<p>These aren’t CC smart applicants, but I want to prove an asshat wrong.</p>
<p>Person A:</p>
<p>3.81 Cumulative GPA
3.60 Freshman Year
3.65 Sophomore Year
3.84 Junior Year
4.1 Senior Year
1280 SAT/1950 SAT
3rd place out of 2 people at science fair
Magna Cum Laude Latin Award
Maxima Cum Laude Latin Award
Web Design Club 2 years
Chess Club 4 years
Science Fair 2 years
Newspaper 2 years
Academic Team 3 years
Summer at state university studying the environment
AP Biology: 1 APES: 5 AP Psych: 4</p>
<p>Person B:</p>
<p>3.83 Cumulative GPA
3.36 Freshman Year
3.55 Sophomore Year
3.99 Junior Year
4.4 Senior Year
1250/1930 SAT
2 French awards
Magna Cum Laude Latin Award
Maxima Cum Laude Latin Award
French Academic Team 2 years
Newspaper 2 years
Academic Team 3 years
Web Design Club 2 years
Chess Club 4 years - Secretary 10th grade
Community Service Award
Summer studying C++
AP English Literature: 3 AP English Language: 4 AP Psych: 4</p>
<p>Is this a contest? There is no better candidate here, only a better candidate for a particular school…which you haven’t told us. We also don’t know:
in state/oos
gender
race
legacy
We haven’t read their letter’s of recommendation or their essays. Even given that, it’s going to be subjective.</p>
<p>Sorry. Statistics don’t make better candidates, admissions packages do.</p>
<p>Someone else may surely give you a different answer, perhaps the one you obviously want. It depends on the school and the major. It depends on the adcom who reads their application.<br>
It doesn’t sound like you are not dealing with a hypothetical situation, or asking what options would serve you better. One-upmanship is a foolish game to play with admissions. Just ask students who are turned down to schools who swear their applications were better than their neighbors. In many cases schools see something you do not.</p>
<p>Seeing as how they are fairly similar, I’d like to schedule an interview :)</p>
<p>I’d don’t know which I’d pick, they are both fairly similar in stats, without getting to know the actual people through essays, recs, or interviews, I would be forced to take a stab in the dark and pick person B. </p>
<p>But I wouldn’t want to admit a stat into my college, I’d want to admit a person</p>
<p>I would say B because a stronger upward trend and more success in harder classes. The SAT is pretty much identical and same with the EC’s. It’s really a push but if you need me to say someone I’d say B.</p>
<p>I see both applications about equal. Likely if one application was to be admitted so would the other. Though application B does stand out more, looking at their more leadership roles, more Ap exams. Both applications show a trend of increasing GPA though application B seem to increased more and statistically was the lowest. Though I wouldn’t look too much into that.</p>
<p>It is hard to say. They both seem very evenly matched. I would have to agree with those who have responded and say that I’m leaning slightly toward B, even though A seems almost as good.</p>
<p>I’d say that without letters of recommendation of essays—i.e. assuming the college doesn’t require them, the two candidates are very, very likely to receive the same admission decision: (both in) OR (both waitlisted) OR (both denied).</p>
<p>There is just not enough difference between the two IMHO to admit one and deny the other.</p>
<p>The stats you’ve posted in this thread are much worse than the stats you posted in the UChicago decisions thread. And I’m going to go ahead and say A, just because you come off as an angry, racist jerk in the other thread.</p>
<p>These stats are just changed so that our SAT scores/GPAs don’t affect the decision and so that they hide my identity as others from my school use this site.</p>
<p>Obviously. You’ve exhibited that through your (erroneous) belief that other unqualified 3.0 GPA, 1000 SAT URMs stole a spot from you. That’s BS.</p>