158.The damn thing kicked my ass. I was consistently practicing around 163-165. Irony of ironies: Logic games was my best section after always being my weakest. My initial reaction is "F*ck that! I KNOW I can do a lot better." But part of me is thinking: "Why bother? Maybe my worse-than-expected performance is a sign that law is not the path I am supposed to take."
Quote from: JimmyO on June 29, 2006, 05:50:08 PM158.The damn thing kicked my ass. I was consistently practicing around 163-165. Irony of ironies: Logic games was my best section after always being my weakest. My initial reaction is "F*ck that! I KNOW I can do a lot better." But part of me is thinking: "Why bother? Maybe my worse-than-expected performance is a sign that law is not the path I am supposed to take."You can still get into a good school with that score. I got a 159 when I took it last year and had similar feelings to what you're expressing now..I cried my eyes out, in fact. Don't get too down on yourself. Lots of people underperform on the LSAT. T14 might not be a realistic option for you, but if your main priority is to be a lawyer, then a lower T1 or T2 will suffice. Many schools in that range have excellent regional reputations and might even throw some scholarship money your way (that was my experience).
Quote from: phooey on June 29, 2006, 11:26:18 PMQuote from: JimmyO on June 29, 2006, 05:50:08 PM158.The damn thing kicked my ass. I was consistently practicing around 163-165. Irony of ironies: Logic games was my best section after always being my weakest. My initial reaction is "F*ck that! I KNOW I can do a lot better." But part of me is thinking: "Why bother? Maybe my worse-than-expected performance is a sign that law is not the path I am supposed to take."You can still get into a good school with that score. I got a 159 when I took it last year and had similar feelings to what you're expressing now..I cried my eyes out, in fact. Don't get too down on yourself. Lots of people underperform on the LSAT. T14 might not be a realistic option for you, but if your main priority is to be a lawyer, then a lower T1 or T2 will suffice. Many schools in that range have excellent regional reputations and might even throw some scholarship money your way (that was my experience).Thanks so much for the kind words, but my dilemma is this: My wife and I are moving to Durham, North Carolina in a few weeks. (A job opportunity that came up for her suddenly and well AFTER I registered for the LSAT.) That basically limits me, geographically, to 4 or 5 schools. Duke (no chance), UNC Chapel Hill (would love to go there, but 158 is the 25th percentile, and my UGPA is only 3.0 - and it's VERY competitive because of the fantastic in-state tuition), Wake Forest (decent, but it would be a loong commute), North Carolina Central (apparently held in very low regard) and Campbell (apparently very strictly conservative, not my cup of tea, and also not held in very high regard). No, I'm not simply looking for a "name" school, but I would like some marketability in other parts of the country at some point.I was hoping for a score around where I was prep-testing, in the low-mid 160s to give me a strong shot at UNC, basically my best, most realistic choice. I know exactly how I f*cked up on the LSAT, by pushing it too hard and putting too much pressure on myself. I do NOT mean to make this a pity party for myself by any means, though. I don't want anyone to feel sorry for me. I just have to wonder: If the LSAT flummoxed me so bad, how will I do as a 1L? And will re-taking it REALLY be that much better? Sure, I'd be familiar with "gameday" conditions, but will the pressure be any less the second time around? I'm convinced success on the LSAT is also a mindgame, and not just smarts, and in that regard, I failed myself.