<p>Just wondering, for those who have been chanced by this forum before (in earlier years), did you find those chances to be largely consistent with the actual outcome of your UCLA admission status?</p>
<p>I'm curious because I heard that CC tends to be overly harsh, which would not be surprising because it definitely does not represent the "average" students.</p>
<p>it was pretty accurate for me.</p>
<p>although i'd recommend only trusting chances you get from people who have at least some clout here on CC, ie flopsy, UCLAri, etc etc..</p>
<p>they know what they're talking about, and the vast majority of the people who post here don't..</p>
<p>Or trust people whom are Senior Members. Many of them, IMHO, have taken part in chances for a while, have a general picture of what UCLA student profiles are like, and have observed the "old" members (i.e., UCLAri, flopsy) predicting chances for a long time as well. Therefore, like mariopuzo said, they have experience.</p>
<p>Being ranked "Slight Reach" and getting into UCLA does make me feel accomplished. heh.</p>
<p>for the most part, but i was supposed to be a match for ucb, and i got rejected anyways. </p>
<p>it's really hard to tell</p>
<p>my advice would be to just not worry about it until the decisions actually come out.</p>
<p>however you get chanced on here isn't going to change the outcome, and there's no use obsessing over it during what should be the most fun part of your high school career.</p>
<p>try to enjoy yourself a bit....trust me, if you go to UCLA or Cal, it's the last chance youll get for a while.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>agree! have some fun you guys. it's really out of your hands now. you did the best you can already. :)</p>
<p>yeah and after uclari and flopsy chance you, its as good/accurate as itll get unless u wanan fork up 89 bucks and have dave berry give you his opinion.</p>
<p>yeeeeah..how about no.</p>
<p>save your money for textbooks. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>did you find those chances to be largely consistent with the actual outcome of your UCLA admission status?</p>
<p>well, the chances are based upon previous admissions data, which you can find on <a href="http://www.admissions.ucla.edu%5B/url%5D">http://www.admissions.ucla.edu</a> </p>
<p>from a purely numerical ------ yes, it's been accurate</p>
<p>we can cite whatever members' admit status and their stats but that doesn't tell us about the general decisions that are made for someone of their stats whatever...</p>
<p>Generally, chances from the CC forum are quite accurate though a bit on the conservative side. It does depend though who is giving out the advice.</p>
<p>I say so because we don't want to say 'Match', have the poster all hyped up, but end up not being admitted.</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>
[quote]
for the most part, but i was supposed to be a match for ucb, and i got rejected anyways. </p>
<p>it's really hard to tell
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Match means you have around a 50% chance, so it's very possible to be rejected. Match does not mean safety.</p>
<p>Fairly accurate, but perhaps slightly under-chanced as I got Regents' invitations to both UCLA and UC Berkeley, which were in the middle of safeties and matches.</p>
<p>who's dave berry?</p>
<p>edit: whoops, lmfao. i got it. HAHA.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Match means you have around a 50% chance, so it's very possible to be rejected. Match does not mean safety.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I constantly have to give a disclaimer after my predictions that my notion of match is not a specific percentage, but instead representative of that person being well within one standard deviation of the mean admit to that university.</p>
<p>After all, you can be a match to Stanford (meaning that you're in line with the average admit) and not get in. Same thing goes for UCLA and Cal. I never believe that my opinion is sacrosanct, however. I will argue with the data I have in front of me, but I don't believe that I'm some sort of alpha and omega of college admissions predictions.</p>
<p>Humble, you are. =p</p>
<p>I'm not necessarily "humble..." more like "realistic. I can't always know what a candidate isn't telling me. Agency loss sucks.</p>
<p>
I wish I could bold this: :rolleyes:</p>