<p>gpa 4.0
rank 1/200
sat 2400
sat2 800/800/800/800/800
ap 10 fives</p>
<p>ec
some leaderships, no national level</p>
<p>live in MA
US citizen
competitive private(I'd say Milton)
Upper class($200,000 annually)
grandmother graduated MIT
white female</p>
<p>B</p>
<p>gpa 2.9(straight As in Math and Science classes though)
rank 370/500
no sat
sat2: 800 math 2/790 physics/800 chinese
ap: calculus bc 5
toefl: 233</p>
<p>ec
4 consecutive years of IMO gold medal(one year with perfect score-only one)
no ecs except math or science</p>
<p>live in China(I chose China because they are always first in IMO)
normal public highschool in China(don't know much about there)
Middle-lower class($20,000 annually)
Chinese Male</p>
<p>A because B is international and the international pool is about 5x more competitive. Come to think of it, there are no AP tests offered in china, either. I'd be curious as to how this kid got his hands on it. He'd have been kicked out of school maintaining a GPA like that. And $40,000 translates into some 320,000 yuan and that's a pretty damn good living. He's not fooling me into thinking he's middle/lower class.</p>
<p>You missed my point. My point is that this is a ridiculous contrived situation that without further context would be an utter waste of time to pursue.</p>
<p>EDIT: regarding IMO... there's a whole long unhappy thread about that somewhere. Search the archives. It wasn't that long ago.</p>
<p>Physicslover, I think pebbles point that got a little lost is the difference in admission percentages between domestic and international applicant pools. Given those differences, it might on the surface be easier to predict that A would be a "more likely" admit than B. But of course no applicant is just a matter of his or her numbers and list of awards, so it's not a realistic question.</p>
<p>You can name all the people with 4 consecutive IMO golds, and they tend to be smart enough people to get decent GPAs all around, and driven enough to remember to take the SATs. It's very possible to outsource humanities classes to the left side of your brain..</p>
<p>This seems silly. In admissions, it's never A vs. B. I think they would both be accepted assuming the other factors like essays and interviews were adequate or better.</p>
You think that this is middle-lower class in China? Try fantastically affluent. This brings up one of the greatest problems with hypothetical questions: you have to know what you're talking about first.</p>
<p>There are a just a very small handful of 4-time gold medalists in IMO history, in addition to which students attaining golds in their freshman years move on to bigger and better things junior and/or senior year. Hence, the extracurriculars themselves are contrived and unrealistic. </p>
<p>(Such a student would also be involved heavily in research, regardless of whether they could be successful in it or not)</p>
<p>Furthermore, there's no way that one would get straight Ds and Fs in non-technical classes with the intellectual ability to get 4 straight IMO golds. It's utterly nonsensical to believe this.</p>
<p>It's like saying that Lebron James is less athletic than the average person pulled off the street. No, basketball (math compeitions) is not pure athletic (academic) ability, but you'd better need both hard work and great athleticism (intellect) to succeed at that level. </p>
<p>And I have a good suspicion that one of the greatest math competition participants of all time would not be going to a regular Chinese high school, contrary to Hollywood films about geniuses....</p>
<p>Heh, I think the only two gladiator movies I've watched are "Gladiator" and "Sparticus". I liked both, but didn't consider either a masterpiece.</p>
<p>I am however a great admirer of the acting work of both Joaquin and River Phoenix.</p>