<p>can't we all just be happily content????????????????</p>
<p>Haha, "trudat" guys.</p>
<p>I still don't believe it.</p>
<p>I call BS. Lets say I got a 1600, which is certainly possible, I'm 50% of the way there.</p>
<p>Then, lets say that for 4 years of high school, the toughest courses I took were algebra I, english I, and general science and I've gotten all As for those years. Technically, judging from your criteria, I have a 4.0 unweighted GPA.</p>
<p>4.0 GPA + 1600 = I should be IN. (but evidently, I wouldn't be in real life).</p>
<p>Therefore, this is BS.</p>
<p>However, it was a good joke to get the masses riled up</p>
<p>I'm assuming by 50% of the way to a 1600 you mean you got an 800 in either Math or Verbal...but the way you phrased it made me think at first about 800 combined.</p>
<p>Yeah, ok...my stories suck.</p>
<p>I also know someone with a 1600 and 4.0 (well... 3.9 <em>GASP</em>) who did not get in.</p>
<p>ISEF or USAMO, however, I would have to agree with.</p>
<p>There must be other criteria, since my daughter got into MIT with 1400 SAT's, a 3.6 from a difficult private school, and musical ability. You don't have to be perfect--she graduated in 3 years, chose to have a social life at the expense of her GPA, hated all the cut-throat pre-meds, and was accepted by all the Ivy med schools she applied to. She's now a resident at her first choice hospital. Maybe she does a great interview?</p>
<p>iggal - the idea of the original post was not that anything on the list is <em>required</em> for admission. The idea was that the small percentage of applicants with multiple things from the list were almost guaranteed admission.</p>
<p>I would tend to agree that it's plausible for every combination of things from the list that includes RSI, ISEF, or USAMO (plus Intel winner, Siemen's Westinghouse winner, and int'l math/science olympiad). I do not think it's true for applicants who have 4.0/1600 and nothing else.</p>
<p>By the way, the published list of 2004 USAMO qualifiers is incorrect. They mistakenly printed the 2003 list in the 2004 book that they published. The names are correct on the website. The number of juniors who qualified last year was about 50.</p>
<p>ah, finally some humour on this forum.</p>
<p>it would've been much more convincing if it was either 1600 and 4.0 along with one of USAMO or ISEF.</p>
<p>What does USAMO mean? What about ISEF</p>
<p>USAMO = USA Mathematics Olympiad
ISEF = Int'l Science and Engineering Fair</p>
<p>useful website: acronymfinder.com</p>
<p>The valedictorian from my school last year had a 4.0 unweighted and the highest weighted GPA in our school district's history. He had a 1600, and two 800s on SAT IIs, and a 760. He participated in the ISEF.</p>
<p>He was accepted at Caltech and all eight of the Ivies except Princeton (wait-listed), and he was rejected from MIT.</p>
<p>By the way, he attends Rice now on a full-ride scholarship.</p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.mit.edu/madmatt%5B/url%5D">http://blogs.mit.edu/madmatt</a></p>
<p>Put that in your pipe and smoke it!</p>
<p>Heh, that's kinda humiliating.</p>
<p>looks like that guy doesn't know what the 5th criterion is.... and you do. hmm. very interesting.:rolleyes:</p>
<p>This thread is pointless.</p>
<p>Do NOT be so naive as to think there is some magic, utilitarian calculus to admissions at MIT.</p>
<p>The degrees of separation you have to this information is dubious as well.</p>
<p>"someone who has a friend that goes there and knows the admission council very well."</p>
<p>Someone's (1) friend (2) knows admission council (3)</p>
<p>"My friend acheived all 5 things, and he's mad as hell because he didn't need to waste 2 months on ISEF research and he could've already gotten in with his 1600 and USAMO qualification. They told him AFTER he was admitted."</p>
<p>So are you FRIENDS WITH the person who goes to MIT? Earlier you said you know "someone who has a friend!"</p>
<p>Stop fooling yourselves people, there is no "secret on guaranteed Admissions." There are likely candidates (who have impressive stats), but there is no magic formula.</p>
<p>These qualifications are all impressive, but I severely doubt that they play a direct role in acceptance... I would believe that they would help one get past triage.</p>
<p>Not that I think it is the grounds for instant acceptance, but if achieving USAMO, ISEF, or RSI doesn't play a "direct role in acceptance..." but merely "help one get past triage," I don't know how people get in at all.</p>
<p>Of course any one of these five criteria would help one get into MIT but not without the consideration of many other factors and context. Not all 4.0's were created equal and 1600s aren't as big of a deal as people think...but it's crazy to think they can't play any significant role.</p>