<p>@Veggie_delight, that’s absolutely horrible and I can honestly say it’s Stanford’s loss! I hope she gets into some other excellent schools.</p>
<p>I got deferred from Brown ED when my GC said I would almost definitely get in. I know that’s not saying much, but in general admissions do seem to be pretty wacky this year based on what’s happened in my school too. I hope RD is a bit better.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You know, if Stanford is rejecting people like this in favor of the people that they have accepted from my school (jerks and weirdos), I would frankly not want to go to Stanford. This acceptance history is consistent with another thread that analyzed all the great names associated with Stanford (like the Google founders, for example) and posited and proved that the vast majority were in the grad schools and almost none had come out of the college itself. I don’t really think they have good adult supervision at the Stanford college admissions level – the apps are read by just-out-of-college readers and so they naturally choose kids like themselves and/or subliminally express their biases. The one time I took a tour of the campus, the campus tour guide was a complete nitwit girl who couldn’t stop talking breathlessly about the football team. At least she could walk backwards without tripping, so I was impressed . . .</p>
<p>I would not be surprised if you are rejected. I know plenty of people who sounded better than you on paper who did get rejected.</p>
<p>@rainbowrose–it’s all right, though I do agree to an extent with your post, among others. I wouldn’t be shocked if the OP was rejected. Why? Because I’m not surprised when anyone is rejected anymore. Seriously, we’ve all seen so many utterly amazing people get rejected, it really shouldn’t faze anyone if the same were to happen to the OP.</p>
<p>Also the search function is working again–here’s the profile I mentioned. She was rejected outright from Stanford SCEA, though she’s a senior at Harvard now, I think.</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/what-my-chances/165580-stanford-ivies-ucs-etc-chances-rising-senior.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/what-my-chances/165580-stanford-ivies-ucs-etc-chances-rising-senior.html</a></p>
<p>@kellybkk</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s fair to make those judgments and assumptions about your peers, since you haven’t seen their applications, recommendations, essays, etc. All that is monumentally important. It’s very unfair to extrapolate that to the entire accepted class at Stanford. Every top school accepts ******s.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you look at it selectively, sure 
What about… Vinton Cerf, father of the Internet? Ray Dolby, of Dolby Digital fame? Reid Hoffman, founder of LinkedIn? Ricardo Maduro, president of Honduras? Richard Levin and Peter Salovey, current president and current provost of Yale? Almost every US Congressman that Stanford has produced? Four US Supreme Court justices? The list goes on, and all of them did their undergrad at Stanford. See this</p>
<p>[List</a> of Stanford University people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stanford_University_people]List”>List of Stanford University faculty and staff - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>It’s a generally recognized phenomenon that grad schools tend to overshadow, simply because they’re the most educated, the most driven, etc. (unsurprisingly, people with graduate education on average are more successful and have higher incomes). Since Stanford has probably the best graduate division in the country, it’s no wonder that it overshadows its undergrad. But its undergrads are pretty successful too–probably why nearly half of the students go straight to grad school, they have high starting salaries… well, we don’t need to rehash why Stanford’s undergrad is awesome.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Some of the admissions team is freshly hired, but most are not. Remember that it’s a large team of people doing this. And again it’s read by multiple people, some senior some junior, so that isn’t a problem.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Way to be superficial and judgmental. She was probably talking about the football team because the Cardinal has done better than it has in a very long time. 12-1, Orange Bowl victory too? Yeah that’s something to talk about. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Stories like these, to be frank, are quite useless. Many many applicants to Stanford are extremely qualified and will, most of the time, end up being rejected. While I cannot assess your chances at Stanford, I can tell you are clearly academically qualified, are taking a rigorous curriculum and are passionate about your extracurricular activities. I think you’ve done everything you’ve can do. Also, nice Chess rating If I’ve kept playing competitive chess, I think I’d be somewhere around there. Anyway, good luck.</p>
<p>Seriously, we’ve all seen so many utterly amazing people get rejected, it really shouldn’t faze anyone if the same were to happen to the OP.</p>
<p>Problem is, when most say ,“utterly amazing people,” again, they are referring only to what they know about them- their stats, classes, hs rigor, list of ECs. (The sort of thing you see on CC chance me posts.) You don’t know how they pulled together their apps, how they wrote their essays, whether their recs were stellar or ho-hum. In a field of thousands of high-achievers, these matter. </p>
<p>When there is so much competition, it’s easy to diss a kid whose writing (thus, thinking) skills, as shown on the app, are somewhere in middle school. There are lots of ways kids trip hemselves up.</p>
<p>OP, by the way- sorry, this will sound picky, but it’s an example- did not found the American Cancer Society. Sure, I can guess it’s an error- but it’s his error. Not my job to 2nd-guess.</p>
<p>You have a better chance than most people though.</p>
<p>[American</a> Cancer Society - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Cancer_Society]American”>American Cancer Society - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>I think OP is a ■■■■■!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The OP founds an organisation and can’t even name it correctly. WOW!</p>
<p>OP - Your ratings are USCF or FIDE (in case, you know the difference)?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Um, what?
10 char</p>
<p>He means stuff like this</p>
<p>π = 3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510…</p>
<p>Why name yourself “LowIncome”? If you will be trying to put the focus on your income status, that will probably be a bad idea. You are who you make of yourself. Also, your name makes you look like a ■■■■■.</p>
<p>1st time was 2050 (LOL) </p>
<p>You’re an ass. Plenty of people would be happy with that. I hope they see you’re cockiness and reject you.</p>
<p>@DreamsUnlimited: When the OP states “Founder/President of American Cancer Society” I think the person meant by a club in the school, not the organization itself o: (just stating)</p>
<p>Oh, I see.</p>
<p>OK, if this is true: WOW!</p>
<p>I will get a shock if you are denied.</p>
<p>It’s true that Stanford likes sports. They take their athletics pretty seriously, and a LOT of their students are athletes (I personally got in EA as a recruited athlete).
It’s also true that being Asian hurts you. Stanford is really big on its “diversity.”
You do have a great resume, you’re just going to have to write a really good essay that proves why you’re different from every other asian with a perfect record.</p>
<p>^ Do you have to be recruited to be considered an athlete? I play Varsity Football and Varsity basketball and team captain for both sports respectively, however I am not recruited would I still be considered am athlete in the admissions process? I am also a URM.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>YES. You have to be recruited. Easiest way to get recruited (besides winning stuff and newspaper clippings, etc. etc.) is to show up at a Stanford camp for your sport – all the key coaches are there and looking around for talent.</p>
<p>@beginning, just because people would be happy with that score, doesnt mean it’s a good score.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you’re an athlete, you’re an athlete. But for admissions purposes, your athlete status won’t have much of an effect unless you’re recruited (and even then not much). Once you’re a student, you can be considered an athlete in different ways. The recruited athletes usually play for intercollegiate sports. But Stanford considers you a student-athlete if you play for club sports, too. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>About 12% of the student body are intercollegiate athletes. So I wouldn’t say “a LOT.”</p>
<p>[Cardinal</a> Athletics: Stanford University Facts](<a href=“http://www.stanford.edu/about/facts/athletics.html]Cardinal”>http://www.stanford.edu/about/facts/athletics.html)</p>
<p>If you count everyone in club and intramural sports, it’s a lot.</p>