Chicago c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013) Forum

nba101790 · Post by **nba101790** » Thu May 02, 2013 4:23 pm

Still UR2 as of 4/26. Chicago really does take their time...

JXander · Post by **JXander** » Thu May 02, 2013 4:25 pm

Does anyone even expect direct admits at this point?

jvincent11 · Post by **jvincent11** » Thu May 02, 2013 4:31 pm

JXander wrote:Does anyone even expect direct admits at this point?

I do. If not, why haven't we been WL'd/Dinged yet?

FlowBro · Post by **FlowBro** » Thu May 02, 2013 4:32 pm

JXander wrote:Does anyone even expect direct admits at this point?

Yes

CaptainLeela · Post by **CaptainLeela** » Thu May 02, 2013 4:46 pm

Welcome to TLS

islandbrowser · Post by **islandbrowser** » Thu May 02, 2013 5:09 pm

applied on the due date and just went ur1. I'm sure hoping there are still direct admits.

JXander · Post by **JXander** » Thu May 02, 2013 7:07 pm

islandbrowser wrote:applied on the due date and just went ur1.

TheMostDangerousLG · Post by **TheMostDangerousLG** » Thu May 02, 2013 10:33 pm

Application under review! Went complete in late March. I just vomited all over myself with excitement.

atomist · Post by **atomist** » Thu May 02, 2013 10:46 pm

JXander wrote:
islandbrowser wrote:applied on the due date and just went ur1.

I also applied on the due date and just went under review too. Yeah. I know.

Lavitz · Post by **Lavitz** » Thu May 02, 2013 10:55 pm

This isn't going well, I see.

If they didn't get enough deposits, then they'll go through the people who haven't received a decision yet and try to find straight-admits. They won't go to the WL unless they exhaust that pile and still don't have all the seats filled.

If they did get enough deposits, then I guess they're just figuring out who to WL and who to reject. Nobody will get pulled from the WL unless people withdraw from this point on.

toothbrush · Post by **toothbrush** » Thu May 02, 2013 11:30 pm

i applied early jan and went ur on april 23rd

chicago is so far forgotten by me idk what i'd do with an acceptance. i'm like a dog chasing cars..

LRGhost · Post by **LRGhost** » Fri May 03, 2013 8:46 am

Lavitz wrote: If they did get enough deposits, then I guess they're just figuring out who to WL and who to reject. Nobody will get pulled from the WL unless people withdraw from this point on.

Yup

Big Dog · Post by **Big Dog** » Fri May 03, 2013 10:40 am

If they did get enough deposits, then I guess they're just figuring out who to WL and who to reject. Nobody will get pulled from the WL unless people withdraw from this point on.

Furthermore, if their yield is significantly over their projections, no one is getting pulled from the hold/WL. Period.

(Note: like Cal-Berkeley, UofC makes it clear that is an advantage to apply early. Thus, the converse is that it is a disadvantage not to apply early.)

Lavitz · Post by **Lavitz** » Fri May 03, 2013 11:34 am

Big Dog wrote:Furthermore, if their yield is significantly over their projections, no one is getting pulled from the hold/WL. Period.

Pretty much, although it depends on what you mean by "significantly." If they're shooting for 185 seats but received 200 deposits, then technically there's still a chance for WL movement but it would require 16 people to withdraw for just one person to get pulled. Not good odds at all.

And since Harvard doesn't intend to pull from its WL until the end of the month, something like that wouldn't happen anytime soon.

banjo · Post by **banjo** » Fri May 03, 2013 11:47 am

Sad as it is, I think Chicago's jump to #4 probably helped its yield, especially relative to NYU.

Lavitz · Post by **Lavitz** » Fri May 03, 2013 11:56 am

banjo wrote:Sad as it is, I think Chicago's jump to #4 probably helped its yield, especially relative to NYU.

Definitely.

I think the interviews and the $$$ it's been throwing around also helped.

manti5 · Post by **manti5** » Fri May 03, 2013 12:15 pm

Is anybody familiar with what the WL timeline looked like last year or the year before? Or is reading anything into that useless?

Lavitz · Post by **Lavitz** » Fri May 03, 2013 12:31 pm

manti5 wrote:Is anybody familiar with what the WL timeline looked like last year or the year before? Or is reading anything into that useless?

Last year they sent out e-mails to people on April 16th, right after the deposit deadline, asking if they were still interested. Most of these people got admitted on the 20th. The fact that we haven't seen any is why I expect they're at least going to finish with the "forgotten" apps first.

There were other small waves on May 9th and May 31st. Some people received calls to gauge interest on June 12th and got admitted the next day. Then some sporadic admits at the end of July and in mid-August.

Here's last year's WL thread if you want to read it yourself: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 7&t=179339

margulia · Post by **margulia** » Fri May 03, 2013 2:31 pm

Hey anyone else (besides me) who went UR1 on 3/29 still not gone UR2? Went complete 1/17.

CaptainLeela · Post by **CaptainLeela** » Fri May 03, 2013 2:35 pm

Welcome to TLS

fivestarfolds · Post by **fivestarfolds** » Fri May 03, 2013 3:49 pm

I was applying for a dual-degree but U of Cs lateness is really putting the JD in jeopardy. I had to start planning for my second year in my other program already, including lining up internships for the school year.

elterrible78 · Post by **elterrible78** » Sat May 04, 2013 3:30 pm

Big Dog wrote:
If they did get enough deposits, then I guess they're just figuring out who to WL and who to reject. Nobody will get pulled from the WL unless people withdraw from this point on.
Furthermore, if their yield is significantly over their projections, no one is getting pulled from the hold/WL. Period.

(Note: like Cal-Berkeley, UofC makes it clear that is an advantage to apply early. Thus, the converse is that it is a disadvantage not to apply early.)

And when they say it, they mean it. Based on the data from LSN for all cycles up until the current one, Chicago and Berk are numbers one and two in terms of the edge you gain by applying early. For Chicago, each month you apply early increases your probability of being admitted by a whopping 70.5%, and it's 55.2% for Boalt.

Mal Reynolds · Post by **Mal Reynolds** » Sat May 04, 2013 3:46 pm

elterrible78 wrote:And when they say it, they mean it. Based on the data from LSN for all cycles up until the current one, Chicago and Berk are numbers one and two in terms of the edge you gain by applying early. For Chicago, each month you apply early increases your probability of being admitted by a whopping 70.5%, and it's 55.2% for Boalt.

I don't think that's as true this year. I applied right before Christmas and still got in with a scholarship.

LSATSCORES2012 · Post by **LSATSCORES2012** » Sat May 04, 2013 5:14 pm

Mal Reynolds wrote:
elterrible78 wrote:And when they say it, they mean it. Based on the data from LSN for all cycles up until the current one, Chicago and Berk are numbers one and two in terms of the edge you gain by applying early. For Chicago, each month you apply early increases your probability of being admitted by a whopping 70.5%, and it's 55.2% for Boalt.

I don't think that's as true this year. I applied right before Christmas and still got in with a scholarship.

Perhaps you just had a good app?

But I think it's less true this year because they stopped going in chronological order in app reviews at one point.

Interestingly, LSN already has as many people who marked themselves as attending Chicago as there were total last year and there are twice as many people in the FB group as there were at this point last year (just going through last year's group and finding people who were added 12 months or more than one year ago). Of course, probably not everyone who is in the FB group is actually attending - many may just not have removed themselves if they deposited elsewhere - and some people will get off waitlists at other schools and leave.

Crowing · Post by **Crowing** » Sat May 04, 2013 7:40 pm

Lavitz wrote:
banjo wrote:Sad as it is, I think Chicago's jump to #4 probably helped its yield, especially relative to NYU.
Definitely.

I think the interviews and the $$$ it's been throwing around also helped.

The interviews probably helped for admitting a class that is more legitimately interested in Chicago, but one would think the admissions office would try to compensate for an expected higher yield rate. Ofc it would be hard/impossible to quantify it, so maybe that's where the issue comes in.

Still, last year at least 20 people were pulled from the WL on TLS alone, so I would still expect some movement this summer.