How Low Did You Go- 2005

[Cric4U]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hey All. I saw a poll like this for a previous match year. I thought it would be interesting and may help next year's class. This is anonymous. Congrats.

 

[Cric4U]

Bumpity Bump...polls don't get a bump when people vote...maybe the powers that be could fix this? Looks like everyone is doing great. I guess a new countdown is in order => T-3months.

 

[Cric4U]

bump

 

[waterski232002]

So much for 95% of people matching in their top 3... Looks more like 80%.

That's a big difference when you consider it means that 1 in 5 people will match at their #4 program AT BEST (compared to only 1 in 20).

 

[WilcoWorld]

Waterski makes an interesting observation. Where did those incredibly optimistic stats come from anyway? However, it did seem that a lot of the people on this forum had their sights set rather high. I mean, If your top 4 included Indy, Maricopa, Carolinas, & Pitt then matching at #4 aint too shabby.

 

[Jeff698]

From talking with folks and seeing some of the unfilled numbers, I'm getting the idea this year was part of the continuing trend of EM being more competitive each year.

95% may be been accurate in previous years. Perhaps 80% (to the extent that it is accurate this year) might not be accurate next year.

24/1108 (IIRC) seems pretty tough. The good news is most did match into EM.

The rule of thumb I'd heard and used going into this year of applying to enough places to be able to rank 10 still seems sound. IMHO, the take home message for future applicants is to cast a wide net and rank lots of places.

Take care,
Jeff

 

[Apollyon]

So much for 95% of people matching in their top 3... Looks more like 80%.

SDN is not a representative sample.

 

[ERMudPhud]

SDN is not a representative sample.

That's for sure.

 

[WilcoWorld]

I totally agree that SDN isn't respresentative, so I'll aks again; Where did that 95% stat come from?

 

[waterski232002]

I totally agree that SDN isn't respresentative, so I'll aks again; Where did that 95% stat come from?

Agree... anybody know where that came from? Or is that figure totally arbitrary and been drilled into our heads for generations so we assume it's true?