Now that Match is over - a Q about lists

[red10]

---

Members do not see this ad.

So I've heard people at school talking about how this year was a tough year for matching and its only going to get harder to match, etc. I've also heard 2 schools of thought with regard to rankings schools in your final list.

Say you're an average student (for your specific specialty) who interviewed at 9 schools and now it's time to rank them.

3 are notorious for accepting students who cured cancer, aids and/or score perfect on Step 1 and 2 but they're your "dream schools".
3 are strong programs anyone would be proud to attend and probably your most realistic options.
3 are in Bufu,Nowhere and are accredited but probably no one's dream school.

One theory I've heard staff suggest is the "shoot for the moon" theory where your match list should be in the order of the schools as above. That way, supposedly, you might match at dream schools with the others as a safety net of sorts.

The other theory I've heard is people saying you should be realistic and rank programs that are more likely to take you at the top of your list. So say the 3 schools you'd be proud to attend should be your first three with the others falling somewhere below. Supposedly this ensures you won't somehow fall through the cracks because you aimed too high with your first few rankings.

For those of you who have been through it or go to other schools, what are you being told?

I've heard both versions from staff here and those who site the second theory say the people who had to scramble had to do so because they somehow screwed up their match list by ranking dream programs before realistic programs (instead of just a general problem with only applying to dream schools when the student is just average)

Thoughts?

 

[runeofmajesty]

ABSOLUTELY rank the programs in the order of your preference. If your "dream" schools are where you really want to go, rank them high. It does no good to rank where you think programs ranked you. The Match system works in a way that favors the applicant. It will attempt to rank you at your 1st choice...if it is full (or if you are "temporarily" matched there until someone the program ranked higher bumps you off), the program will try to match you into your 2nd choice, and so on and so on down the list until you are matched into a program where you are ranked higher than the other applicants being considered. SO, to repeat...rank in order of your preference!

 

[K31]

Rank them in the order of where you'd like to end up. If for you that means ranking the highly competitive programs at the top of your list, do that. The way the algorithm works means that it won't hurt your chances of matching at your "safety" programs if you don't match higher up your list.

 

[xrevision]

Rank in order of preference, and thats it.

 

[beatsbydre]

I have a similar question - I really don't understand what "favors the student" really means. What if a truly stellar student and an average student both ranks a top program #1? However, the top program ranks the stellar student at #1 but the average student at #20. If there is only 2-3 program spots, the stellar student would most likely get this top program.

Let's then look at an average program with our previously talked about average student (we'll call this average student #1) and another similarly average student (we'll call this average student #2). Average student #1 ranks this average program number #5 because he has ranked his dream programs #1 to 4 (none of them ranked him highly though). Average student #2 ranks this average program #1. Wouldn't this average program take average student #2 over #1 if they are both ranked close to each other in the program's rank?

Thanks!

 

[DoctwoB]

I have a similar question - I really don't understand what "favors the student" really means. What if a truly stellar student and an average student both ranks a top program #1? However, the top program ranks the stellar student at #1 but the average student at #20. If there is only 2-3 program spots, the stellar student would most likely get this top program.

Let's then look at an average program with our previously talked about average student (we'll call this average student #1) and another similarly average student (we'll call this average student #2). Average student #1 ranks this average program number #5 because he has ranked his dream programs #1 to 4 (none of them ranked him highly though). Average student #2 ranks this average program #1. Wouldn't this average program take average student #2 over #1 if they are both ranked close to each other in the program's rank?

Thanks!

Yes the top student will get the spot at that top program. But if average student #1 fell past 1-4 on his rank list ,he would still get the spot at the other program over student #2 so long as the program ranked him above student #2 regardless of where he is on his ranklist. At this point the program doesn't get to see where you ranked them or "choose" someone who ranked them higher. The ONLY time that your rank of a program can effect their rank of you is prior to rank-list submission, when you play the whole post-interview contact ""I ranked you first/highly/too match" game.

Also, is it just me or do med schools need to do a much better job on educating about the match and how its algorithm works. People ask this question all the time on SDN and its really quite important in determining the next several years of your life.

TLDR: Rank in the order of YOUR preferences. You can't "lose"a spot at a lower program by aiming for a higher one.

 

[kjamess]

rank in order of preference; however, dont get your heart set on your dream school if you know its a reach, lest you become disappointed on match day.

 

[K31]

I have a similar question - I really don't understand what "favors the student" really means. What if a truly stellar student and an average student both ranks a top program #1? However, the top program ranks the stellar student at #1 but the average student at #20. If there is only 2-3 program spots, the stellar student would most likely get this top program.

Stellar student absolutely gets the spot in this case.

Let's then look at an average program with our previously talked about average student (we'll call this average student #1) and another similarly average student (we'll call this average student #2). Average student #1 ranks this average program number #5 because he has ranked his dream programs #1 to 4 (none of them ranked him highly though). Average student #2 ranks this average program #1. Wouldn't this average program take average student #2 over #1 if they are both ranked close to each other in the program's rank?

Thanks!

Assuming student #1 isn't ranked highly enough to match by 1-4 on his ROL, and the program ranked #1 higher than #2, then #1 will match at that program.

This link from the NRMP is the official explanation of how the Match algorithm works:
http://www.nrmp.org/res_match/about_res/algorithms.html

 

[evilbooyaa]

Rank in order of your preference on where you would like to go. The system is specifically made to not hurt you for reaching on your rank lists.

 

[Stellar Clouds]

Rank in order of your preference on where you would like to go. The system is specifically made to not hurt you for reaching on your rank lists.

+1

Anyone who tells you differently from this advice doesn't know how the match algorithm works. This is how the match algorithm works. I implore you to read this and send this link to any attending/staff member who tells you how to "game the match system."

 

[wholeheartedly]

The way ppl screw themselves is not applying/interviewing/or ranking the right number/range of spots (ie broadly), it has nothing to do with where they put those programs on their ROL. As others have stated, make your ROL based on your preferences only, the way the match algorithm works there's no way plan number #2 works in your favor.

 

[ArcGurren]

Nothing new to add - I agree with the general sentiment that you should rank based on preference and NOT how much the program says it likes you. General bits of advice

- make sure you apply to enough programs to have enough to rank (different per specialty)
- if you are only borderline competitive for a specialty consider applying with a backup
- rank based on how much YOU like the program as the system is made to benefit the applicant

 

[rocketbooster]

I don't get why option #2 is necessarily a bad option. Let's say me and another guy are only average applicant's for our specialty. Let's say A, B, and C are my top 1, 2, and 3 while for someone else their top 3 are B, A, and C. Both of us actually want A the most, but A is very selective. I ranked my order by preference but the other person chose B first because he thought that program was more likely to take him even though he preferred A. Now, A ends up not ranking either of us while B ranked me as #1 and the other guy as #2. Since the other guy ranked the easier program #1, he gets matched there over me. This program only has one spot. So I don't get A or B and get stuck with C. Clearly, the other guy matched better than me even though the program preferred me since he went with the safer option.

Therefore, based on my example, how can the OP's #2 option be a bad one? This option allowed the other guy to match over me. Anyone care to explain how ranking based on preference was somehow the best option here? Doesn't appear to be the case...If you are overly competitive for your specialty, then you have nothing to lose by ranking the most selective programs first. But if you are average for your specialty, there's a good chance you could end up like me above if you still rank based on preference only.

 

[Stellar Clouds]

I don't get why option #2 is necessarily a bad option. Let's say me and another guy are only average applicant's for our specialty. Let's say A, B, and C are my top 1, 2, and 3 while for someone else their top 3 are B, A, and C. Both of us actually want A the most, but A is very selective. I ranked my order by preference but the other person chose B first because he thought that program was more likely to take him even though he preferred A. Now, A ends up not ranking either of us while B ranked me as #1 and the other guy as #2. Since the other guy ranked the easier program #1, he gets matched there over me. This program only has one spot. So I don't get A or B and get stuck with C. Clearly, the other guy matched better than me even though the program preferred me since he went with the safer option.

Therefore, based on my example, how can the OP's #2 option be a bad one? This option allowed the other guy to match over me. Anyone care to explain how ranking based on preference was somehow the best option here? Doesn't appear to be the case...If you are overly competitive for your specialty, then you have nothing to lose by ranking the most selective programs first. But if you are average for your specialty, there's a good chance you could end up like me above if you still rank based on preference only.

Wrong. Read the match algorithm. You would kick the second person out of B and he would go down to his next spot on his rank list.

 

[mvenus929]

Therefore, based on my example, how can the OP's #2 option be a bad one? This option allowed the other guy to match over me. Anyone care to explain how ranking based on preference was somehow the best option here? Doesn't appear to be the case...If you are overly competitive for your specialty, then you have nothing to lose by ranking the most selective programs first. But if you are average for your specialty, there's a good chance you could end up like me above if you still rank based on preference only.

Because the programs also rank. So if A was filled, and you both had B next on your list, but you were ranked higher by the program, you would get the position over him, even though it was higher on his list.

So there's nothing to lose by ranking based on your preferences. The algorithm tries to match you into your highest spot, but goes based on the program's preferences as well. That's why it's a match--you get the highest possible program on your list, and they get the highest possible applicants on their list who also want to go there.

 

[jackets5]

It boggles my mind how medical students who you would think are very intelligent to get to the point of making a ROL, can't understand the match algorithm. It's actually quite simple.

 

[rocketbooster]

Because the programs also rank. So if A was filled, and you both had B next on your list, but you were ranked higher by the program, you would get the position over him, even though it was higher on his list.

So there's nothing to lose by ranking based on your preferences. The algorithm tries to match you into your highest spot, but goes based on the program's preferences as well. That's why it's a match--you get the highest possible program on your list, and they get the highest possible applicants on their list who also want to go there.

Oh ok I gotcha. I always heard the rank list favors the student not the programs but it really equally favors both. The other guy wouldn't get it until the ppl ranked above him by the program first get matched elsewhere.

 

[EuroDoc]

Rank them in order of preference (saying it once more underscores the point, I hope).

Try to be "smart" and create a "realistic" ROL - end up in America's armpit...

 

[evilbooyaa]

I ranked my order by preference but the other person chose B first because he thought that program was more likely to take him even though he preferred A. Now, A ends up not ranking either of us while B ranked me as #1 and the other guy as #2. Since the other guy ranked the easier program #1, he gets matched there over me.

Incorrect, for all the reasons other people have said.

 

[red10]

It boggles my mind how medical students who you would think are very intelligent to get to the point of making a ROL, can't understand the match algorithm. It's actually quite simple.

jeez harsh

 

[red10]

Thanks for the info guys and to those who linked the algorithm explanation!

 

[airplanes]

Oh ok I gotcha. I always heard the rank list favors the student not the programs but it really equally favors both. The other guy wouldn't get it until the ppl ranked above him by the program first get matched elsewhere.

No...it favors the student because the student's ROL is given priority first, rather than the programs rank list. You will not go to your #15 program if your #1 is willing to take you, even if your #'s 2-15 all rank you first on their rank list. (dramatic example).

 

[sazerac]

(incorrect information removed by the author)

 

[Law2Doc]

...
I've heard both versions from staff here and those who site the second theory say the people who had to scramble had to do so because they somehow screwed up their match list by ranking dream programs before realistic programs (instead of just a general problem with only applying to dream schools when the student is just average)

Thoughts?

you need to never take advice from whomever is telling you to try and game a system in a way that it can't be gamed. They simply dont know what they are talking about and i would never again go to them for this kind of match advice. Rank your preferences, dreams first. If you end up in SOAP it really has nothing to do with your preference order, just the number of places you were able to rank and their respective interest in you.

 

[rocketbooster]

No...it favors the student because the student's ROL is given priority first, rather than the programs rank list. You will not go to your #15 program if your #1 is willing to take you, even if your #'s 2-15 all rank you first on their rank list. (dramatic example).

Yea no. It doesn't matter who "goes first." It's equal for both sides. Go look up the simple algorithm, bra

 

[Rothbard]

nm

 

[Bartelby]

ABSOLUTELY rank the programs in the order of your preference. If your "dream" schools are where you really want to go, rank them high. It does no good to rank where you think programs ranked you. The Match system works in a way that favors the applicant. It will attempt to rank you at your 1st choice...if it is full (or if you are "temporarily" matched there until someone the program ranked higher bumps you off), the program will try to match you into your 2nd choice, and so on and so on down the list until you are matched into a program where you are ranked higher than the other applicants being considered. SO, to repeat...rank in order of your preference!

Exactly. Anyone who is telling to rank based on where you think you might match while putting your favorite programs at the bottom is offering you pretty much the worst possible advice on the issue.

 

[ChiDO]

It boggles my mind how medical students who you would think are very intelligent to get to the point of making a ROL, can't understand the match algorithm. It's actually quite simple.

This. Plus, if you understand how the match works, better for you as you might get that "dream" spot over someone who has no idea how it works.

 

[NickNaylor]

It boggles my mind how medical students who you would think are very intelligent to get to the point of making a ROL, can't understand the match algorithm. It's actually quite simple.

Yeah, I totally agree. Hell it made sense to me when I was initially looking at the profession to understand how training works. NRMP even gives a sample scenario with nice figures included!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717

 

[billybob746]

No. The ranked order algorithm doesn't favor one party over the other. It's just an algorithm that finds the optimal match. It was originally designed to solve ranked order lists for dance partners, without being partial to leads or follows.

One could easily turn your argument around and clam it favors the residency over the applicant, because you will NEVER match to a program that is already full of applicants THEY ranked higher than you, even if it was the other applicants' last choice and your first choice.

Fundamentally both parties benefit to the maximum benefit possible, and neither party (applicants, residencies) has an advantage over the other.

This is not correct. it does favor the applicant. if you read what is known about the algorithm with regards to the match, it clearly tries to place each applicant to his/her #1 spot assuming that program ranks the person until a more favored applicant more highly ranked by the program fills that spot (or this does not happen and a match occurs). and, the algorithm is not "quite simple" either, it won the nobel prize...

 

[yehhhboiii]

This is not correct. it does favor the applicant. if you read what is known about the algorithm with regards to the match, it clearly tries to place each applicant to his/her #1 spot assuming that program ranks the person until a more favored applicant more highly ranked by the program fills that spot (or this does not happen and a match occurs). and, the algorithm is not "quite simple" either, it won the nobel prize...

nobel memorial prize.

 

[survivordo]

Yeah, I totally agree. Hell it made sense to me when I was initially looking at the profession to understand how training works. NRMP even gives a sample scenario with nice figures included!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717

Ever tried explaining it to someone not involved in medicine? Well it's this giant computer that fills a room. There are lots of tubes and wires and such. It takes almost a month to do but somehow it puts us all in the appropriate spot... At least that's how I envision it and explain it.

Honestly, apply to as many programs as you can, interview at as many as you can, rank any program you can see yourself going to. It is getting tougher and tougher out there, you gotta give yourself every fighting chance.

Survivor DO

 

[Stellar Clouds]

This is not correct. it does favor the applicant. if you read what is known about the algorithm with regards to the match, it clearly tries to place each applicant to his/her #1 spot assuming that program ranks the person until a more favored applicant more highly ranked by the program fills that spot (or this does not happen and a match occurs). and, the algorithm is not "quite simple" either, it won the nobel prize...

Who gives a **** whether anyone thinks it favors the applicants or both the applicants and the programs or just the programs? Bottom line: (and its been said too many times in this same thread) RANK THE PROGRAMS IN ORDER OF YOUR PREFERENCE ALONE.

Edit: it's turning into medicine rounds around here

 

[rocketbooster]

This is not correct. it does favor the applicant. if you read what is known about the algorithm with regards to the match, it clearly tries to place each applicant to his/her #1 spot assuming that program ranks the person until a more favored applicant more highly ranked by the program fills that spot (or this does not happen and a match occurs). and, the algorithm is not "quite simple" either, it won the nobel prize...

No, it definitely doesn't favor the applicant. If you think it does then you don't understand the match "algorithm" and have ignored this entire thread. It favors both sides equally. Yes it tries to place each applicant at their #1, just as it tries to equally give programs their #1. If you and someone else rank the same program as #1 but the program ranks the other person as its #1, then that other person matches there instead of you, assuming there was only one spot. Clearly it didn't give favor to you over the program in that example. It gave the best fit for both parties.

 

[sazerac]

Well I did some more research into the NRMP match algorithm and matching ranked order lists in general, and airplanes and billybob746 are right, while sazerac and the rest of us are wrong.

The match algorithm favors the applicant over the programs.

The match algorithm produces one stable low-cost set of matches if the applicants are processed, and another different stable set of low-cost matches if the programs are processed. Any matching algorithm favors the proposers at the expense of the recipients. This can be seen in the following websites:

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2012/popular-economicsciences2012.pdf

"If the women propose, the algorithm favors them"

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/10/economics-nobel-honors-perfect-m.html

"the matching is more favorable to women when the women propose and vice versa"

In the NRMP match algorithm, the applicants are processed as the proposers, so the applicants do have the advantage.

If you still disagree, consider the following ranked order list example:

Applicant A: program 1, program 2
Applicant B: program 2, program 1
Program 1: applicant B, applicant A
Program 2: applicant A, applicant B
(assume each program can support only one applicant)

Obviously the programs want 1B and 2A, while the applicants would prefer 1A and 2B. So who wins with the NRMP match algorithm? Well, the applicants are the proposers, so applicant A will go to program 1 and applicant B will go to program 2. This unambiguously favors the applicant's preferences over the programs.

Mea culpa. I will now edit my previous and incorrect post. 🙁

 

[NickNaylor]

No, it definitely doesn't favor the applicant. If you think it does then you don't understand the match "algorithm" and have ignored this entire thread. It favors both sides equally. Yes it tries to place each applicant at their #1, just as it tries to equally give programs their #1. If you and someone else rank the same program as #1 but the program ranks the other person as its #1, then that other person matches there instead of you, assuming there was only one spot. Clearly it didn't give favor to you over the program in that example. It gave the best fit for both parties.

When people say that it "favors the applicant," I think what they actually mean is "it'll give you your top preferences first." No, it does not "favor" them per se, but the point is that there is absolutely no harm in ranking your choices however you want to rank them (unless you're an idiot and rank your least preferred place first) and your chances of matching at other places are unchanged based on YOUR list.

 

[thedrjojo]

When people say that it "favors the applicant," I think what they actually mean is "it'll give you your top preferences first." No, it does not "favor" them per se, but the point is that there is absolutely no harm in ranking your choices however you want to rank them (unless you're an idiot and rank your least preferred place first) and your chances of matching at other places are unchanged based on YOUR list.

read sazar's post... they are spot on.

It favors the applicant.... which is different than not giving a **** about the program(a program still has to have ranked an applicant to match there, and if two applicants are being "matched" into 1 spot, then program preference wins out, and the higher ranked applicant is temporarily matched until someone with a higher preference by the program comes and knocks them out of the spot... but this does FAVOR the applicant because it allows you to shoot for whatever program and not be penalized because someone else "stole your spot" because they ranked the program higher than you... No one is Locked into their spot until they are the top person on the programs list (and when you become the top person on a programs list, you match there and are removed from every other list, thus creating a new top person, conversely, if there are no long spots in your top choices, they get removed from your list and it moves to your next top choice and tries to match you there...).

 

[rocketbooster]

read sazar's post... they are spot on.

It favors the applicant.... which is different than not giving a **** about the program(a program still has to have ranked an applicant to match there, and if two applicants are being "matched" into 1 spot, then program preference wins out, and the higher ranked applicant is temporarily matched until someone with a higher preference by the program comes and knocks them out of the spot... but this does FAVOR the applicant because it allows you to shoot for whatever program and not be penalized because someone else "stole your spot" because they ranked the program higher than you... No one is Locked into their spot until they are the top person on the programs list (and when you become the top person on a programs list, you match there and are removed from every other list, thus creating a new top person, conversely, if there are no long spots in your top choices, they get removed from your list and it moves to your next top choice and tries to match you there...).

Yes we all understand how it works. That still doesn't favor one side though. Favoring the applicant implies our rank list weighs more than the program's. That's not the case. Both lists are equal.

 

[kwel]

The SFmatch website explains the algorithm nicely. If you read through it it should be blatantly obvious that the way you should rank programs is in the order of YOUR preference. This will not screw you out of those middle programs that are "more likely to take you"

Don't try to be strategic about ranking; it will only hurt you. If you like program A better than program B, rank program A higher. Simple as that. The strategy all comes with where you choose to apply and where you choose to interview.

 

[kwel]

Yes we all understand how it works. That still doesn't favor one side though. Favoring the applicant implies our rank list weighs more than the program's. That's not the case. Both lists are equal.

Wrong. the algorithm favors the applicant's rank list. Again, see the SFmatch algorithm.

 

[yehhhboiii]

In the stable marriage problem, men are favored because they proposed to the woman of their choice so the man's preferences take precedence. The women, who are proposed to, can choose the best among the suitors that approached them but their choice is limited to the suitors who proposed. So it's much more likely that a match will favor the man over the woman since the women are dealing with a smaller prospective pool and may not have received a proposal from a man that they preferred over those who proposed.

In the match, the applicants' preferences are considered first. After that, the programs' preferences are taken into account. An applicant doesn't have an absolute advantage because their proposal might be rejected but they do have a relative advantage because they set the pool that the programs can choose from.

 

[rocketbooster]

In the stable marriage problem, men are favored because they proposed to the woman of their choice so the man's preferences take precedence. The women, who are proposed to, can choose the best among the suitors that approached them but their choice is limited to the suitors who proposed. So it's much more likely that a match will favor the man over the woman since the women are dealing with a smaller prospective pool and may not have received a proposal from a man that they preferred over those who proposed.

In the match, the applicants' preferences are considered first. After that, the programs' preferences are taken into account. An applicant doesn't have an absolute advantage because their proposal might be rejected but they do have a relative advantage because they set the pool that the programs can choose from.

It doesn't matter whose rank list "goes first." You get the same results with either rank list going first. How is this hard to comprehend? Go set up a few lists and cross off the highest picks in either order and you'll see it doesn't matter which list "goes first."

 

[yehhhboiii]

It doesn't matter whose rank list "goes first." You get the same results with either rank list going first. How is this hard to comprehend? Go set up a few lists and cross off the highest picks in either order and you'll see it doesn't matter which list "goes first."

Of course it matters. Preference is pretty basic economics. It's not just about highest picks because the options are limited on one side (the people who are proposed to aka the programs in the match). Let's say you have 3 men and 3 women. The most handsome man proposes to the most beautiful woman and she accepts. The second place man proposes to the third most beautiful woman and she accepts. The third man proposes to the second most beautiful woman and she accepts. All of the men would be happy with any of the woman but this is how they chose.

All the women prefer the men in order from most to least handsome (1>2>3). But all of the women would be happy to marry any of the men. In this scenario you see that the second most beautiful woman didn't get her optimal choice because she wanted the second most handsome man but he chose the least beautiful woman. (Of course she wanted #1 but he was taken already.)


Now let's turn the scenario around. This time, the women get to choose first. The most beautiful woman proposes to the most handsome man and he accepts. Then the second woman proposes among the two that are left and she picks the second most handsome man. The third woman is left with the third most handsome man.

The second most handsome man still prefers the third most beautiful woman but he's okay with how it went. (his rank list was 1>3>2) So in this scenario, the second most handsome man wanted #3 but got #2 instead. The rank lists were the same for everyone. All the women still wanted the men in order (1>2>3). Man 1 and man 3 were 1>2>3 but man 2 was 1>3>2. You can see that man 2 is worse off from not being able to choose because he would have been happier if he were to marry woman 3.

 

[Rothbard]

It doesn't matter whose rank list "goes first." You get the same results with either rank list going first. How is this hard to comprehend? Go set up a few lists and cross off the highest picks in either order and you'll see it doesn't matter which list "goes first."

This **** ain't complicated bro.

Utah prefers Sally to Joe.
Nevada prefers Joe to Sally.
Joe prefers Utah to Nevada.
Sally prefers Nevada to Utah.

Who goes where?

 

[Rothbard]

This **** ain't complicated bro.

Utah prefers Sally to Joe.
Nevada prefers Joe to Sally.
Joe prefers Utah to Nevada.
Sally prefers Nevada to Utah.

Who goes where?

The real question is, how often do situations like this come up? The big selling point of the match is that it favors the applicant, but I'd imagine scenarios like this are relatively rare. I doubt we'll ever see the data.

 

[NotAProgDirector]

You're all basically arguing the same thing.

The fact is that the match algorithm basically uses both program and applicant rank lists to find the best fit. Both lists are used equally. In the vast majority of cases, it doesn't matter whether you start with applicants proposing to programs, or programs proposing to applicants -- you'll get exactly the same result.

But, as the post above demonstrates, you can generate some ties. In those cases, either the applicants or the programs get their preferred choice, not both.

So, when the match says that it "favors" the applicant, it means that it breaks ties such that the applicants get their best choices. This is rare, somewhere around 1-2% of the matches. hence, if the match favored programs (which it did in the past), 98% of people would end up in exactly the same place.

 

[rocketbooster]

You're all basically arguing the same thing.

The fact is that the match algorithm basically uses both program and applicant rank lists to find the best fit. Both lists are used equally. In the vast majority of cases, it doesn't matter whether you start with applicants proposing to programs, or programs proposing to applicants -- you'll get exactly the same result.

But, as the post above demonstrates, you can generate some ties. In those cases, either the applicants or the programs get their preferred choice, not both.

So, when the match says that it "favors" the applicant, it means that it breaks ties such that the applicants get their best choices. This is rare, somewhere around 1-2% of the matches. hence, if the match favored programs (which it did in the past), 98% of people would end up in exactly the same place.

This.

 

[yehhhboiii]

You're all basically arguing the same thing.

The fact is that the match algorithm basically uses both program and applicant rank lists to find the best fit. Both lists are used equally. In the vast majority of cases, it doesn't matter whether you start with applicants proposing to programs, or programs proposing to applicants -- you'll get exactly the same result.

But, as the post above demonstrates, you can generate some ties. In those cases, either the applicants or the programs get their preferred choice, not both.

So, when the match says that it "favors" the applicant, it means that it breaks ties such that the applicants get their best choices. This is rare, somewhere around 1-2% of the matches. hence, if the match favored programs (which it did in the past), 98% of people would end up in exactly the same place.

Well yeah, the whole point of the match system is to generate the maximum number of stable matches possible. In most cases, the stable matches would be the same. But in the cases that they aren't, it favors the applicant. So it's not exactly the same and those who propose get a slightly better deal. It obviously affects those individuals who get a better match than if the situation were reversed.

 

[Stellar Clouds]

Well yeah, the whole point of the match system is to generate the maximum number of stable matches possible. In most cases, the stable matches would be the same. But in the cases that they aren't, it favors the applicant. So it's not exactly the same and those who propose get a slightly better deal. It obviously affects those individuals who get a better match than if the situation were reversed.

Good job. You just paraphrased what aPD said.

 

[yehhhboiii]

Good job. You just paraphrased what aPD said.

Thanks 👍