<p>Delete.</p>
<p>Delete.</p>
<p>Delete.</p>
<p>Delete.</p>
<p>Delete.</p>
<p>Delete.</p>
<p>Delete.</p>
<p>Each NESCAC institution is allowed a maximum of 14 recruits for having a football team, with an additional two per remaining varsity sport. But you’re correct, ED1 does not have a ‘majority’ of recruits. I would have been better served had I said a significant number of ED1 admits are recruited athletes. Regardless, the ED acceptance rate for non-recruited athletes is less than published. In other words, the ED admission advantage is not as significant as most believe.</p>
<p>Btw, that’s one of the reasons I posted the admissions statistics without comment. I felt I had insufficient knowledge to interpret them for the OP’s circumstances.</p>
<p>What is there to interpret? The OP is neither a legacy or a recruited athlete, both of which lower the admission rate for ED applicants. How much is debatable, nevertheless, it is significant.</p>
<p>“What is there to interpret? The OP is neither a legacy or a recruited athlete . . .”</p>
<p>Exactly. So that makes it challenging to interpret how much of a factor the more favorable appearing ED figures would mean in her case.</p>
<p>@CrewDad thankyou for your input on this! I do agree, other than applying ED and my story, there is no hook or edge for me.
I’ve been researching on Smith and my score is within their range. Plus I’m legacy there and I also love the college. While I haven’t visited Hamilton, I have visited Smith and I felt like it was the place for me. Although I was a little skeptical regarding the whole thing about attending an all girl’s school, I don’t feel like it should not be a big problem for me anymore.
Of course, Hamilton will be one of the schools to which I’ll apply to for Regular Decision (or if the situation arises, ED 2) but I think I’ll apply ED 1 to Smith.
@merc81 and @CrewDad -Thank you so much for your responses. I really appreciate it and your feedback means a lot to me! </p>
<p>My point was that posting the ED acceptance rate without an explanation of the variables is doing a diverse to prospective students.
Many high school students and their parents are unaware that the ED acceptance rates include recruited athletes, legacies.</p>
<p>I’m also surprised that no one asked the OP if she has visited both colleges. I can’t imagine two different institutions.</p>
<p>And before you ask, my wife and oldest daughter are Smithies. My daughter was also was accepted to Hamilton. My youngest daughter spent considerable time on campus but in the end chose to apply ED elsewhere. And I’ve had a lifelong affiliation with the Hamilton 
</p>
<p>@CrewDad: I suppose we disagree on at least one thing. Data should be visible to all. Interpretation can follow, as well as differ, but the figures for the basis of discussion should be made clear.</p>
<p>The OP is in Nepal, so I’m not sure she had the option to visit these colleges. It wouldn’t have hurt to ask her of course. But she did, in the early stages, state that she had narrowed her choices to Hamilton and Smith, and that she would “much . . . prefer attending a coed school.” So her case seemed relatively simple.</p>
<p>I was interested in that collegiate slice of your life. Based upon your experience, you could have been right in the middle of this thread!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nothing is ever as simple as it appears. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You don’t know that I wasn’t. Private messages have advantages. ;)</p>
<p>“Nothing is ever as simple as it appears.”</p>
<p>When you add 2 plus 2 in modulo 3 you arrive at 1. So adding 2 plus 2 is not as simple as it appears, but this example should demonstrate that if you are willing to define your terms with discipline, and pursue them to their conclusion, then even seemingly complex topics can be made accessible.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Making complex topics accessible doesn’t necessarily make them any less complex. Merc, trying to be too clever by half is unbecoming of a Hamilton student. ;)</p>
<p>Hamilton student? I wish I went to Hamilton . . . But thanks for the compliment. </p>
<p>Too clever by half? I find abstractions more elegant than using examples – which take more time, can go back-and-forth with examples and counter-examples, and often appear argumentative. Nonetheless, I felt l had a point worth defending . . . Or perhaps I was just reacting to a truism.</p>
<p>You have knowledge on the topic, for which my request was not rhetorical; I was grateful that you provided it. So I thank you for that.</p>
<p>Bottom line, subtracting the athletes and legacies acceptances for ED1, and understanding that you don’t have firm numbers on this, is it possible that RD is statistically more in the favor of the non-legacy, non athlete applicant? Please say it ain’t so!</p>
<p>It’s ain’t so. ED still provides an advantage, it’s just not as large as the raw numbers would have you believe. But it is an advantage IF you fall within the mid-50 range.</p>