<p>
I meant the second lowest.</p>
<p>@bobleman: Sorry to hear you got rejected. Well, I’m from a pretty underrepresented state, so that may play in my favor. Far as everything else goes, we shall see.</p>
<p>I would completely state that that is NOT true.</p>
<p>Why would I state that, even when I haven’t been accepted yet etc?</p>
<p>This is why:
in 2008 (?) (not sure if it’s that year specifically) Stanford alone ranks 8 in the professional Olympics.
This fact alone emphasizes the fact that Stanford looks for potential/talent in sports. I personally think this extends also to music (esp. those applied in orchestras) since Stanford seems to love talent. (just what I personally think it is)</p>
<p>So, even if a person has 2400 and pretty good extracurriculars in academics, the person has a higher chance of not getting in compared to a 2100+ person with large amount of musical commitment/wins/impressive music record. (I could be wrong, but this is just my theory)</p>
<p>oh, forgot to state that I disagree that its purely random after a point</p>
<p>With any school of Stanford’s caliber, they could fill at least 3 whole classes with the top rejected applicants and there would be no noticeable difference in academic performance.</p>
<p>So the sport recruits aside, I think there is quite a bid of randomness in the process. (I actually don’t think music plays nearly as big of a part as sports, since the Stanford lacks the dual degree programs that many top Boston schools have with music conservatories and are unable to attract elite music students who wish to pursue a career in music.)</p>