly make achieving a higher score a superflous (and supercillious) exercise. 
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: TwinkyBean on June 18, 2007, 07:46:11 PM
Yes idiot, you are supposed to study EVERY section and practice EVERY section like a gazillion times before taking the test if you are serious about law school. 

Anyone have any similar stories of LSAT-takers that you almost pity because they will be lucky if they even get admitted into Cooley?

I think the condescension is really uneccessary.  There are plenty of people who are serious about law school, but who don't need to practice or study every section (some who don't need to practice or study at all).  For all you know this kid could have been scoring in the low 170s and was just trying to beef up his games skills to help his odds at YHS.  I know quite a few people here at Michigan, myself included, who never opened a prep book, took a prep course, or did more than a handful of practice exams. 

I hate, yet am extremely jealous of, people like you. :)
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: MorningStar on June 24, 2007, 10:31:09 PM
"The difference between the 176 I started with and the 180 I could have guaranteed by studying is truly insignificant in my case"

Do you know how silly that sounds?
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: OkieAaron on June 27, 2007, 08:07:50 AM
Back to the main point...

Hell I never scored in the 170's on a practice, but I agree that there were people in my testing center that made me feel pretty good about my situation and put me at ease...Whatever that was worth.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: ctown on June 27, 2007, 08:26:35 AM
If this thread is any indication of ones level of logic, reasoning, and reading comprehension I am guessing that Tetris bombed the LSAT.

It's funny how he hasn't even been admitted anywhere yet, and he's already gunning.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: wellpreserved on June 29, 2007, 05:33:28 PM
After the proctor read the instructions, a guy in the back asked if there was a penalty for guessing and "How many sections did you say there were?"

I gathered he didn't do a whole lot of serious prep.

what's worse is this person is a friend of mine. one of my girlfriends just up and decided to take the LSAT back in Feb...after only deciding to go to ls a few weeks prior. I mean she, like, spent, like, a gazillion dollars on prep guides so she should be fine, right?

turns out buying 'em isn't the same as USING them and she got a 146.

i'm like, damn, i got a 159 on my first pretest. i told her that and she says, well, you must have taken the whole thing. i never took a complete practice test.

yeah, i can't for the life of me figure out how she got a 146. ::)

but what can you say? i had to smile and tell her i'm sure no one cares if she takes it again. the sad part is she still hasn't started studying. *smh* i've taken a vow of silence.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: AllyS on June 30, 2007, 09:55:13 AM
Back to the main point...

Hell I never scored in the 170's on a practice, but I agree that there were people in my testing center that made me feel pretty good about my situation and put me at ease...Whatever that was worth.

Yah, I felt bad about my situation until I overheard a girl in my class talking to our teacher. She was scoring in the 140s on her prep tests and it was about a week before the LSAT. She was thinking of actually writing the test, did not plan on cancelling her score and was hoping to reach the 160s! I wanted to slap her upside the head and ask her wtf she was thinking... but I also felt pretty bad for her. She was delusional enough to think she could raise her score from the 140s to the 160s in a few days ... *sigh* I hope she chose to wait until Sept to write it.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: owlsmid17 on June 30, 2007, 07:02:00 PM
No reason to rub it in. Let it go.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: ....,,., on June 30, 2007, 07:03:28 PM
I'd just like to point out that the starter of this thread is currently disappointed with his score (as he says on a different thread) which proves my point of not stockpiling bad LSAT karma :P

He's also been an all-around feminine hygiene product.  Arrogant, bragging about LSAT, getting, laid, etc.  But I still kinda felt bad.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: ....,,., on June 30, 2007, 07:05:10 PM
No reason to rub it in. Let it go.

How dare you talk to MP that way.  >:(
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: ....,,., on June 30, 2007, 07:58:42 PM
No reason to rub it in. Let it go.

Actually, he doesn't even have that bad a score. It really only sucks if you talk yourself up, brag about how well you did, and then fall short. Outside of that context, he did very respectably

No reason to rub it in. Let it go.

How dare you talk to MP that way.  >:(

Thanks Bosco ;)

To the first part, MP is right.  He's been rubbing it in everyone's faces that he's practicing in the 170s, and talking condescendingly to people in the 160s, so I say rub away.  That said, I feel bad and hope he does better if he retakes.

To the second part, I can't help defending your honor.  :P
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: ....,,., on June 30, 2007, 10:21:12 PM
He "only" got 169.  (98th percentile.)

It's surprising how hard people here are on themselves. 

Eh, it's all relative.  Someone who's upset about a 162 would laugh at tetris for whining about a 169, but a guy with a 158 would think someone would be crazy to be upset about 162.  I was pissed about my score.  If you score lower than you've been practicing, it's extremely disappointing no matter what.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Hank Rearden on June 30, 2007, 11:47:09 PM
He "only" got 169.  (98th percentile.)

It's surprising how hard people here are on themselves. 

I "only" got a 169 a year ago. I was pissed. I can understand that. I'd like to think I hadn't antagonized anyone on LSD with my practice scores however. Oh wait...I didn't know LSD existed then. Sigh, life was so much simple :P

Your life before you knew me...must have been sad. 
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: NotSmails on July 01, 2007, 12:15:50 AM
Whatever.  You guys are just stunned by my intelligence.  Send me a postcard from Cooley.  I'll be somewhere in Cambridge, MA 02138. 

And seriously what the hell crawled up everyone's a**.  This is an internet forum.  Who f*ing cares who says what.  Jesus.  Who called the arrogance police? 

Really or just bullshitting?  You have some huge shoes to fill if you want to take over my position as the awesome board HC DB.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: ....,,., on July 01, 2007, 12:48:20 AM
Whatever.  You guys are just stunned by my intelligence.  Send me a postcard from Cooley.  I'll be somewhere in Cambridge, MA 02138. 

And seriously what the hell crawled up everyone's a**.  This is an internet forum.  Who f*ing cares who says what.  Jesus.  Who called the arrogance police? 

Really or just bullshitting?  You have some huge shoes to fill if you want to take over my position as the awesome board HC DB.

Is there another law school in Cambridge?
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: NotSmails on July 01, 2007, 01:48:45 PM
I don't think so, but I misread his post and thought he was already there.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Tetris on July 03, 2007, 09:39:27 PM
Whatever.  You guys are just stunned by my intelligence.  Send me a postcard from Cooley.  I'll be somewhere in Cambridge, MA 02138. 

And seriously what the hell crawled up everyone's a**.  This is an internet forum.  Who f*ing cares who says what.  Jesus.  Who called the arrogance police? 

Really or just bullshitting?  You have some huge shoes to fill if you want to take over my position as the awesome board HC DB.

Yeah I'm just BSing.  Trying to be all tough and arrogant.

Then I got a 169 on my LSAT.

:'( ... the tears haven't stopped since.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: I AM A DREAMER on July 06, 2007, 11:00:26 PM
One girl at my test center asked if she could bubble in her answers on the scantron with a pen.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: TeresaPinfold on July 09, 2007, 03:17:35 AM
I was by no means saying that people shouldn't study (or even seriously believing my argument as a whole), but just because someone doesn't pursue an optimal strategy doesn't mean Tetris should pity them, especially since they could very likely have ended up getting higher than him.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Vapid Unicorn on July 09, 2007, 02:29:03 PM
Is it worth it to buy Anna Ivey's book? I mean will it tell me anything useful about the application process I can't learn on this board?

Yes.  And if you take her info to heart, you won't need to buy anything else.  While most of what she said can be found on this board, this board is also full of people saying the opposite, or just generally spewing rank speculation and nonsense.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: I AM A DREAMER on July 09, 2007, 05:38:03 PM
One girl at my test center asked if she could bubble in her answers on the scantron with a pen.

Bonus points if it was a pink gel pen


Scented!

Actually she had regular black pens, but instaed of using a zip lock bag for her pens and other stuff, she used a clear trash bag that she had cut down to a smaller size.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: TwinkyBean on July 09, 2007, 09:46:17 PM
One girl at my test center asked if she could bubble in her answers on the scantron with a pen.

Bonus points if it was a pink gel pen


Scented!

With sparkles...
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Dizzle on November 02, 2007, 12:58:11 PM
He "only" got 169.  (98th percentile.)

It's surprising how hard people here are on themselves. 

169 is 97th percentile.  I would know.   :'(

I would gladly accept a 169. People who complain about things like that will never ever be happy.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Tetris on November 03, 2007, 01:18:39 PM
He "only" got 169.  (98th percentile.)

It's surprising how hard people here are on themselves. 

169 is 97th percentile.  I would know.   :'(

I would gladly accept a 169. People who complain about things like that will never ever be happy.

Don't worry.  I'll be absolutely ecstatic if I get into Harvard, my dream school, with my 169.  There's "never happy" about it.  Plus, I think my comments fit it with the thread's title.   ;)

Your numbers don't look so bad, either.  Good luck this cycle!

Did you take the June test?  I feel gipped.  This was the bottom of my practice range-- I'd say only 1/5 of my tests were this low.  I blame the June scale and rotten luck.

169 IS good but not when I was expecting a floor of 171.  We definitely underperformmed here.  I hear ya brotha.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: Dizzle on November 05, 2007, 11:30:47 AM
He "only" got 169.  (98th percentile.)

It's surprising how hard people here are on themselves. 

169 is 97th percentile.  I would know.   :'(

I would gladly accept a 169. People who complain about things like that will never ever be happy.

Don't worry.  I'll be absolutely ecstatic if I get into Harvard, my dream school, with my 169.  There's "never happy" about it.  Plus, I think my comments fit it with the thread's title.   ;)

Your numbers don't look so bad, either.  Good luck this cycle!

Sorry, my gripe wasn't with you. Just the board in general. There is nothing wrong with shooting for a 170+. By all means, go for it. Just complaining about a 169 seems silly. It's the 97th percentile! That's a huge accomplishment in my eyes. It just seems nothing is good enough for some people. Be proud in what you've done. It's a kin to complaining about hooking up with Jessica Alba.

Good luck to you too. I know I need all the luck I can get.

The plus is I got accepted to a couple PhD programs so I have a back-up plan.
Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: newtocali on December 03, 2007, 08:25:34 PM
I felt pretty bad for the girl from another country that just moved here and thought that she wouldn't need to take the test...or the older man who asked me if they would be supplying writing utensils.

Title: Re: You know... that guy that you almost pity.
Post by: lp1283 on December 04, 2007, 08:57:59 AM
Someone I work for was telling me that someone she knows had a convo with her on Friday about the LSAT, which went like this:

Guy: "I'm taking the LSAT this Saturday."
Lawyer: "Oh yeah, did you study?"
Guy: "Yeah, I went over a book last week."
Guy: "What did you get on your LSAT?"
Lawyer: "I got [within 150 to 160 range] out of 180."
Guy: "It changed, the highest score you can get now is 171 so it should be easy."

He was serious and;
He was def "that guy"...