<p>“I’m curious about the numbers for Stanford vs Harvard, Stanford vs Princeton, and Stanford vs Yale. I’m fairly confident that Stanford beats Princeton and Yale, but I’m sure that Harvard wins the cross-admit battle with Stanford. I’d just like to see some figures.”</p>
<p>Stanford v. Yale: In the last year, Yale and Stanford split their cross-admits evenly, according to the minutes in a Stanford meeting.</p>
<p>Also, the Sv.H and Sv.P numbers posted are outdated.</p>
<p>As far as I can recall, every advisee of mine who was admitted to Stanford along with Yale and/or Princeton did NOT choose Stanford. My recollections have no statistical validity whatsoever, but if you’re looking for anecdotal results, that’s been my experience. The same has been true with Harvard vs. Stanford.</p>
<p>At my school, which has a decent sample size, HYP wins most of the time against S, unless there is some factor, such as legacy, that would make Stanford appealing. I imagine more California students would choose S over HYP.</p>
<p>There was an interesting piece in the Stanford Daily last year about cross-admits and the complacency of elite universities.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What it should boil down for you is “fit”. Not what other people have chosen in the past. Good Luck.</p>
<p>^ what Batllo said … what difference does it make what decisions other student’s made? … what matters is what school you prefer! </p>
<p>PS #1 - the cross admit data is not real complicated - the higher ranked school typically wins the cross admits; the only question is by how much. </p>
<p>PS #2 - I believe one of the best decisions I ever made in my lfe was picking Cornell as as undergrad … and I did that as one of the 9% in a 9/91 cross-admit scenario … for ME Cornell was just a terrific experience … what those other 91% picked is a moot point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ll fight you for it :D</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you have more recent data, then post it.</p>
<p>Otherwise, we have to go by the data that is actually available.</p>
<p>“tufts vs. northwestern seem to come up a lot for some reason” – not really. THere’s not much to tufts unless you have to be close to boston for some reason and cant do better. These seem to come up more often: NU/Duke; NU/Dartmouth; NU/Cornell; NU/ LACs (williams, pomona etc); NU/Vanderbilt; NU/washu; NU/Rice. IMO NU almost always loses to Duke and more often than not to Dartmouth and Cornell. It seems to routinely beat Vandy, Rice.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow, harsh much? I already mentioned the Stanford minutes; if you want the link I’ll find it (someone posted it elsewhere on the forum, not this thread).</p>
<p>Plus, what you gave wasn’t even data – it was a statement from a book that didn’t even have a footnote justifying its claim. Furthermore, it’s citing data from which the latest point is 1990 (and the book was published three years ago) in reference to HYP v. Stanford.</p>
<p>Here is a more recent study, which is more of a predictive analysis:</p>
<p>[The</a> New York Times > Week in Review > Image > Collegiate Matchups: Predicting Student Choices](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/09/17/weekinreview/20060917_LEONHARDT_CHART.html]The”>The New York Times > Week in Review > Image > Collegiate Matchups: Predicting Student Choices)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Although this is true, the other overlooked factor is of course money. I have lost track of the number of threads on CC I have seen that are basically asking the same question: “Should I accept an offer at a great school that would mean graduating with a huge debt, or take an essentially free education at a less prestigious (but not necessarily worse) school?”</p>
<p>That complicates the cross admit equation, as financial aid awards are not all equal, and that means different things to different people. </p>
<p>So while it is easy enough to make judgements in large part about cross-admit battles, that abstracts away a lot of complexity that matters a lot in any individual case, where you are comparing two concrete offers rather than abstract notions of which might be preferred all else being equal. In the real world, all else is rarely equal.</p>
<p>
Not exactly recent. That draws its data from a survey that was done in 2000 – nearly 10 years ago.</p>
<p>The elimination of early admissions at Harvard and Princeton and the financial aid arms race have shaken things up considerably since then.</p>
<p>I didn’t apply to HYP, but I chose Texas over Cornell, Chicago & Notre Dame. It was mostly a money thing though. It’s less than half the cost and McCombs is still ranked competitively with the other options.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I hardly find it to be harsh, for the principle is simple: you can contradict evidence only with better evidence. Not a simple assertion. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s still better than the evidence you presented, which was nothing at all. </p>
<p>Again, you can credibly dispute evidence only with better evidence. Barring that, your argument is left wanting. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Which is merely a model of what people would have done given the choice. It says nothing about whether the choice was even provided.</p>
<p>In regards to UCLA vs. USC, my friend got into both, and chose UCLA because of the costs of course, because we all know USC is superior.</p>
<p>Sakky,</p>
<p>1). That is correct. But you did not even provide that – you provided numbers that were relevant almost twenty years ago, if they were correct. There isn’t even an actual source provided. Not only was it not relevant, it was not substantiated. To call it evidence is laughable.</p>
<p>2). See above for why you are incorrect. Your statement was tantamount to me linking to a blog that made similar, unproven claims. The fact that it was found in a book thy was published four years ago by a man who didn’t even cite his sources does not reflect well on his credibility. Again, the evidence you supposedly provided is nonextant.</p>
<p>3). You wanted better evidence, and I provided it to you. My source was credible, and included a sample size of thousands. That doesn’t make it accuratez. But at least it’s more relevant than the pontification of an author who doesn’t believe in citing his sources in-text.</p>
<p>Additionally, I mentioned the Stanford debriefing that occured this past year. If you want the link, I will get it.</p>
<p>Please continue this inane argument by PM if you wish.</p>
<p>Harvard vs. Princeton</p>
<p>Brown PLME vs. Duke</p>
<p>When a group of hummingbirds were given the choice of two sweet nectars, both identical except one was bright red and one was medium red colored, how many birds went to feed on one versus the other? It doesn’t matter. All the birds were nourished. The same goes for who chooses what school over another. All the students get a good education if they put into what they can get out of it and what they want out of it. It all comes to down to a matter of individual preferences and situations. Let it be.</p>
<p>Anyone interested in the UNC/Duke conundrum should read “To Hate Like This is to be Happy Forever.” Great read. Lots of fun. Terriffic rivalry. But people feel strongly, and the rankings aren’t ever going to explain the whole story. Like Harvard/Yale…I mean, who cares??? But people really care!</p>
<p>Students choose UC Berkeley over UCLA</p>