Don't worry. I am still alive and kicking. Just been extremely busy. I know that I owe you all a trip report from my Vegas jaunt in December, and it will be forthcoming here eventually. Let's just say it was a profitable trip. I made legendary craps status twice for 50/100/50 on this silly bet. First time I hit it, I need to roll 1,1. Second time I hit it all I had left was 6,6. Fitting and symmetric, so I was stoked about that little bit of yin-yang in my gambling life.
As for law school, first semester grades are in and I rocked it. 3.85 GPA. Here's how that compares to last year's class after first year classes. A in Criminal Law. A in Civil Procedure. A- in Torts. A- in Legal Writing and Research. I am very stoked about the A- in Torts. I got a B on the midterm in that class, and to pull off an A-, means I must have absolutely rocked the final! And I am very happy with the A- in Legal Writing and Research. I did very middle of the pack on our first two graded assignments in that class as well, as I adjusted to how to properly do legal writing, and I rocked the final paper, getting the second or third highest grade in the class.
As to be expected in a competitive law school, there is a flip side to that coin. For everyone who did well, there is likely someone who did not do as well. And there really is no upside to disseminating your grades to others in your class. If you did extremely well, it only breeds contempt, jealousy, and other potentially negative feelings. If you did poorly, well everyone is going to think you're an idiot. So if anyone asks, the best response to give is a well thought out neutral response, such as, "I think I got the grades that I deserved and am happy with how I did." Hopefully, that's neutral enough.
I am well into my summer job search. Given my background, I have been using a different strategy than is typical for most 1L's. After extensive consultation with the career services offices, I have been applying for the nation-wide and very competitive diversity fellowships and patent fellowships that various big law firms offer to 1L's. I think I have reasonable chance, but am for sure not banking on that. I have been contacting partners directly who are in charge of the practice groups, or are big enough fish to have some clout at their firms. I have had about a 50% response rate of some sort from all e-mails I have sent out. I have already had one phone interview, have a second phone interview tomorrow, and an on-site interview with the same firm that phone interviewed me already on Friday, and I'm in the process of lining up another interview in Los Angeles too. All with top tier big law firms in the intellectual property space. So I am super stoked about that. I'd like to have all my employment stuff wrapped up before spring break, so I can just enjoy the break and focus on my studies and finals and not worry about where I'll be working for the summer.
All right, break over. Time to read some Constitutional Law, which by the way, is by far the most interesting class I have this semester.
Sunday, January 26, 2014
Friday, December 13, 2013
Now this is not the end
It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.
-- Winston Churchill, London, 1942
Finals are almost over for my first semester. I took my first final yesterday, and then have two finals next week. One on Monday and one on Wednesday. Then I am off to Vegas on Thursday for a few days.
On my midterms, I got two A's and a B. The B was in Torts, on a multiple choice exam, which I very much dislike, but will need to get used to it, as part of the California Bar Exam, is multiple choice. On Civil Procedure which was just an essay, I did well, and on Criminal Law, I got one of the highest grades in the class. The Criminal Law midterm was a combination of an essay and multiple choice. The criminal law midterm multiple choice was extremely challenging. After the exam, I thought to myself, self, there was only 1 question out of 9, that I actually know I got right. The other 8, I had to think about and make arguments for why each answer could be correct, and then pick the best one. It turns out, I got 7 out of 9 correct on the multiple choice and when I went to look at my exam, figured out why I missed the other two. Interestingly enough, the professor posted the raw exam scores and the distribution was very telling.
The distribution approximates a mirrored chi-squared with a long tail, or another way of thinking about it is a "chi-squared" distribution with a long left handed tail as opposed to the normal long right handed tail. What does all of this mean? Well, law school is interesting in that raw scores don't really matter all that much. Mean and standard deviation aren't really relevant. What's relevant is the median and your ranking. And the distribution is telling. There are a couple of outliers at the far right, who did very well on the exam, and then you have a large middle section where lots of people are bunched together and all within a few points of each other, and then a very long tail as you get to people who clearly either a) are not getting it, b) don't belong in law school, c) don't care, or d) all of the above. So why does all of this matter? Because USD School of Law, and many other law schools have a mandatory curve for their 1L class.
Grading for all first-year courses, except Introduction to the Study of Law, can use any grade from A+ to F on a mandatory curve. The average of the grades for each course must be between 2.95 and 3.05. The grade distribution must be as follows.
So there's a couple of quick observations I have about this system, both from a personal practical point of view, and from a 10,000 foot view on institutional implications of law school and grades. From a personal practical point of view, EVERY LITTLE POINT MATTERS, and it matters a lot. Because your grade is determined, not by how well you do in the abstract, but it is determined by how well you do relative to everyone else in the class. I guess this is why I've heard the stories and I'm sure others have as well, as to why law school can be so competitive and cut-throat. There are two ways to get a better grade, get your score to go up, or make someone else's score go down.
So instead of the mean giving you a wealth of information about the class, it is now all centered on the median. And remember how the distribution looks? Yep, lots of people clustered together in a big center of mass. And remember those arbitrary lines and GPA's that need to be set? That means 1 point, yes 1 point, simply because it kicks you in into the next highest grouping could make a very significant difference in your grade. And since a lot of financial aid in law school is also tied to your ranking within your class, well you see where this is going.
Next, there is an inherent bias in the system across the different sections and professors. You'll notice the rules simply say the class average must be between 2.95 and 3.05, and what the requirements are on the top and bottom. No requirements that says something like students ranked in the top 5% will receive an A+, etc, etc. What are the implications of this? Well a professor, who really doesn't want to fail anyone, or give grades no lower than a C-, or to minimize D's and F's, can help push the average down, by giving everyone in the top 20% A-. There is nothing explicitly in the rules against this, and it would conform. Now, it may not be in spirit with the rules, but aren't lawyers by nature, trying to push the rules at every possible corner? So what is the impact of this? Well, at USD at least, there are approximately 225 total students in the 1L class, divided into 3 sections of approximately 75 each. But your class rank is not specific to your section, but to the overall class. Each section takes its substantive law classes together and will do so for the full year, consisting of 26 units. So there are some potential issues, if let's say Crim Professor I versus Crim Professor II and Crim Professor III don't get together and grade similarly. If one professor wants to give 2 or 3 A+'s, but another doesn't, well that's going to have an effect on class rank when the entire 1L class of 225 is ranked. And since there's money on the line, as well as things like admission on to law review, well yeah, stuff like this kind of matters. Now, maybe the school has this stuff all figured out, and behind the scenes they take steps to make sure that things are done properly. But then, again, maybe they don't.
What's the point of all this? In the sense of having a mandatory curve, and assigning what the average grade should be? Unless you attend an elite school like Harvard or Yale, where everyone who graduates from there is going to get a job that they want, you need a way of evaluating your students. But, there has been a problem with grade inflation among higher education institutions for decades now. Mommy and Daddy, want to make sure little Junior is getting good grades, and since they are paying so much, the school feels compelled to hand out the grade. Take a look at this article. So what, you say? Well, think about if you are USD and you need your graduates to compete with other graduates from like institutions and those institution's graduates have GPA's higher than yours? That doesn't look good. Well how do you fix it? Renorm the average, that's how. So instead of the average being a C, (which I recall it being that way when I was an undergraduate), it has been inflated to a B. And with the way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised to see it go higher, as other schools will be tempted to make their graduates look better, and what you end up having is a nuclear arms grade race, also known as an unstable positive feedback system. So in reality what does all of this mean? Once again, your grade doesn't really matter. What matters is your ranking. And employers know how law school works. And guess what employers want to know? Are you in the top 10% of your class, top 15%, top 25%, top 33%, top 50%, etc. At the more prestigious universities, the lower they are willing to dip to find talent. At the weaker schools, the higher up you need to be, in order to be even considered.
So where am I? I don't know. The official rankings for the 1L class, don't come out until after spring grades are released in May. From what I have seen so far, I should be in the top 25% without a problem after the fall term ends, even though it will be unofficial. I hope I can get at least a B+/A- in Torts. Getting that B on the midterm, really sucks, and it is going to be hard to overcome, now that I know a little better how the system actually works.
-- Winston Churchill, London, 1942
Finals are almost over for my first semester. I took my first final yesterday, and then have two finals next week. One on Monday and one on Wednesday. Then I am off to Vegas on Thursday for a few days.
On my midterms, I got two A's and a B. The B was in Torts, on a multiple choice exam, which I very much dislike, but will need to get used to it, as part of the California Bar Exam, is multiple choice. On Civil Procedure which was just an essay, I did well, and on Criminal Law, I got one of the highest grades in the class. The Criminal Law midterm was a combination of an essay and multiple choice. The criminal law midterm multiple choice was extremely challenging. After the exam, I thought to myself, self, there was only 1 question out of 9, that I actually know I got right. The other 8, I had to think about and make arguments for why each answer could be correct, and then pick the best one. It turns out, I got 7 out of 9 correct on the multiple choice and when I went to look at my exam, figured out why I missed the other two. Interestingly enough, the professor posted the raw exam scores and the distribution was very telling.
Grading for all first-year courses, except Introduction to the Study of Law, can use any grade from A+ to F on a mandatory curve. The average of the grades for each course must be between 2.95 and 3.05. The grade distribution must be as follows.
- 20-25% of all grades for the class must be above B+. Within this group of grades, the mean must not exceed 3.85.
- AND 20-25% of all grades for the class must be below B-. Within this group of grades, 8-12% of all grades for the class must be below C.
So there's a couple of quick observations I have about this system, both from a personal practical point of view, and from a 10,000 foot view on institutional implications of law school and grades. From a personal practical point of view, EVERY LITTLE POINT MATTERS, and it matters a lot. Because your grade is determined, not by how well you do in the abstract, but it is determined by how well you do relative to everyone else in the class. I guess this is why I've heard the stories and I'm sure others have as well, as to why law school can be so competitive and cut-throat. There are two ways to get a better grade, get your score to go up, or make someone else's score go down.
So instead of the mean giving you a wealth of information about the class, it is now all centered on the median. And remember how the distribution looks? Yep, lots of people clustered together in a big center of mass. And remember those arbitrary lines and GPA's that need to be set? That means 1 point, yes 1 point, simply because it kicks you in into the next highest grouping could make a very significant difference in your grade. And since a lot of financial aid in law school is also tied to your ranking within your class, well you see where this is going.
Next, there is an inherent bias in the system across the different sections and professors. You'll notice the rules simply say the class average must be between 2.95 and 3.05, and what the requirements are on the top and bottom. No requirements that says something like students ranked in the top 5% will receive an A+, etc, etc. What are the implications of this? Well a professor, who really doesn't want to fail anyone, or give grades no lower than a C-, or to minimize D's and F's, can help push the average down, by giving everyone in the top 20% A-. There is nothing explicitly in the rules against this, and it would conform. Now, it may not be in spirit with the rules, but aren't lawyers by nature, trying to push the rules at every possible corner? So what is the impact of this? Well, at USD at least, there are approximately 225 total students in the 1L class, divided into 3 sections of approximately 75 each. But your class rank is not specific to your section, but to the overall class. Each section takes its substantive law classes together and will do so for the full year, consisting of 26 units. So there are some potential issues, if let's say Crim Professor I versus Crim Professor II and Crim Professor III don't get together and grade similarly. If one professor wants to give 2 or 3 A+'s, but another doesn't, well that's going to have an effect on class rank when the entire 1L class of 225 is ranked. And since there's money on the line, as well as things like admission on to law review, well yeah, stuff like this kind of matters. Now, maybe the school has this stuff all figured out, and behind the scenes they take steps to make sure that things are done properly. But then, again, maybe they don't.
What's the point of all this? In the sense of having a mandatory curve, and assigning what the average grade should be? Unless you attend an elite school like Harvard or Yale, where everyone who graduates from there is going to get a job that they want, you need a way of evaluating your students. But, there has been a problem with grade inflation among higher education institutions for decades now. Mommy and Daddy, want to make sure little Junior is getting good grades, and since they are paying so much, the school feels compelled to hand out the grade. Take a look at this article. So what, you say? Well, think about if you are USD and you need your graduates to compete with other graduates from like institutions and those institution's graduates have GPA's higher than yours? That doesn't look good. Well how do you fix it? Renorm the average, that's how. So instead of the average being a C, (which I recall it being that way when I was an undergraduate), it has been inflated to a B. And with the way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised to see it go higher, as other schools will be tempted to make their graduates look better, and what you end up having is a nuclear arms grade race, also known as an unstable positive feedback system. So in reality what does all of this mean? Once again, your grade doesn't really matter. What matters is your ranking. And employers know how law school works. And guess what employers want to know? Are you in the top 10% of your class, top 15%, top 25%, top 33%, top 50%, etc. At the more prestigious universities, the lower they are willing to dip to find talent. At the weaker schools, the higher up you need to be, in order to be even considered.
So where am I? I don't know. The official rankings for the 1L class, don't come out until after spring grades are released in May. From what I have seen so far, I should be in the top 25% without a problem after the fall term ends, even though it will be unofficial. I hope I can get at least a B+/A- in Torts. Getting that B on the midterm, really sucks, and it is going to be hard to overcome, now that I know a little better how the system actually works.
Saturday, October 26, 2013
To the Moon!
Of course, at this time I had my designs on breaking my single session win record of 125 bets. But alas it was not to be. For the next 4 hours, I pretty much treaded water. I actually gave back like $1500 or so, before I went on a mini rush before I quit around 11:45pm to get up to my peak at $10,700. So for the first 7 hours, I could do no wrong, but the last 4 hours not much happened. Oh well.
Nights like these don't happen very often so you definitely need to appreciate it when it does. Of course on nights like this, it always helps to have more than your fair share of big pairs, and flop sets galore and have most of them hold up. And have more than your fair share of semi-bluffs get there.
I got to own Helen one hand. I opened with KJs button - 3, she 3-bet the cutoff and we went heads up to the flop of AQx, 1 of my suit, but 2 diamonds. Check/call. Turn was a blank, and I check/raised and she called. River was ten of diamonds. I checked. She hesitated and thought for a little bit, bet, and I insta raised and she called, saw the bad news and flung her cards at the dealer in frustration.
I have varied up my turn check raises against Helen quite a bit here lately. I would go into my reasons and rationale, but I'm not sure I want to get deeply into how my poker mind works in such a public forum.
Monday, September 30, 2013
That's a wrap
Well my first month of law school is in the books. I am having a grand time. I really like being back in school, being intellectually challenged and thinking critically about the assigned reading. So far, I have not felt like the work load has been anything that I can't handle. Although the next month, I may regret having said that. This week looks fairly full. And all 3 of my substantive courses have midterms. I thought that wasn't supposed to happen in law school. Oh well. I have midterms scheduled on the 8th, 22, and 28 of October.
This week is going to be fairly busy. I need to study up for my midterm next Tuesday in civil procedure and I have a 1250 word legal memo due this Friday at 9am. I have read all of the cases regarding the legal memo, but need to pencil in some time for actual drafting of the memo, which I imagine will take at least 8 to 10 hours minimum. That and the studying I need to do for my midterm will make me a very busy guy this week.
September poker wise is also in the books. I had my best month of the year dollar wise, making 11k in 49.5 hours, so I am happy about that. In other news Helen who continues to hate me, had another bad night on Friday, in no small part due to me. I got her good quite a few times, with bluffs, value bets, and suck-outs (maybe). Here's one hand I played, in which I think I sucked out on her, but it's possible I flopped the best hand.
Amos, drunk and spewing, live straddles. UTG+1 folds, I 3-bet next up the QdJd, Helen caps next up, and it folds around to Amos and he calls, and I call. Flop comes QJ5 1 diamond. Checked to Helen, who bets, Amos calls, I raise, Helen calls, Amos calls. Turn T. I bet, Helen raises, Amos folds, I call. River J. I check, Helen bets, I raise, and she insta calls, and I win. She lost probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 racks on the night and was super frustrated and on tilt most of the night. I am beginning to think that she comes pre-tilted.
October is shaping up to be a light poker playing month for me. I will probably play this Friday, but the next couple of weeks after that I have family commitments on Fridays that will likely prevent me from playing.
This week is going to be fairly busy. I need to study up for my midterm next Tuesday in civil procedure and I have a 1250 word legal memo due this Friday at 9am. I have read all of the cases regarding the legal memo, but need to pencil in some time for actual drafting of the memo, which I imagine will take at least 8 to 10 hours minimum. That and the studying I need to do for my midterm will make me a very busy guy this week.
September poker wise is also in the books. I had my best month of the year dollar wise, making 11k in 49.5 hours, so I am happy about that. In other news Helen who continues to hate me, had another bad night on Friday, in no small part due to me. I got her good quite a few times, with bluffs, value bets, and suck-outs (maybe). Here's one hand I played, in which I think I sucked out on her, but it's possible I flopped the best hand.
Amos, drunk and spewing, live straddles. UTG+1 folds, I 3-bet next up the QdJd, Helen caps next up, and it folds around to Amos and he calls, and I call. Flop comes QJ5 1 diamond. Checked to Helen, who bets, Amos calls, I raise, Helen calls, Amos calls. Turn T. I bet, Helen raises, Amos folds, I call. River J. I check, Helen bets, I raise, and she insta calls, and I win. She lost probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 racks on the night and was super frustrated and on tilt most of the night. I am beginning to think that she comes pre-tilted.
October is shaping up to be a light poker playing month for me. I will probably play this Friday, but the next couple of weeks after that I have family commitments on Fridays that will likely prevent me from playing.
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Absent
As I expected the spot that kicked out last Friday night was nowhere to be seen this Friday. Don't know if it was because he was away on business, or if he made a conscious decision to not come. We shall see. It will be a shame if he stays away for a while, due to the poor treatment he received from the casino management.
Monday, September 9, 2013
Sunday, September 8, 2013
Really?
You gotta love Oceans-11 sometimes. They make some of the stupidest decisions I have ever seen.
Friday night 40 game going strong and with all appearances that it will go well into the early AM hours of Saturday, when the inexplicable happens. The spot is kicked out of the casino!
For what? Apparently shooting off his mouth to one of the floor men in the California Games part of the casino while taking a break from playing poker. Now this guy is one of the biggest whales in the casino and in our 40 game. He's super nice, gives great action, tips EVERYONE well, and is easily one of the biggest losers in the game. He also likes to play the other table games, and I know he's a big whale in Las Vegas as well. Even at Oceans-11, he's been known to play Ultimate Texas Holdem, and min-bet the ante and blind bet ($10) and max-bet the trips bet ($500).
Now all of this is hearsay, so I can't vouch for any of this personally. So while on a break from our game around 2:00 am in the morning, he goes to the restroom and stops by the pit games and wants to play Ultimate Texas Holdem. There is currently not a table open spreading that game. He talks to the floor guy, and apparently he is reticent to opening a table for him to play. Our gentleman says something to the effect, "get off your fat ass and get a dealer over here so I can play."
For this, the floor man has him kicked out for the night. He is escorted back to our table around 2:15 am, security in tow, and is forced to rack up, cash out and leave. The rest of the table is dumbfounded and is in awe of what a bad decision was rendered. And of course, as soon as he is out of the building, the game insta breaks. No duh, the entire reason for that game existing, walked right out the door, with like 5 or 6 racks, that would have inevitably ended up in the other players' stacks. At least that's what happened last week.
Sometimes I just don't get it. In Vegas, I have seen people get away with far more egregious behavior and get nothing more than a warning to the effect of please try and control yourself, and as expected, the bigger and more you bet, the larger the tolerance for obnoxious behavior, justified or not. I'll leave it to you to decide for yourself what you think the appropriate policy on the part of the casino should be in this regard, although I tend to believe in the end, that money talks.
Overall, I did ok this week. I was running really well, getting up 5 racks, but by the time the game had broken, I was only winning 2 racks, so that was a bit of a downer. The game was off the charts good too, with the maniac who got kicked out, raising and capping most hands, and two others on his left, not knowing how to adjust properly 3-betting super light and doing all other sorts of stupid things. We had more than one 8-way capped pre flop pots. It was a sight to behold, if you could happen to win one of those behemoth pots, which I unfortunately, I didn't seem to win my fair share of those. Oh well, as long as he shows up this Friday, it'll make for another good Friday game.
Friday night 40 game going strong and with all appearances that it will go well into the early AM hours of Saturday, when the inexplicable happens. The spot is kicked out of the casino!
For what? Apparently shooting off his mouth to one of the floor men in the California Games part of the casino while taking a break from playing poker. Now this guy is one of the biggest whales in the casino and in our 40 game. He's super nice, gives great action, tips EVERYONE well, and is easily one of the biggest losers in the game. He also likes to play the other table games, and I know he's a big whale in Las Vegas as well. Even at Oceans-11, he's been known to play Ultimate Texas Holdem, and min-bet the ante and blind bet ($10) and max-bet the trips bet ($500).
Now all of this is hearsay, so I can't vouch for any of this personally. So while on a break from our game around 2:00 am in the morning, he goes to the restroom and stops by the pit games and wants to play Ultimate Texas Holdem. There is currently not a table open spreading that game. He talks to the floor guy, and apparently he is reticent to opening a table for him to play. Our gentleman says something to the effect, "get off your fat ass and get a dealer over here so I can play."
For this, the floor man has him kicked out for the night. He is escorted back to our table around 2:15 am, security in tow, and is forced to rack up, cash out and leave. The rest of the table is dumbfounded and is in awe of what a bad decision was rendered. And of course, as soon as he is out of the building, the game insta breaks. No duh, the entire reason for that game existing, walked right out the door, with like 5 or 6 racks, that would have inevitably ended up in the other players' stacks. At least that's what happened last week.
Sometimes I just don't get it. In Vegas, I have seen people get away with far more egregious behavior and get nothing more than a warning to the effect of please try and control yourself, and as expected, the bigger and more you bet, the larger the tolerance for obnoxious behavior, justified or not. I'll leave it to you to decide for yourself what you think the appropriate policy on the part of the casino should be in this regard, although I tend to believe in the end, that money talks.
Overall, I did ok this week. I was running really well, getting up 5 racks, but by the time the game had broken, I was only winning 2 racks, so that was a bit of a downer. The game was off the charts good too, with the maniac who got kicked out, raising and capping most hands, and two others on his left, not knowing how to adjust properly 3-betting super light and doing all other sorts of stupid things. We had more than one 8-way capped pre flop pots. It was a sight to behold, if you could happen to win one of those behemoth pots, which I unfortunately, I didn't seem to win my fair share of those. Oh well, as long as he shows up this Friday, it'll make for another good Friday game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
