A Question For Those Who Apply To Many Top Schools w/o Ultra High Stats

[efle]

Nah, I'm white. I did have a 35 on the MCAT and I worked throughout school. But the important thing is that even if someone has a 0.001% chance of getting into a top med school, I don't think it's anyone's business to deter them. If someone 1) wants to take the chance against all odds of being that 0.001% or 2) wants the peace of mind of knowing with absolutely certainty that they would not have been accepted, that's their issue.

Yeah so that makes sense - you had a low sGPA but were coming from a prestigious undergrad, had a top 5% MCAT that probably leaves you with an overall LizzyM similar to many mid-tiers, and had a compelling life story. How many MD schools did you apply to, btw? Even for someone with all that going for them 10 is a lot of admits!

Anyways, you getting into a top 50 was not nearly as much of a long shot as a cookie cutter typical applicant with a ~3.6/31-32 getting into Harvard or Penn. I am totally in agreement about it being fine to toss a few reaches in if you have the $ and the time to spare, but I don't think you're a great example of beating the odds.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MonkeyArrow]

I acknowledged that there was some luck involved, but, not to toot my own horn, you don't get into 10 schools just based on luck. I proved myself in other ways and I showed that I was worthy of my spot by being at the top of my class now. It was a mix of luck and work, and the point still stands that if someone wants to spend money on improbable chances, that is their concern.

That's fine, and I never said people shouldn't apply to their dream school. However, I am going to call a spade a spade and stand behind my prior statement. A person with a sub 3.3 sGPA should not gain an acceptance to a T50.

If he got 10 acceptances it would seem that he worked very hard to be a good applicant despite his GPA. I wouldn't call that luck. So why the condescending attitude? He succeeded. This stay in your lane nonsense gives this forum a bad reputation.

The tone in my response was in direct response to the tone in Pepe's response. Simple. The OP asked a question, Pepe, responded with an anecdote about an amazing comeback story, and I responded in kind. Everyone feels like they deserve a T50 or T20 or T10 or whatever despite their bad GPA/MCAT/ECs/LOR.

 

[efle]

That's fine, and I never said people shouldn't apply to their dream school. However, I am going to call a spade a spade and stand behind my prior statement. A person with a sub 3.3 sGPA should not gain an acceptance to a T50.

The tone in my response was in direct response to the tone in Pepe's response. Simple. The OP asked a question, Pepe, responded with an anecdote about an amazing comeback story, and I responded in kind. Everyone feels like they deserve a T50 or T20 or T10 or whatever despite their bad GPA/MCAT/ECs/LOR.

Uh...why? Look at some places in the "top 50", like take U of Minnesota ranked 44.

Their top 10% by MCAT starts at 34, and their bottom 10% by sGPA is all the way down at 3.19

Why should it be a big deal for a 3.2x/35 with an Ivy caliber undergrad and compelling story to get in?

 

[Pepe18]

.

 

[efle]

I added an edit to my previous post. Absolutely, people have overcome worse odds than mine. I simply wanted to give an example of how taking chances sometimes leads to unexpected results. I applied to 35 MDs and 7 DOs (I do regret spending the money on DO applications in hindsight. But I honestly could not have predicted many of the MD interviews I got. I was accepted to a few schools that get a ton of applicants, but not even an interview to the state school 10 mins from my house. So if I cut my list down more, I'm not sure I would be where I am now).

I mean you def still had a solid app, you don't get into 1/3 MD schools you apply to based on luck. I just don't think your type of story is much evidence for or against the OP. Yours was a totally different kind of situation.

 

[Pepe18]

.

 

[Inspired Chaos]

.

 

[MonkeyArrow]

What tone did I take? I didn't say I deserved anything in my first post. In fact, I said I was fortunate and that I was surprised by how my cycle turned out. You're the one adding a tone there.

Regardless, it's okay if you don't think I deserved an acceptance. That's your opinion. I'm doing well. I'm happy. That's all that matters

I never said you did or did not deserve anything. You replied to a post about the utility to applying to Top Schools with lacking stats. Your post shared a "dramatic" anecdote about your success. I agree that the tone in your post was dramatic. I replied curtly. I opined my generalization about this subset of people (low stats applying to high schools) as justification to my curt reply when prompted.

 

[Pepe18]

.

 

[mwsapphire]

That's fine, and I never said people shouldn't apply to their dream school. However, I am going to call a spade a spade and stand behind my prior statement. A person with a sub 3.3 sGPA should not gain an acceptance to a T50.

The tone in my response was in direct response to the tone in Pepe's response. Simple. The OP asked a question, Pepe, responded with an anecdote about an amazing comeback story, and I responded in kind. Everyone feels like they deserve a T50 or T20 or T10 or whatever despite their bad GPA/MCAT/ECs/LOR.

( duplicate post,sorry)

 

[mwsapphire]

That's fine, and I never said people shouldn't apply to their dream school. However, I am going to call a spade a spade and stand behind my prior statement. A person with a sub 3.3 sGPA should not gain an acceptance to a T50.

The tone in my response was in direct response to the tone in Pepe's response. Simple. The OP asked a question, Pepe, responded with an anecdote about an amazing comeback story, and I responded in kind. Everyone feels like they deserve a T50 or T20 or T10 or whatever despite their bad GPA/MCAT/ECs/LOR.

 

[bannie22]

It really doesnt take too long writing those secondaries.

At this stage in the game, there is nothing of relevance in college. Applicants have already finalized their AMCAS, breezing through some 4th year classes that are probably pushovers, and regardless will not show up on their application GPA.
Thus, you have all the time in the world to write secondaries that have significant overlap amongst them.

Id say the multiple edits from neurotism delayed those secondaries more than anything else.

 

[dr.Breezy]

I understand why it comes off like that. However, the specific stats I mentioned are not mediocore. My claiming that they aren't "ultra-high" doesn't mean I think they are mediocore.

I think I should be able to say that having a certain set of stats puts you at a disadvantage at certain schools. That's a statistical fact. If you get upset at me about that, then that's more of a hostility on your end that you have trouble accepting reality.

Furthermore, my post builds on that fact. If stats put someone at a disadvantage, it is their experiences that get them it (if they do get in). Which means they have to spend time on their secondaries that could better be spent elsewhere.

Now exactly does that mean I'm telling people to "stay in their lanes"?

Mediocre wasn't the word I should have used, let's just say less than top stats. No one is saying that having certain stats can put you at a disadvantage at some of the top schools is not the reality. That's just common sense. But it seems as though you are trying to say that those same candidates, should quit wasting their time with top schools and (using their EC) just focus on mid to lower tier schools. I'm not saying that their chances are not better at mid to low (they're better for almost everyone), but who cares if they also apply to the top 20, if they can afford to. Despite being at a disadvantage, it may work out, who knows.

By telling people that they're better off spending all their energy on mid to low tier schools and not look at the top cause they don't have the numbers, you are in effect telling people to stay in their lanes.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[md-2020]

Well I'd officially like to have 15 minutes of my life back after reading through this meandering literary journey through nothingness. Like seriously, what is even the point of this thread? Who cares at all where others apply to and/or get into??

 

[efle]

Mediocre wasn't the word I should have used, let's just say less than top stats. No one is saying that having certain stats can put you at a disadvantage at some of the top schools is not the reality. That's just common sense. But it seems as though you are trying to say that those same candidates, should quit wasting their time with top schools and (using their EC) just focus on mid to lower tier schools. I'm not saying that their chances are not better at mid to low (they're better for almost everyone), but who cares if they also apply to the top 20, if they can afford to. Despite being at a disadvantage, it may work out, who knows.

By telling people that they're better off spending all their energy on mid to low tier schools and not look at the top cause they don't have the numbers, you are in effect telling people to stay in their lanes.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I had a friend I knew all through college ask me to help him with his school list. He had a ~3.6/30 and was from a flyover state, where the single public school medians were ~3.85/32-33 at the time. He wanted to apply to about 15 schools and when he showed me his list, the first half dozen names were places like Harvard and Manhattan schools. I told him those were donations and he said yeah he figured but it's worth a hail mary for the dream names/locations.

Ended up waitlisted a couple places and then not admitted. Staying a little more "in his lane" with those ~6 choices might have made all the difference. Like I've already said a few times I don't think it's bad to want to have reach schools but it really needs to be a very low priority that you only get to if you finish your apps to a nice long list of match schools first.

Well I'd officially like to have 15 minutes of my life back after reading through this meandering literary journey through nothingness. Like seriously, what is even the point of this thread? Who cares at all where others apply to and/or get into??

Bruh we're already done with our cycles, what reason would we be on SDN for if not to waste time reading petty arguments over things that will never be relevant to us

 

[dr.Breezy]

I had a friend I knew all through college ask me to help him with his school list. He had a ~3.6/30 and was from a flyover state, where the single public school medians were ~3.85/32-33 at the time. He wanted to apply to about 15 schools and when he showed me his list, the first half dozen names were places like Harvard and Manhattan schools. I told him those were donations and he said yeah he figured but it's worth a hail mary for the dream names/locations.

Ended up waitlisted a couple places and then not admitted. Staying a little more "in his lane" with those ~6 choices might have made all the difference. Like I've already said a few times I don't think it's bad to want to have reach schools but it really needs to be a very low priority that you only get to if you finish your apps to a nice long list of match schools first.


Bruh we're already done with our cycles, what reason would we be on SDN for if not to waste time reading petty arguments over things that will never be relevant to us

Key phrase here is that your friend is applying to only "15 schools". if people have no limits to the number of schools they're willing to pay and write secondaries for, then what you're saying is moot. Since you state that your friend is trying to only apply to 15 schools, then he obviously shouldn't be applying to 15 of the top 20s then duh. But if he was ok applying to 20+ schools then he could have kept all those reaches and applied to a few more target schools and had a better cycle.

The number of reaches you can have is only limited by the money and work you're willing to put in on secondaries IF you already applied to sufficient number of target schools. If you apply to 10-15 target schools then knock yourself out with as many reaches as you want.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[efle]

Key phrase here is that your friend is applying to only "15 schools". if people have no limits to the number of schools they're willing to pay and write secondaries for, then what you're saying is moot. Since you state that your friend is trying to only apply to 15 schools, then he obviously shouldn't be applying to 15 of the top 20s then duh. But if he was ok applying to 20+ schools then he could have kept all those reaches and applied to a few more target schools and had a better cycle.

The number of reaches you can have is only limited by the money and work you're willing to put in on secondaries IF you already applied to sufficient number of target schools. If you apply to 10-15 target schools then knock yourself out with as many reaches as you want.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Most med students did apply to "only" about 15 schools or less. And about half only got a single admit from it! Applying to 20+ places was only done by about a fifth of med students.

For the extremely on-top-of-it crowd I agree, you can have your good list and reaches too. For most, or at least many, every school on your list might be the one place that takes you though, and so it needs to be a reasonable list.

 

[dr.Breezy]

Most med students did apply to "only" about 15 schools or less. And about half only got a single admit from it! Applying to 20+ places was only done by about a fifth of med students.

For the extremely on-top-of-it crowd I agree, you can have your good list and reaches too. For most, or at least many, every school on your list might be the one place that takes you though, and so it needs to be a reasonable list.

Yeah it's common sense to have a reasonable list. All I'm saying is that once you've applied to an adequate amount of target schools, whether you throw in two or 10 reaches doesn't matter and it makes no difference, nor should it. And actually the top tends to be more quirky, and maybe more reaches can increase the chances of getting one of the rare Pokémon (provided you covered your bases with the target schools).

 

[dr.Breezy]

And even with 15 schools, if you have 10 solid on target schools, then you could probably throw in 5 reaches

 

[LoveBeingHuman:)]

Mediocre wasn't the word I should have used, let's just say less than top stats. No one is saying that having certain stats can put you at a disadvantage at some of the top schools is not the reality. That's just common sense. But it seems as though you are trying to say that those same candidates, should quit wasting their time with top schools and (using their EC) just focus on mid to lower tier schools. I'm not saying that their chances are not better at mid to low (they're better for almost everyone), but who cares if they also apply to the top 20, if they can afford to. Despite being at a disadvantage, it may work out, who knows.

By telling people that they're better off spending all their energy on mid to low tier schools and not look at the top cause they don't have the numbers, you are in effect telling people to stay in their lanes.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I think you are twisting my words. Anything can come off a certain way if you twist the words. I never said anything meant to put someone down. Even you admit to the fact that certain stats make some have disadvantages at certain schools. So instead of spending efforts applying to schools where the cumulative chances are lower, they should redirect their efforts to applying to schools where the cumulative chances are higher. It's not about NOT applying to top schools. It's about being mindful that applying to top schools shouldn't hurt the efforts you put into applying to other schools. There's a big difference between what I'm saying and what you're accusing me of.

 

[LoveBeingHuman:)]

Most med students did apply to "only" about 15 schools or less. And about half only got a single admit from it! Applying to 20+ places was only done by about a fifth of med students.

For the extremely on-top-of-it crowd I agree, you can have your good list and reaches too. For most, or at least many, every school on your list might be the one place that takes you though, and so it needs to be a reasonable list.

I'm extremely curious about that dip at 21-24. I'm guessing it keeps dipping down for every 5 increment after 20, but the last bar is high because it totals it all those increments that would have been there otherwise.

 

[efle]

I'm extremely curious about that dip at 21-24. I'm guessing it keeps dipping down for every 5 increment after 20, but the last bar is high because it totals it all those increments that would have been there otherwise.

This is my interpretation too, it's rare to see people applying to ~30 or ~35 or ~40 schools but sum them all up and they become a sizable group.

 

[dr.Breezy]

I think you are twisting my words. Anything can come off a certain way if you twist the words. I never said anything meant to put someone down. Even you admit to the fact that certain stats make some have disadvantages at certain schools. So instead of spending efforts applying to schools where the cumulative chances are lower, they should redirect their efforts to applying to schools where the cumulative chances are higher. It's not about NOT applying to top schools. It's about being mindful that applying to top schools shouldn't hurt the efforts you put into applying to other schools. There's a big difference between what I'm saying and what you're accusing me of.

There really isn't that much of a difference. If there is no limit to the number of schools a person is willing to put in work and pay for, I don't see how applying to reaches hurts their efforts in applying to other schools. The only way I see it hurting is if they really have a limit of like 10 schools and they GIVE up target schools in order to apply to top schools. But if they have sufficient target schools then does it really matter how many reach schools they apply to?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Pepe18]

.

 

[mwsapphire]

I had a friend I knew all through college ask me to help him with his school list. He had a ~3.6/30 and was from a flyover state, where the single public school medians were ~3.85/32-33 at the time. He wanted to apply to about 15 schools and when he showed me his list, the first half dozen names were places like Harvard and Manhattan schools. I told him those were donations and he said yeah he figured but it's worth a hail mary for the dream names/locations.

I get that his MCAT is lower, but isn't a 3.6 from Wash U still super competitive, even without an upward trend? Had he applied to more upper mid tiers ( like rochester, Boston, Keck Einstein) he'd have been succesful.

 

[LoveBeingHuman:)]

There really isn't that much of a difference. If there is no limit to the number of schools a person is willing to put in work and pay for, I don't see how applying to reaches hurts their efforts in applying to other schools. The only way I see it hurting is if they really have a limit of like 10 schools and they GIVE up target schools in order to apply to top schools. But if they have sufficient target schools then does it really matter how many reach schools they apply to?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

So if someone half-asses their secondaries for target schools cause they focus on the top schools, that's ok?

 

[mwsapphire]

So if someone half-asses their secondaries for target schools cause they focus on the top schools, that's ok?

They're saying that once the secondaries for target schools are done, they can add in as many reaches as they please.

 

[calivianya]

I applied to a ton of top schools, plus my state schools and some middle tiers. Total undergrad gpa 3.5, post bacc 3.84 (both science and non-science), current degree is 4.0, 515 MCAT. >10,000 hours of healthcare work experience... which is what I hope is going to carry me, really. Schools give lip service to the idea that they like healthcare experience but when you look on the MSAR, only 30-40% of accepted applicants have paid clinical experience, so I have no idea what to think.

As far as I'm concerned, my app is a crap shoot. If you're just looking at my current 4.0, borderline (for top 20) MCAT, and my experience, I'd say I'm top school material... but then a lot of schools care about research (which I didn't do any of), and only one of my letters is from a professor because I finished my science degree in 1.5 years and only had one professor more than once, so I didn't feel like anyone else knew me. I really have no idea what to expect. Maybe I was stupid applying to top schools?

 

[DBC03]

My app is a total crapshoot - 3.4 cGPA (significant upward trend), 522 MCAT, 4.0 postbac, HYP grad, 11 years in engineering and 9 owning my own business. But I have NO idea how that will look to any given admissions committee. So far it's not looking great to any schools that pre-screen, so my guess is that I will not get into a T20 school. BUT - I can't count on low tier or even mid tier because of yield protection. So I have to thrown the net far and wide.

 

[mwsapphire]

My app is a total crapshoot - 3.4 cGPA (significant upward trend), 522 MCAT, 4.0 postbac, HYP grad, 11 years in engineering and 9 owning my own business. But I have NO idea how that will look to any given admissions committee. So far it's not looking great to any schools that pre-screen, so my guess is that I will not get into a T20 school. BUT - I can't count on low tier or even mid tier because of yield protection. So I have to thrown the net far and wide.

Not every top school pre screens- and many have tenth percentiles below a 3.4, so I wouldn't count out top schools juuuuussttt yet.\!! Especially with your UGrad name, upward trend, MCAT, and experiences!!!!

 

[DBC03]

Not every top school pre screens- and many have tenth percentiles below a 3.4, so I wouldn't count out top schools juuuuussttt yet.\!! Especially with your UGrad name, upward trend, MCAT, and experiences!!!!

Yeah, this is a nerve-wracking experience. I am hoping for that one college to make a crazy decision and think, "wow, we need this person." All it takes is one, right?

 

[dr.Breezy]

So if someone half-asses their secondaries for target schools cause they focus on the top schools, that's ok?

You're making the faulty assumption that people who have a ton of reaches have half assed their secondaries to target schools, there is no evidence that proves your point.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[dr.Breezy]

My app is a total crapshoot - 3.4 cGPA (significant upward trend), 522 MCAT, 4.0 postbac, HYP grad, 11 years in engineering and 9 owning my own business. But I have NO idea how that will look to any given admissions committee. So far it's not looking great to any schools that pre-screen, so my guess is that I will not get into a T20 school. BUT - I can't count on low tier or even mid tier because of yield protection. So I have to thrown the net far and wide.

LOL quit worrying, I would be surprised if you didn't get love from top schools


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[DBC03]

LOL quit worrying, I would've surprised if you didn't get love from top schools


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I was feeling okay for a while, but UCSF and Vandy are definitely not sending their love (no secondaries). I just have to remind myself that those are just two schools. There are many more, right? I think I would be stronger with one more year of post-bac. I originally applied this year thinking I would be going military and I age out next year.

 

[dr.Breezy]

I was feeling okay for a while, but UCSF and Vandy are definitely not sending their love (no secondaries). I just have to remind myself that those are just two schools. There are many more, right? I think I would be stronger with one more year of post-bac. I originally applied this year thinking I would be going military and I age out next year.

Two schools not sending you secondaries (yet) is nothing to worry about. It could be schools still processing apps. Regardless, nothing means anything at this point. If it's January and you have not gotten a single interview then you can come back and I'll cry with you.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[moggat]

I was feeling okay for a while, but UCSF and Vandy are definitely not sending their love (no secondaries). I just have to remind myself that those are just two schools. There are many more, right? I think I would be stronger with one more year of post-bac. I originally applied this year thinking I would be going military and I age out next year.

Just so you know, UCSF takes FOREVER to send out secondaries. It's not automatic; they do prescreen. I got one like three months after submitting my primary and was still invited to interview. So set your mind at ease on that one and definitely don't count it out yet. (Cannot vouch for Vandy)

 

[LoveBeingHuman:)]

You're making the faulty assumption that people who have a ton of reaches have half assed their secondaries to target schools, there is no evidence that proves your point.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I'm saying that SOME applicants half ass their secondaries by spreading themselves too thin. Look at my second post, where I clarified this.

 

[dr.Breezy]

I'm saying that SOME applicants half ass their secondaries by spreading themselves too thin. Look at my second post, where I clarified this.

lol you don't even have evidence that SOME people who have too many reaches, half ass their secondaries to top schools. Regardless, even if you're right, there are also SOME applicants who didn't get accepted to target schools (perhaps got yield protected etc.) or who did get accepted to a target school but could have gotten accepted to a certain reach school if they just applied to a few more (reach schools can be quirky, and there might be a top 20 out there who would take a chance on you, and applying to more would increase the odds that you find that one). So just because some applicants do anything does not prove a point


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[LoveBeingHuman:)]

lol you don't even have evidence that SOME people who have too many reaches, half ass their secondaries to top schools. Regardless, even if you're right, there are also SOME applicants who didn't get accepted to target schools (perhaps got yield protected etc.) or who did get accepted to a target school but could have gotten accepted to a certain reach school if they just applied to a few more (reach schools can be quirky, and there might be a top 20 out there who would take a chance on you, and applying to more would increase the odds that you find that one). So just because some applicants do anything does not prove a point


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Of course there is no evidence for it. There is no survey that says "did you half ass your secondaries for target schools?". 'm just pointing out that some people half ass their applications to target schools for top schools. Whats wrong with pointing that out if it reminds someone and perhaps makes them evaluate their circumstances and perhaps makes them consider if they are putting the effort to target schools that they should be doing.

I don't know why you are hating so much. If I try to point something out, and it applies to someone, and it helps them, then you really shouldn't be an a$$hole about it.

Get a life. If something in your life isn't working out, be a man and deal with it face one. Don't fill yourself up with hatred and hate on people you find on the internet just because you can hide behind a screen.

 

[dr.Breezy]

Of course there is no evidence for it. There is no survey that says "did you half ass your secondaries for target schools?". 'm just pointing out that some people half ass their applications to target schools for top schools. Whats wrong with pointing that out if it reminds someone and perhaps makes them evaluate their circumstances and perhaps makes them consider if they are putting the effort to target schools that they should be doing.

I don't know why you are hating so much. If I try to point something out, and it applies to someone, and it helps them, then you really shouldn't be an a$$hole about it.

Get a life. If something in your life isn't working out, be a man and deal with it face one. Don't fill yourself up with hatred and hate on people you find on the internet just because you can hide behind a screen.

lol yeah man, my life is a wreck that's why I'm here "hating" on you while hiding behind a screen. What a joke. It has nothing to do with the fact that you are over invested in where other people apply, try to make a generalized claim based on an assumption (with no proof) of what you think some applicants do, and try to persuade people based on said assumption. If you ask me you come of as an entitled a-hole.

Cool your thread is about pointing something out, and I'm pointing out that your thread is dumb. Nothing wrong with that.

Now I'm becoming over invested with this BS, I'm done with this.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[mwsapphire]

Of course there is no evidence for it. There is no survey that says "did you half ass your secondaries for target schools?". 'm just pointing out that some people half ass their applications to target schools for top schools. Whats wrong with pointing that out if it reminds someone and perhaps makes them evaluate their circumstances and perhaps makes them consider if they are putting the effort to target schools that they should be doing.

I don't know why you are hating so much. If I try to point something out, and it applies to someone, and it helps them, then you really shouldn't be an a$$hole about it.

Get a life. If something in your life isn't working out, be a man and deal with it face one. Don't fill yourself up with hatred and hate on people you find on the internet just because you can hide behind a screen.

Here

This will make what you're doing easier

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

I suspect that medical school admissions is driven very heavily by numbers, especially MCAT scores, since numbers are the only way to objectively compare applicants to the overall applicant pool.

I think like this too, everyone likes to think that admissions is like a triangle where all the sides (GPA, MCAT, ECs) are equal or that the ECs can somehow overshadow the other sides. The reality is that I suspect that admissions is more like a coin, where the two faces are GPA/MCAT and the small band of width between the two is ECs.

Experiences matter but probably not to the extent of good scores. Schools want something in their classes, and usually, having solid numbers helps accomplish this easier than having very advanced and significant activities (exception of course is being a member of a highly sought after demographic group like URM).

Yeah, not to mention that everyone drastically underestimates what are actually "killer ECs". I've met very few people that I would actually consider to have such good ECs that they can overshadow a bad GPA or MCAT. They are people who have started their own businesses that have become very successful or stuff of that nature. Everyone thinks their 500 extra hours of shadowing will overcome the 3.0/505. People don't really understand how great some of their peers truly are, like Gonnif frequently mentions, admissions is like an Olympic event, the best of the best are what you are up against.

What tone did I take? I didn't say I deserved anything in my first post. In fact, I said I was fortunate and that I was surprised by how my cycle turned out. You're the one adding a tone there.

Regardless, it's okay if you don't think I deserved an acceptance. That's your opinion. I'm doing well. I'm happy. That's all that matters

Don't worry, he's just salty you are gearing up for boards and he is just starting to take Ochem.

Had he applied to more upper mid tiers ( like rochester, Boston, Keck Einstein) he'd have been succesful.

Eh no.. Medical school admissions are not predictable like that.

 

[Lawpy]

I think like this too, everyone likes to think that admissions is like a triangle where all the sides (GPA, MCAT, ECs) are equal or that the ECs can somehow overshadow the other sides. The reality is that I suspect that admissions is more like a coin, where the two faces are GPA/MCAT and the small band of width between the two is ECs.



Yeah, not to mention that everyone drastically underestimates what are actually "killer ECs". I've met very few people that I would actually consider to have such good ECs that they can overshadow a bad GPA or MCAT. They are people who have started their own businesses that have become very successful or stuff of that nature. Everyone thinks their 500 extra hours of shadowing will overcome the 3.0/505. People don't really understand how great some of their peers truly are, like Gonnif frequently mentions, admissions is like an Olympic event, the best of the best are what you are up against.



Don't worry, he's just salty you are gearing up for boards and he is just starting to take Ochem.



Eh no.. Medical school admissions is not predictable like that.

That's why LizzyM scores are very useful because they reliably approximate the selectivity of medical school admissions. Simply calculating your LizzyM score and comparing it with median LizzyM score +/- 2 of schools in MSAR is an effective way of creating good school lists.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

That's why LizzyM scores are very useful because they reliably approximate the selectivity of medical school admissions. Simply calculating your LizzyM score and comparing it with median LizzyM score +/- 2 of schools in MSAR is an effective way of creating good school lists.

Agreed, the only people I've found who that doesn't work for are the ones with very discordant GPA/MCAT splits (only for low GPA high MCAT though) like 3.1/520.

 

[mwsapphire]

But you also can't go nuts on a single GPA number b/c trends/ grade deflation can make a "low" GPA competitive. But if medical school was more heavily numbers based than it already is, then the mean stats for acceptees would look something like 3.8+/515 instead of 3.7/510. You need to show you're not just a robot and actually want to be around sick people- missing an important EC can kill you. I'm actually terrified at how important the right EC's are to be comeptative- at least according to Goro. Top schools could then afford to fill seats with 3.9+ 520+ applicants only. EC's need to be just as important as at least grades or MCAT.
And @Antomygrey, you're right, You can't totally predict outcomes I just meant it'd be likely he'd have been more succesful.

 

[cactusman]

That's why LizzyM scores are very useful because they reliably approximate the selectivity of medical school admissions. Simply calculating your LizzyM score and comparing it with median LizzyM score +/- 2 of schools in MSAR is an effective way of creating good school lists.

The LizzyM score is dead. The LizzyM score remains a very useful tool with the help of conversion tables. And the MR5 advisory committee has killed it.
- Friedrich Nietzsche, tr. Cactusman

 

[Lawpy]

Agreed, the only people I've found who that doesn't work for are the ones with very discordant GPA/MCAT splits (only for low GPA high MCAT though) like 3.1/520.

Here, it would be comparing MCAT with median MCAT +/- 2 and buffering the list with mid tiers and even DO schools. Low tiers are a bad option with high MCATs regardless of GPA.

 

[Lawpy]

The LizzyM score is dead. The LizzyM score remains a very useful tool with the help of conversion tables. And the MR5 advisory committee has killed it.
- Friedrich Nietzsche, tr. Cactusman

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

then the mean stats for acceptees would look something like 3.8+/515

Top schools could then afford to fill seats with 3.9+ 520+ applicants only

You're overestimating how many people actually have those stats.

Edit/addition: don't get me wrong, ECs are necessary. But anyone who tells you they are on the same level of importance as stats is wrong. ECs come into play after your stats have been deemed "acceptable". The "right" ECs to be competitive will vary by each school and whatever their mission is, and, as I said before, will only come into play after your stats have been scrutinized. This process is far more stat-centric than any school website will have you believe.

 

[mwsapphire]

You're overestimating how many people actually have those stats.

Still , meds schools, especially top schools, have such limited seats they can fill them with those people. There are still enough of those people to fill those seats.
Have you applied to medical school yet? Ec's are almost as important as stats I'm legit panicking over my volunteer hours b/c of this.
Goro says it all the time. Anyone can make high numbers doesn't mean they actually know what being a doc is like.
I'm kind of flabbergasted right now I'm not trying to argue I just can't see how this can be true.