<p>I should probably just give up but let's try to stop the spread of misinformation.....</p>
<p>1of42, while no college is stupid enough to say they have quotas, do you think it's a coincidence that HYPSMDD and all the others end up with the same % of Asians, blacks, hispanics, etc. every year?</p>
<p>And Fred, you can make a minute change to a run of the mill screw and patent it. Most patents are useless. His ECs are not top in the MIT pool.</p>
<p>Don't know a thing about AIME and that stuff because you're right, there are better ECs.</p>
<p>Well, if he's intl, I have to agree with Suze in that it is very hard to get in. However the misinformation that his ECs won't stand out is unsubstantiated. They will. RSI accounts for 70 applicants. Also, you implied this guy does not have a reasonable chance, again look at his ECs. "five patents" (you can't just patent a screw..that's illegal), "Varsity Tennis, 3 yrs, several awards + being captain for 2yrs" (again...how many AIME qualifiers have this, this boy may be recruited if he's really good-well not at Caltech, but you get the point), and the volunteering. Unlike most volunteering I see, this looks very real and geniune. Also, if he writes a very touching essay about the experience, some adcom's may even cry. (And crying=admission ;)) The only thing I fear for the OP concerning the ECs is that colleges might think he fabricated them, seeing as it would be relatively easy if you do not live in America to do so and not be caught. (Most of your stuff isn't very verifiable except the patents-speaking of which, they are recognizable in America right? I don't know alot about patent law except the first bit about patenting a screw) You will need very good stats OP but your ECs are solid, show a passion for the math and sciences and lend over all well-roundedness. I hate to compete against you next year.</p>
<p>Suze, did you take an intro business law course? If the product can be confused for a previous one by a reasonable person assuming it offers no significant advantage you won't get a patent. The only thing I worry for is that his patent is "legal" here in America. Also, the colleges aren't foolish and neither is the OP. The OP should state what he patented...then the colleges will view it as impressive, assuming its worthwhile. I would say colleges have pseudo-quotas, to deny it would be..foolish..but still....they are not in stone. The guys ECs are extremely solid.</p>
<p>Clearly you know nothing about patents and I'd have to totally disagree with your take on college admissions.I now what worked for kids at my high school which is one of the Country's top and has booth intnl and American students and I know what worked for the kids the college counselor I currently work for represents.</p>
<p>From wikipedia <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent#Petty_patent:%5B/url%5D">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent#Petty_patent:</a>
"So, for example, a pharmaceutical company may obtain a patent on a new drug but will be unable to market the drug without regulatory approval, or an inventor may patent an improvement to a particular type of laser, but be unable to make or sell the new design without a license from the owner of an earlier broader patent covering lasers of that type."-colleges will know which one is a petty improvement on a screw or what is truly genuine. They aren't stupid.</p>
<p>Also, Suze, as for college admissions look at the boards and see who was accepted and who wasn't. I saw maybe only 2 kids who would fulfill your standards of EC superiority.</p>
<p>In stone? No, but these schools have a method to their madness and several recent books have uncovered more than ever. According to "Price of Admission" by Golden of thee WSJ, 60% of seats at top colleges are gone before they start looking at unhooked candidates. They are taken by recruited athletes, URMs, legacies, the rich and famous and big/potential big donors.</p>
<p>When they get to a non hooked kid from a non feeder school they're looking for a lot. Those kids need to have stats to bring up the pool as a whole. As you will see if you read the CDSs, at ivies most unhooked kids are at the very top of their high school classes. They also need to balance out geography and socioeconimics with this pool, so if you're low income from Kansas your chances are WAY higher that a white kid from MA or Long Island.</p>
<p>Bottom line, when you're not hooked and applying to an ivy and you're in any OR group chances can not be called good.</p>
<p>I doubt the 60% number, I would venture lower to 40%, but lets assume its 60% for the basis of discussion. Now, assuming all the legacies, atheletes, and urms could not be admitted on their own merit, again another fallacious statement but lets roll with it for simplicity, 40% of the seats are composed of the highest scoring and class rank hogging individuals, right? I would estimate probability of acceptance into this area for an ORM as lets say 5%? Correct me if that's too high. I think we can both agree this guy is way above the average applicant, even in this selective group of un-hooked ORMs, assuming he has great class rank and test scores. So, lets correct his chance to 15%, again remembering the assumptions. Therefore there is a 35~% chance of him being rejected at all 6 schools. 65% chance of him being accepted, those aren't poor odds are they? Remember the assumptions I'm making:
1) Near Quota's in admission
2) 40% of the school for "unhooked"+ all "hooked" are not really that qualified
3) 5% chance for an unhooked applicant at acceptance
4) This guy, with great stats (2250+, 1-5% class rank), would probably have a 3x higher admissions rate than other applicants in this pool.
Point is, OP, you only hurt yourself if you don't apply and I look forward to hearing great things from you!</p>