<p>@petersuu that viewpoint seems a bit unfair. I have come to the realization I am not an Olympic level athlete in my sport (which is a varsity sport at Cornell). It’s just not my future. My plans are to attack my school work with the same intensity and focus as I did my high school studies + sport. I suspect most other students at Cornell have a higher IQ and better prep than my large public high school provided me. I can only compete and suceed by out working everyone of my classmates. So while it would be fun to continue in my sport at Cornell, and yes I am good enough to be recruited, why bother? What confuses me is the whole assessment process. I thought EC’s were to show passion for something and prove you could handle high school academic work while doing something meaningful outside of the classroom. I am starting to suspect its more PC and biased and why not? It’s hard to understand the commitment level it takes to compete at a high level in any sport. The year round training, weeks away from home at development camps, the stress of competition. It’s easier to understand EC’s like Environment club and Habitat for Humanity that make the world a better place but as @Sox said doesn’t necessarily shown passion or commitment to excellence.</p>