You know... that guy that you almost pity.

[Vapid Unicorn]

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.

[JusAccrescendi]

This thread is sad.

[Lindbergh]

Or, wait until you get your score before you start pitying anybody - whether they deserve it or not. You really don't want to be gathering bad karma when it comes to LSAT scores

TITCR

[Lindbergh]

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.

[Lindbergh]

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.

omg you didn't get a 180 you should have practiced more lol lol pwnd etc.

TITCR.

How can he live with himself knowing that other students did better than him?

[Lindbergh]

TITCR.

How can he live with himself knowing that other students did better than him?

On second thought,

I should be nice to him.  I plan to steal his outlines.

GIMME YOUR OUTLINES.

Mr. Piggly Wiggly:

YOU ARE A PIMP!!!

[Vapid Unicorn]

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. 

[TwinkyBean]

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.

[Lindbergh]

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. 

Most of your premises are actually questionable, involving choice of school.  I'll simply note that a 180 probably would've earned you more scholarship money, in addition to possible etrance into higher-ranked schools (which again would've earned you more scholarship money if you leveraged those admissions with Michigan.)

Thre are in fact many students who don't think these things through, so I'm not picking on you personally.  I'm just saying that pretty much everyone, except for those students who start off with a 180, would in fact benefit from prep.  If you had studied more, you'd probably be thousands of dollars further ahead of the game right now.  However, maybe someone else is picking up the tab for your schooling, and you don't care.  That's another matter altogether.

[MorningStar]

"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?