I don’t disagree with and haven’t argued against any of the points you’ve made. Yet- the data I have presented (comparisons of capped GPAs under various scenarios), are not misleading. They are what they are - schools including UCs use school-specific GPAs for a reason (see lots of OOS examples also) and the UC capped GPA decreases substantially with more rigor, all other things (such as minimal B’s) being equal. I have wondered whether there may be a sweet spot where the rigor is pretty good, weighted GPA is pretty good, and the UC-capped GPA is not at the low end of the 25th-75th percentile, as a result of lots of rigor and a few B’s. There is some zone where the fully weighted GPA and UC-capped CPA converge at around 4.3, with a couple of B’s. How that is looked at by admissions compared to a fully weighted of 4.5+ and UC-capped of 4.12 (low end of median), is unknown. I am simply considering the 2 experiences in my family who are both ELC (top 9% of competitive bay area public high school) and fall more into the latter category but are a combined 0 for 8 thus far with UCs + Cal Poly. Inevitably, this has caused me to wonder about the relative importance of these things. Truthfully though, I think the biggest factor was their major choices, both of which are quite competitive at UCs and Poly.