Still can't believe I didn't match with anesthesia with these stats

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
No. That’s the myth. Doesn’t make sense logically. All programs go down their list to some extent. Then they all subsequently lie and say they got their “top X!” They rank the better applicants higher because that’s the only way they might get them.
I literally had a faculty tell me that this came up a lot in meetings and more senior faculty would sometimes push to rank based on their perception of if they would fill the list sooner because the match used to be more open and it led to some bragging rights about how desirable the program was if they could fill sooner in the list. But, they didn't seem to care and did it anyway.

Not saying this is widespread, but it happens at a few places with older leadership, from what I was told.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I'm sorry to hear that OP. Based on your stats you should have gotten in somewhere. The only thing I can think of is your list might be top heavy in competitive programs and you just barely missed the cut on them all. Any way you would be willing to share your match list? Doesn't have to be ranked in order.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
She right-clicked and viewed the source code :joyful:
2014 was my original class and oh boy was that a wild couple of days.

Also, "rank to match" means being ranked "Top X" where X is the number of spots. Any program that says otherwise is intentionally lying. If you are ranked x+1, even though the program often goes down that far, you are not ranked to match. You probably still will match, but you are not ranked to match because if you are "ranked to match" then that means you will match no matter what anyone else does. That's how NRMP uses it in their little videos and that's also the only way it makes logical sense as a concept/phrase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I thought programs didnt find out until 4 pm EST today? how is this possible?


Sounds like a lie

PDs do this all the time. Nobody wants to admit they went more than halfway down their rank list. Truthfully, nobody can verify this and so they can lie all they want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Also, OP, I’m sorry, that sucks.

I think your mistake was as others said not interviewing and ranking more programs because a PD probably lied to you. You can ask her what the deal is but she will probably either not answer, lie again, or just be evasive - there’s little point to it.

None of us can comment on how you came across during interviews because we don’t know you. But something to consider. Also maybe applying to some more safety programs next year - you’ll have to have a huge swath of programs since you already have one match failure on your list
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Can confirm during an interview day a program told us "we only had to go X down our list to fill" to demonstrate how competitive they were.
 
Man OP this really sucks. I am so sorry to hear this happened to you and I really hope things go better for you next time around. As someone with similar stats planning to apply anesthesia next year, this is a horror story for the ages.
 
Hoping you have a great preliminary year,and that you get anesthesia in the next match. Watching SOAP threads, this has been brutal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
A few questions on this topic:

1. If u don’t match a surgical sub, and then SOAP into prelim Surg, and then u get into Gen Surg the following year, do you start as PGY2?
2. Is this the same with prelim medicine and IM?
3. Is this the same with prelim med or Surg and then going into rads or anesthesia or something, would u start pgy2?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I still can't believe in this day and age that people believe PD when PD say: "We will be happy to have you in our program." PD say that to almost everyone. These people lie a lot.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I still can't believe in this day and age that people believe PD when PD say: "We will be happy to have you in our program." PD say that to almost everyone. These people lie a lot.
Or they would be happy to have any of these applicants who are interviewed, except for maybe 1 or 2. Saying "I think you'd do a good job and we wouldn't hate you" is very different from saying "OMG WE MUST HAVE YOU YOU'RE WAY BETTER THAN THE REST. WE'RE RANKING YOU NUMBER 1." Unfortunately, a lack of critical thinking causes people to interpret the former as the latter. This is the problem of people assuming things to be true because they interpret words differently than what's actually said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
A few questions on this topic:

1. If u don’t match a surgical sub, and then SOAP into prelim Surg, and then u get into Gen Surg the following year, do you start as PGY2?
2. Is this the same with prelim medicine and IM?
3. Is this the same with prelim med or Surg and then going into rads or anesthesia or something, would u start pgy2?

Sometimes you get lucky and go from prelim to PGY-2, sometimes you have to repeat intern year.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
"The only thing I can guess is either you had too many top tier interviews or too many low tier interviews.

Maybe you weren't the tippy top best candidate for any of the top tiers and you were overqualified for the lower tiers and you fell through the cracks."

from the very first reply


From my understanding of the algorithm, this should not matter. In order the algorithm to work properly, lower tier schools should not rank good applicants lower because they fear they are too good for their program. Yield protection should not be a consideration in the ranking process for either side.

Applicants and programs should rank each other based only on preference, ie you should always rank your favorite program first, regardless of if you think you will actually match there. Trying to play the process by putting your personally lower ranked program higher on your list breaks the optimality of the algorithm.

Come to think of it, maybe it's this behavior that causes situations like OPs...
 
From my understanding of the algorithm, this should not matter. In order the algorithm to work properly, lower tier schools should not rank good applicants lower because they fear they are too good for their program. Yield protection should not be a consideration in the ranking process for either side.

Applicants and programs should rank each other based only on preference, ie you should always rank your favorite program first, regardless of if you think you will actually match there. Trying to play the process by putting your personally lower ranked program higher on your list breaks the optimality of the algorithm.

Come to think of it, maybe it's this behavior that causes situations like OPs...
Yes, but god forbid a program matches way down their match list!!!
 
I still can't believe in this day and age that people believe PD when PD say: "We will be happy to have you in our program." PD say that to almost everyone. These people lie a lot.
Noooo that's just the way people talk to hopefully keep applicants from showing up in the lobby one day with the intent of "Take as many suits with me as I can before death-by-cop".

Welcome to reality. People don't tell you what they're thinking in the meatspace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
US-MD
Step 1- 250
Step 2- 251
CS- pass 1st attempt
- No red flags (no course failures or bad grades, mostly HPs in clerkships)
- No apparent issues during my interviews
- Good CV (1 pub, 2 posters, 1 podium presentation)
8 ranked programs (including home school) to top tier and mid tier places

My advisors don't know what the hell happened. They thought I was a shoe-in. Talked to the PD and she can't give me a straight answer either.

Match Data from NMRP had me basically as close to 100% chance of matching with my stats as I could have gotten.

I've gotten 3 surg prelim IVs so far through the SOAP, but man does this suck. Busted my ass to make sure I didn't get to this scenario. Might be the most unlucky anesthesia candidate in this cycle.

Some couple reasons include... bad letter of recommendation. awful essay.
And what are your 8 ranked schools. what are these 'mid tiers' . what likely happened in my opinion is that your mid tiers may not be true mid tiers. strong programs have tons of 250s applicants. usually with 8 programs is enough to match for sure but sometimes things are weird, especially if a letter isn't as strong as you thought

or your interviewing skills need work
 
Some couple reasons include... bad letter of recommendation. awful essay.
And what are your 8 ranked schools. what are these 'mid tiers' . what likely happened in my opinion is that your mid tiers may not be true mid tiers. strong programs have tons of 250s applicants. usually with 8 programs is enough to match for sure but sometimes things are weird, especially if a letter isn't as strong as you thought

or your interviewing skills need work

MY ranked schools were Baylor, UT Houston, UTSW, UTMB, UAB, UT San-Antonio, USC, UCLA (not in ranked order)

Don't really know if my rec letters could have been bad so that's a possibility. My personal statement was reviewed my multiple people and deemed solid. I hope I'll get actual advise moving forward when I talk to my PD.

Yea I'll have work on my interview skills. They could always be better, especially since I'll have to keep interview for years to come.
 
Why not make lists public after rank day?

I say this every year, but in 2005, the AUA (urology) match got completely fu><><0re3d when they apparently did this (i.e. didn't appropriately hand check or QC the results) which resulted in HMS grads with 260+, AOA and PhDs not matching while FMGs with 190s on all 3 steps were matching at Hopkins etc. Turns out, somebody entered the program ROLs backwards which would have been easily discovered if they'd pulled 10 program ROLs and checked them against what the programs actually entered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
the system screwed you hard.
You are right to be upset.

But just a tip if I may:

be sure to check your ego during future interviews and during your preliminary year.
Some of the language in your posts raises flags about attitude and entitlement.
Honestly this is probably what sunk you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
and a second post:

It is not a myth that programs may rank much stronger applicants lower if they get the impression they will not rank the program high
Programs want residents/fellows who want to be in the program.

A average happy resident/fellow is better than a super competent unhappy one.

This is not a myth. I have seen it from the other side. This happens!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
and a second post:

It is not a myth that programs may rank much stronger applicants lower if they get the impression they will not rank the program high
Programs want residents/fellows who want to be in the program.

A average happy resident/fellow is better than a super competent unhappy one.

This is not a myth. I have seen it from the other side. This happens!


This should not happen. This breaks the optimality of the algorithm. Do people understand this?
 
This should not happen. This breaks the optimality of the algorithm. Do people understand this?
I mean "perceived interest in program" is rated pretty high up there in terms of factors considered by PDs when making a ranking list. I honestly do not understand why everyone on SDN so adamantly denies this. Maybe I'm bitter because I too failed to match my intended speciality (actually, correction, I am bitter) but I got grilled at lower-mid tier programs on why I wanted to go there. No one has ever called me arrogant in my life and I did act genuinely enthusiastic to be there (because I was!) Above all, I just wanted to match into that specialty.
 
This should not happen. This breaks the optimality of the algorithm. Do people understand this?
Well, it does but it doesn't. The idea of utility is common in economics and the utility of any individual is represented by his own unique utility function. If the program collectively derives some kind of positive value from if a resident wants to go to that school, then the algorithm is working effectively by still delivering the program's order of preferences. It's irrelevant whether you agree with their preferences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
This should not happen. This breaks the optimality of the algorithm. Do people understand this?

The optimality of the algorithm is to send people to the programs they want to go and to have programs receive the people they want.

The applicant isn't just scores, grades, and pubs. There's much more to an applicant, many factors which are not quantifiable. A program has the right to rank a person as they see fit.

Some of those so-called superstar applicants are also those you would hate working alongside with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
This should not happen. This breaks the optimality of the algorithm. Do people understand this?

NRMP program director survey cited "perceived interest in program" as about as important as step scores in terms of ranking...which puts it well below interview interactions and interpersonal skills, the top two factors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I mean "perceived interest in program" is rated pretty high up there in terms of factors considered by PDs when making a ranking list. I honestly do not understand why everyone on SDN so adamantly denies this. Maybe I'm bitter because I too failed to match my intended speciality (actually, correction, I am bitter) but I got grilled at lower-mid tier programs on why I wanted to go there. No one has ever called me arrogant in my life and I did act genuinely enthusiastic to be there (because I was!) Above all, I just wanted to match into that specialty.
You might be bitter but it's not making what you're saying any less accurate
 
MY ranked schools were Baylor, UT Houston, UTSW, UTMB, UAB, UT San-Antonio, USC, UCLA (not in ranked order)

Don't really know if my rec letters could have been bad so that's a possibility. My personal statement was reviewed my multiple people and deemed solid. I hope I'll get actual advise moving forward when I talk to my PD.

Yea I'll have work on my interview skills. They could always be better, especially since I'll have to keep interview for years to come.

i guess do prelim and just match into a CA1 class year next year? unless there are good soap options
 
i guess do prelim and just match into a CA1 class year next year? unless there are good soap options

There's only a small number of options left for spots still, but definitely giving it my all to get one before July. But yea man, prelim + applying for every R spot will be my plan next cycle.
 
MY ranked schools were Baylor, UT Houston, UTSW, UTMB, UAB, UT San-Antonio, USC, UCLA (not in ranked order)

Don't really know if my rec letters could have been bad so that's a possibility. My personal statement was reviewed my multiple people and deemed solid. I hope I'll get actual advise moving forward when I talk to my PD.

Yea I'll have work on my interview skills. They could always be better, especially since I'll have to keep interview for years to come.
These are top mid tier except UTMG and ?UT San Antonio... You should have had a few low mid tiers.
 
For any med student who is reading this thread, please don't be cocky even if you have good scores... People who've gone thru the SOAP would tell you it's a nightmare.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
the system screwed you hard.
You are right to be upset.

But just a tip if I may:

be sure to check your ego during future interviews and during your preliminary year.
Some of the language in your posts raises flags about attitude and entitlement.
Honestly this is probably what sunk you.

In all fairness I think OP has every right to have a bad attitude right now and was by all metrics right to expect to match with top-tier stats and an adequate number of ranks.

Could this have been showing during interviews? Who knows. But I don’t think now is the time to pile on as undoubtedly he is blaming himself anyway without input from anyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
This should not happen. This breaks the optimality of the algorithm. Do people understand this?
I mean its still optimal for the Program, because they are literally putting their preference down. They just have a preference for candidates lower on the scale.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
For any med student who is reading this thread, please don't be cocky even if you have good scores... People who've gone thru the SOAP would tell you it's a nightmare.

I have bad scores and this is scaring me to death.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I have bad scores and this is scaring me to death.

My school gives a post-match talk to the underclassmen every year and the opening take-home message every year is "if you passed all the steps and apply realistically, you will match." Don't apply only to the top 10 programs in your field, don't apply to a surgical subspecialty with low scores, and you'll be fine.
 
My school gives a post-match talk to the underclassmen every year and the opening take-home message every year is "if you passed all the steps and apply realistically, you will match." Don't apply only to the top 10 programs in your field, don't apply to a surgical subspecialty with low scores, and you'll be fine.

My step score is between 210-220. And I want to stay in Philly and the surrounding area. Lots of FM programs, thankfully. My top choice is a community program, so I guess I am being realistic about it all. I’m also not interested in FM because of my score (have been asked this...).
 
My step score is between 210-220. And I want to stay in Philly and the surrounding area. Lots of FM programs, thankfully. My top choice is a community program, so I guess I am being realistic about it all. I’m also not interested in FM because of my score (have been asked this...).
also lean on mentors and other people to pull strings or put in a good word or build relationships with the programs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
My advice to the OP is to have someone else, a faculty member, reach out to the home PD to get the real story. From what you've written here, chances are if you ask you'll get some meaningless explanation. A mentor who reaches out and says "JayHow92 isn't going to apply here next year, I'm trying to give him/her feedback on what to do next year" is much more likely to yield useful information.

I know a guy who ranked program X (a high-ranking program) as his top spot, they ranked him to match, and the NRMP system screwed up and he didn't match anywhere. He called the program and politely said "WTF?!" They said they were totally stumped, too, since they had wanted him and ranked him high. He ended up SOAPing into a prelim year and then matching into a low-tier program. The good news is that he's now a successful attending anesthesiologist. Not sure what happened to you, OP, but it could be the same kind of thing that burned my friend.

Reports like this have been investigated in the past, and always come down to someone not being truthful, or variations on what "ranked to match" means. Some feel that it means mathematically guaranteed a spot -- if I have 10 spots, you're in the top 10 ranks. Others think that if to fill my 10 spots I usually go down to #40, then you're in the top 40 -- but if I happen to fill at #35 and you're at #39, that's too bad.

If this actually happened to a program, you can bet that they would make a huge stink and it would be very public. Several of my ranks above my last match were unmatched -- that means that they didn't rank me at all, or that they were in a couple's match and chose not to be matched. I'll be reaching out to them just to check. If either tells me I was ranked, you can bet I'll be exploring with the NRMP and it will be a huge deal.

The PD specifically said he'd been ranked second, so either that's an overt lie or some error occurred. I'd call BS on the PD if it were a vague "IDK, we ranked you high but I won't tell you exactly where," but I rather doubt a PD at a top program would fabricate an actual number to assuage a non-matched MS4 he's probably never going to see again. I think there was an error in how the program submitted its match rankings or within the NRMP system itself, and I'd take even money on either.

I doubt there was an error in either. PD's likely just shade the truth to avoid owning responsibility. Plus we don't want to be sued, so it's best to say nothing.

This actually happened before on this forum. Urology applicant well-known to the program, ranked program #1, program ranked applicant to match. Applicant matched #2, applicant super confused on Match day, sent program an email asking 'I am happy that I matched #2 but just curious why you guys didn't match me if your ranked me to match.' PD was mad too and replied 'yeah whatever u played us.' Then some more conversation, the PD and applicant contacted NRMP and there was in fact an issue with the way they submitted their ROLs or the algorithm. Let me look up the thread.

I think this has already been commented upon. This was a match run by the AUA, not the NRMP. And it was all screwed up. And programs noticed, complained, and the whole thing was repeated. It wasn't an NRMP issue at all. Totally different group.

I thought programs didnt find out until 4 pm EST today? how is this possible?


They moved the notification deadline to 4PM because of the SOAP mess. But they forgot to change the email send time, so we all found out at 2PM as was originally planned.

A few questions on this topic:

1. If u don’t match a surgical sub, and then SOAP into prelim Surg, and then u get into Gen Surg the following year, do you start as PGY2?
2. Is this the same with prelim medicine and IM?
3. Is this the same with prelim med or Surg and then going into rads or anesthesia or something, would u start pgy2?

1. Maybe, up to the PD and whether there is a spot available.
2. Much more common with IM, there tend to be more open PGY-2's. But there's no centralized list, so you just have to hunt around.
3. You would match either into an Advanced position and then have a year gap (where you could do whatever you wanted), or match into an "R" (Reserved) position which would be a PGY-2 starting that upcoming year, with no gap.

Why not make lists public after rank day?

I say this every year, but in 2005, the AUA (urology) match got completely fu><><0re3d when they apparently did this (i.e. didn't appropriately hand check or QC the results) which resulted in HMS grads with 260+, AOA and PhDs not matching while FMGs with 190s on all 3 steps were matching at Hopkins etc. Turns out, somebody entered the program ROLs backwards which would have been easily discovered if they'd pulled 10 program ROLs and checked them against what the programs actually entered.

Would you really want to know you were the last person picked for a program?

The NRMP does a tremendous amount of quality control to make sure the match is correct.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Can you comment on what the quality control actually entails?
I don't know for sure, but there's a reason it takes 17 seconds to actually run the match algorithm but 3 weeks to deliver the results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Can you comment on what the quality control actually entails?

Probably entails creating a dummy full match series with random ranks, running the match, then running a different program that checks all the matches to make sure they're correct. Then, making a different match series and repeating the process a few hundred times. They probably also simulate "errors," like having candidates rank a nonexistent program or a program ranking the same candidate twice.

It's 2019. At this point, the only way we'll get an error in the match is if someone spills a soda on the computer while it's running.
 
It's 2019. At this point, the only way we'll get an error in the match is if someone spills a soda on the computer while it's running.
You have too much faith in technology. I agree there are many other fail-safes in place, but to act as if the process is flawless, more or less, is to ignore an obvious reality that computers are a product of human engineering. If they were so perfect there would be no need for the quality control. All of this is subject to the limits of our design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top