Admissions Lore- WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED?!?!

[140am]

I went to a forum at one of the LSs I was applying to today and the head admissions officer echoed an "industry secret" that my law school advisor told me a year ago.  Apparently, to gauge your LSAT you take the verbal portion of your SAT substract the last number and add a "1" to the front.  Example (my SAT): 740, so my LSAT should be 174...  When my advisor told me this she said it would predict your range (in my case 170-174, so with test anixety she expected me to be between 165 and 172) and today the admissions officer said it is indicative of the score you are capable of with the "proper" amount of study (review and at last 10-20 practice tests). 

I studied 5 hours a day for a month before the LSAT and did the Powerscore Logic Games Bible (this was before the LR Bible came out), as well as about 15 practice tests.  The second time I took it I studied the LR Bible, reread the LG Bible, and did more practice tests.  Both times I got a 152 (lowest practice test was 168).

So what the hell happened?!  My advisor has worked in her field for decades at top universities, so I doubt she just made this up and hearing the same thing from a head admissions officer who has worked at the school for twenty years makes me wonder what I did wrong.  Does anyone else have experience with this formula not holding up?  If it is true, why am I so incredibly bad at the LSAT?!

I have an anology that can explain this.  You obviously have talent, but ...

http://usesoap.com/images/events/superbowl39/donovan_mcnabb.jpg

Ah, an image from what has widely gone down in history as a choke.  But I've always looked at that game as a good performance -- the Pats were the superior team that year and beat us, and not by very many points.  I don't see it as a choke, but what can I say...I like McNabb.  Still, funny post

[magnumalv]

redacted

[as436]

...Does everyone at your school take the LSAT...?

hardly, but what does that change?  Assuming that people at my school only take the LSAT if they feel like they have a chance of gaining admission to a good law school (the assumption being of course that kids graduating from an ivy league college would choose another career path rather than attend a tier 4 law school) than the avg LSAT should be higher than the average SAT..

so how do you cover the gap between 680-700 verbal (supposedly 168-170 by your logic) and 161 average at my school?

[pistolpete23]

"industry secret" you say?

more like insider garbage. almost anyone can score a 500 on the SAT Verbal but getting a 150 on the LSAT is really not that easy. the variance between a 150 and 155 simply does not parallel the gap between a 500 and 550 SAT verbal. you have to take into account that the field of applicants who are taking the LSAT are a hell of a lot smarter and more ambitious than the undergrad norm.

pistol pete

[as436]

"industry secret" you say?

more like insider garbage. almost anyone can score a 500 on the SAT Verbal but getting a 150 on the LSAT is really not that easy. the variance between a 150 and 155 simply does not parallel the gap between a 500 and 550 SAT verbal. you have to take into account that the field of applicants who are taking the LSAT are a hell of a lot smarter and more ambitious than the undergrad norm.

pistol pete

that too... i think the whole comparison is ridiculous

[misery]

I just dug out my old sat score - on the converstion table, 700 is a 95% score, not the 98% score that 170 is on the lsat.  There is no way that everyone who scores in the top 95% of the SAT has a shot at scoring in the top 98% of the LSAT, which is far more difficult in addition to being relatively different.

[thelynifer]

This is clearly crap. Proper preparations makes or breaks your score. My first SAT score: 980...2nd LSAT: 162. I didn't get smarter I just actually started caring.

[pistolpete23]

well put.

[AH]

This is clearly crap. Proper preparations makes or breaks your score. My first SAT score: 980...2nd LSAT: 162. I didn't get smarter I just actually started caring.

True, but proper preparation still isn' 100%, I studied my ass off and look what good it did for me! 

[thelynifer]

Yeah, I see what you're saying. Maybe it really isn't 100% prep. but more like 70% prep and 30% mental. The first time I took them I was nervous as all hell. I knew how much was riding on my scores and a blew it (well and least in my world). Realizing it was all in my head, I took a month off from hardcore studying and just did section work before the Dec test. When I got to the test center I just put myself in a frame of mind that was like "whatever I don't care, I'm gonna kick butt and nothing is gonna stop me" and it worked. You just have to learn to not take it so seriously. That can also mess up your score. Maybe that's what happened to you. I wouldn't rule out taking it again, but the next time don't psych yourself out so much.