The LSAT at least purports to assess a bunch of intellectual abilities that are--to a large extent--innate: reading comprehension, logical reasoning, ability to parse and accurately interpret information under time constraints, etc.
Law school involving taking in a large amount of information within a limited time from and then being assessed through speeded exams. Legal practice involves having to comb through potentially nearly endless amounts of information, discern what is relevant and apply this in a way that is accurate, relatively complete, and persuasive.
Is it not obvious to you why one might hypothesize there is a difference in abilities (that are relevant to the study and practice of law) between someone who can score a 163 in a blind diagnostic LSAT, and someone who has to study for 35 hours a week for 5 months to achieve the same score (even if ultimately their results are identical)?
Again, I don't say this to knock you. Once you get admitted, your LSAT score itself is irrelevant. I say that I'm curious about this, as a hypothesis, in terms of what the LSAT actually represents. Because you studied very long and hard, which is absolutely to your credit, but in law school and legal practice everyone has the same amount of lead time to complete tasks.
So I had originally intended to apply at UVic only if my LSAT was high enough, but since my score was on the lower end of what I was hoping for, and is good enough for a shot at my second choices, I was going to pass this school up. However, I'm thinking I may apply at UVic anyway as my "reach" school (even though I'm likely still waitlist material at best). But since the index circulating on these forums uses percentiles, I was wondering - would UVic use the percentile generated from all applicants in the pool, or the percentile from the specific LSAT sitting I did shown on LSAC?
Also, with the pandemic, are they still considering CR/Pass grades as part of the drops?