< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 12 ·
|Dec-03-09|| ||heathenmaster: Even if you work hard it isn' sure that you'll accomplish something.|
|Dec-03-09|| ||Knight13: <Jim Bartle: Your school isn't necessarily giving you the best education; it just demands a lot of work. Not the same thing.>|
I like how you use the word "best." There's only one school out of millions out there that is "best."
And, no, <just demands a lot of work.> is bullcrap. You don't even go to my school, so what makes you an expert in this area? And why would top colleges take a bunch of us if our education sucked?
Oh, wait, you're an expert in provoking people. Nvm.
|Dec-03-09|| ||Knight13: <The Ivy League has 'need-blind' admissions (even though some of them, due to their shrinking endowments, have had to even reconsider that policy), but there are plenty of 'legacy' students who would not have gotten in with their credentials if they were poorer...What got them over the top with the admissions office (and many of them admitted this openly and proudly) was the amount of money their parents donated to the school.>|
I said what I said because of the need-blind (look, the Ivy League only offers need-based aids and not free scholarship monies) admissions. They don't reject students because of money, and there are fewer poor people because they can't afford it. The Ivy League doesn't throw in full-ride to everyone below $100,000 income in a $200,000+ tuition.
I didn't catch up on your "legacy--wrote a blank check to Columbia University" so obviously I've missed something. That doesnt' mean "I know little about Ivy League admissions." The alumini/legacy does help you in admissions, but I didn't know it would help THAT much as you said....
But, seriously, what is your problem with beating people down with your way with words? <little idea of how Ivy League admissions really work?> <When someone makes a wild, unfounded assert> <<I think you're the one blowing smoke....<And it's coming from behind>> When people make one flawed comment they're suddenly know-nothings?
The process at Ivy League isn't arbitrary and they don't select people by drawing numbers. Most people get rejected in a heartbeat, and those select few that remains have 50/50 chance of getting in because they've been labeled as "Ivy League" material. Those peole you said who got pushed over are the 50/50 ones who had a special "legacy" lable.
The admissions is a lot harder than most people think.
It goes like this (this is for people who don't know how the admissions works at top schools):
Overall Acceptance Rate is 30%
Recruited athletes 75% chance of admission
Underrepresented minorities: 60%.
Alumini Children: 50%.
"Typical" applicants: 15%.
But the special categories still get slashed off if their other requirements don't stack up to the bar line.
|Dec-03-09|| ||Jim Bartle: I do wonder, knight13. I thought you might notice the "necessarily" in there.|
Just because a program demands a lot of work does not mean it is of a superior quality. Just because your program is extremely demanding in terms of effort does not <in and of itself> mean it is a superior education. It might be, or it might not be.
There are schools in Peru which demand hours of study every night from a young age. But it's all memorization and repetition-and little thinking--so it doesn't educate that well.
|Dec-03-09|| ||Jim Bartle: OK, you say the overall acceptance rate for "Ivy material" is 30%. Does that mean you only have a 30% chance of getting into the Ivy League?|
Only if you only apply to one university.
But if you apply to, say, four, with a .30 chance in each, your chances of getting into at least one is .76.
|Dec-03-09|| ||Knight13: <There are schools in Peru which demand hours of study every night from a young age. But it's all memorization and repetition-and little thinking--so it doesn't educate that well.>|
I didn't disagree with you on that topic. Every test we get is knowledge application --- they expect you to know all your stuff, so they test knowledge application. Which means a lot of thinking. It can be annoying because if you cram for a test you'll definitely fail since memorization doesn't work in this place.
I'm confident mine is not in your "necessarily" category. I would've got out of this if it is.
|Dec-03-09|| ||Knight13: <Jim Bartle: OK, you say the overall acceptance rate for "Ivy material" is 30%. Does that mean you only have a 30% chance of getting into the Ivy League?
Only if you only apply to one university.
But if you apply to, say, four, with a .30 chance in each, your chances of getting into at least one is .76.>
Not really. I laid out the overall acceptance rate, and most of the applicant pool falls into the 15% typical applicant category.
The point was to prove the non-arbitrary admissions process.
What you said with 30% is like saying if you apply to, say, a top college (look, I said "top colleg" not "ivy league;" if Ivy League takes 30% of its students I'm happy) they pick students from a lottery box randomly so you have 30% chance of getting drawn.
That's why I laid out the special categories, etc. BEHIND the 30% admission rate.
It's one of those tip-of-the-iceberg concepts.
<But if you apply to, say, four, with a .30 chance in each, your chances of getting into at least one is .76.>
Again, no. That's not how it works. It's like flipping a coin: each time you flip, it's 50% chance of getting head/tail for every flip you make.
BUT, the more you flip, the more likely that you're gonna get that Head side you're looking for instead of just flipping once, because the law of probability (of 50%) is against flipping 9 tails out of 10 in a row.
I hope this analogy helps.
|Dec-03-09|| ||Jim Bartle: All right, let's figure blacks are an underrepresented minority. I do not believe that 60% of black applicants to any Ivy League school are accepted.|
Maybe 60% of those who meet the basic qualifications, but by that time most applicants have been discarded.
|Dec-03-09|| ||Riverbeast: <But, seriously, what is your problem with beating people down with your way with words>|
I apologize if I seemed unnecessarily confrontational...I was really responding like that because you referred to my original post as "whining" and "blowing smoke"
So now that we've retracted our claws, lets get back to the topic:
<The alumini/legacy does help you in admissions, but I didn't know it would help THAT much as you said>
An admissions officer at an Ivy League school once said about legacy credentials, "It can heal the sick, but it can't raise the dead"
In other words, if your grades and SAT scores are mediocre or low, the amount of money your parents donated probably won't make a difference. You still won't get in.
But if you were a 'B' student in high school with slightly above average SAT scores (but lower than what they usually accept), then the only way you WOULD get in is if you were considered an affirmative action candidate, you were a star athlete that the coaches desperately wanted to recruit, you had some other special skill or talent, OR if your parents donated a lot of $$
Need-blind just means that qualified students will not be rejected because they're poor...They'll find a financial aid package to help you pay....But having a wealthy donor parent (especially when the parent is also an alumnus) will help you get in when otherwise you would not have.
Universities are businesses after all...Where do you think most of their huge endowments come from? They rely on alumni giving, and usually the largest donors to the school are those who have had multiple generations go to that school
People always wonder how an intellect like G W Bush got into the Ivy League....The fact is, his father and his grandfather both went to Yale, and I'm sure their donations (and political stature) helped G W get admitted....I can guarantee you that if his parents were truck drivers he would have gotten a very thin envelope in the mail around admissions time! ;-)
|Dec-03-09|| ||Knight13: <Jim Bartle: All right, let's figure blacks are an underrepresented minority. I do not believe that 60% of black applicants to any Ivy League school are accepted.
Maybe 60% of those who meet the basic qualifications, but by that time most applicants have been discarded.>|
Dude, get "Fiske Guide to Getting Into the Right College." Seroiusly.
The colleges all want diversity, but they only got a limited space for underrepresented minorities. That includes hispanics, blacks, native americans, etc. (sorry, Asians, your super high grades and number of poeople won't cut it in this running)
So the 60% is really like
70% native americans
(these are made-up for illustration).
The slashing-of-applicants is based on what type of students the school want. If your category is black, they pick the best black students they want for their school and slash the rest of the blacks. Then they go to whites, etc.
But the categories are really numerous because they want diversity in race, academics, background, extracurricular activity, and all those other factors.
It's complicated and unfair process. People write hundreds of pages of books on this stuff. Read them if you're interested. I can't explain it that well in limited posts.
|Dec-03-09|| ||Knight13: <People always wonder how an intellect like G W Bush got into the Ivy League....The fact is, his father and his grandfather both went to Yale, and I'm sure their donations (and political stature) helped G W get admitted....I can guarantee you that if his parents were truck drivers he would have gotten a very thin envelope in the mail around admissions time! ;-)>|
But, like you said, <In other words, if your grades and SAT scores are mediocre or low, the amount of money your parents donated probably won't make a difference. You still won't get in.>
So Bush did get good grades and good scores to get into Yale.... Can't deny that. But then a lot of applicants who get rejected by the Ivy League have top grades and scores so yeah I'd have to agree that he would've gotten a rejection letter if not for his other special credientials.
|Dec-03-09|| ||Jim Bartle: <Dude, get "Fiske Guide to Getting Into the Right College." Seroiusly.>|
And you criticize Riverbeast for being confrontational. I guess being condescending is OK.
Listen, knight, I went to college, I did fine, I learned a few things, I've used them in my career, and I've done well. I'm not really interested in college admissions at the moment, except when I see mistaken comments posted about it.
I'm beginning to wonder if you're a latter-day Allan Bakke.
|Dec-03-09|| ||Riverbeast: <knight13> So now can you explain what your public vs private school analogy has to do with Nakamura vs the elites?|
Does that mean that Nakamura is the public school student who doesn't work as hard, but whines because he doesn't get invites to top level tournaments?
If that's what you meant (and I'm not sure it is), Nakamura wasn't the one whining about it...I was! ;-)
And Nakamura is starting to get invites to top-level tournaments, probably because the organizers realize that he is an elite player and elite talent, and he belongs there.
Although in my opinion it's still ridiculous he was not invited to the World Blitz this year...But I have a feeling that after his win in the blitz match with Carlsen the organizers realize it was an oversight, and hopefully he'll be in it next year
Then you'll see a public school kid go to TOWN on those country club boys! ;-)
|Dec-03-09|| ||Jim Bartle: Nakamura is not only a good player, he creates interest. People want to see how he (with his Internet play and unorthodox training style) does in top tournaments. A lot more interesting to the majority of chess fans, I would guess, than another round of Svidler-Lekos.|
|Dec-03-09|| ||Riverbeast: <JB> I agree
The transition for him may be difficult at first (or maybe not)....If it is, it's probably because these guys have a different level of preparation than he does (although I can't say that for sure..none of us really knows how hard Nakamura works)
(Incidentally <frogbert> you were talking about Nakamura's huge leap in rating over the past few years...That's probably due to him working harder, but I think it also coincided with him quitting school and focusing on chess full time).
But if they DO work harder than he does, maybe he'll take his lumps at first, start working as hard as they do, and then I think, with his talent, the sky's the limit
And I think his unorthodox playing style will take a lot of these guys out of their comfort zones...It seems like most of them are so used to playing each other, and almost all of them seem to play the Slav or semi-Slav!
Time to mix it up a bit....Maybe Nakamura will hit them with the Dutch Defense and his funky 'hippo' set-ups
Or maybe not ;-)
|Dec-03-09|| ||HeMateMe: Ivy league--they let in smart, pretty people, like Jodie Foster and Natalie Portman.|
And, they let in pretty, dumb people, like JFK Jr.
|Dec-03-09|| ||Riverbeast: <And, they let in pretty, dumb people, like JFK Jr.>|
He may have been a legacy admission, I don't know. Even if he wasn't, he's a good example of what I was talking about...Many times, the private school students don't have to work as hard
I don't know if JFK Jr was dumb, and I don't know how well he did in high school, but I do know that he failed the bar exam two or three times, and still went straight from law school to a plum job as an Assistant District Attorney in Manhattan !
|Dec-03-09|| ||HeMateMe: <Riverbeast> I was reading an account of one of his courtroom cases, as an assistant D.A. There were female jurors, in this case, just some nothing business cheating type thing. Apparently the girls were just drooling over JFK, like knock me over with a feather...I think the other side had a lawyer who jumped in front of the Jury box and said someting like "look at me!" He was crossXing someone, and the girls were all looking at JFK, instead of the witness stand.|
HA! Some people just shouldn't be allowed to work, too many distractions. He quit that gig when his mom died. I think she is the only reasone he went to Law school in the first place. But, give him credit, he did pass the NY state bar on his third try.
|Dec-03-09|| ||alexmagnus: Invites, invites... They should abolish invites in World Blitz altogether. It's a world championship, for goodness' sake!|
|Dec-03-09|| ||Riverbeast: <But, give him credit, he did pass the NY state bar on his third try>|
Yeah, I remember the tabloids in New York were making it front page news when he failed the bar the second time...I felt bad for him...I remember he said "Well, I'm obviously not a legal genius"
The tabloids also told a similar story to yours....On one of his first days on the job he asked one of the female secretaries for help with the copy machine or something, and they said the girl just started hyperventilating when he talked to her, and she nearly fainted.
Guess it's not easy being that pretty after all!
I saw him walking and biking around NYC several times when I lived there....He was actually a little bit shorter than I expected
<He quit that gig when his mom died>
I also heard his mother didn't want him to fly...He started doing that after she died also
My mother told me that....And what she really meant was "Mother knows best, you should always listen to her!"
|Dec-03-09|| ||returnoftheking: hey <alex> In case you missed my correction: he didn't qualify for Corus A|
|Dec-03-09|| ||alexmagnus: <return> That depends on the definition of <qualify>. He shared first with Motylev in Corus B 2006. On tiebreaks Motylev won, but here comes a big BUT: in the A group they don't use any tiebreaks for deciding the winner, so why should there ever have been ones in the B group?|
|Dec-03-09|| ||acirce: <in the A group they don't use any tiebreaks for deciding the winner, so why should there ever have been ones in the B group?>|
Maybe because there was one qualifying spot for group A at stake.
|Dec-03-09|| ||returnoftheking: Yes, there were(and presumably still are)tiebreak rules on deciding the winner in B and C. And with good reason; only 1 person is supposed to move up from each group.
For him they made the (first ever I think) exception, and for Short this year the 2nd. But it was definitely a special privilege, since Motylev was first.|
|Dec-03-09|| ||Riverbeast: <Invites, invites... They should abolish invites in World Blitz altogether. It's a world championship, for goodness' sake!>|
I agree...I wanna play too! :-)
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 12 ·