<p>
</p>
<p>I’m sorry, but that’s a rather condescending viewpoint. You are branding those who criticize the “tryhards” (for lack of a better term; aka Group X) as “less-than-talented,” implying that those who are not advocates of this gun ho life or death attitude towards admission at elites are uniformly less intelligent. That has a bit of an elitist tone to it. </p>
<p>My personal view is that there is in fact a third group that is a mix of X and Y. The ones who take enormous numbers of AP’s, have astronomical SAT scores, compete in major national and international competition and yet are still chill about it. These are the ones who either do things for fun, or maybe even more commonly, do it because it’s good for admissions. However, their attitude is not “it’s good for admissions, must be good,” but rather a more reluctant “fine I’ll do it, but I won’t like it,” and they end up destroying the competition anyways.</p>
<p>Most point is that simple black and white dichotomies never work. And from my own observations, at the higher state, national, and international level you start seeing much more of this third group of people, blessed with incredible abilities but who remain calm and cool human beings. And they seem to be a real hit with the admissions officers.</p>
<p>Then there’s the fourth group who really are less intelligent but are cool anyways.</p>
<p>That’s my take on things. Any thoughts? Criticisms?</p>