HELD @ HARVARD 2012 style Forum

[Nelson]

Not sure why this is a shock. Harvard has always held a lot of candidates and a lot of people get in after being held. But the people who get in have Harvard numbers. Harvard is very predictable.

Talk more about these "Harvard numbers."

173+/3.85+ Be over one and close to the other.

They may have held more than usual but they aren't going to budge on the medians.

[edits]

Not sure why this is a shock. Harvard has always held a lot of candidates and a lot of people get in after being held. But the people who get in have Harvard numbers. Harvard is very predictable.

Talk more about these "Harvard numbers."

173+/3.85+ Be over one and close to the other.

They may have held more than usual but they aren't going to budge on the medians.

You wouldn't necessarily have to be over one and close to the other in order for them to maintain medians. I'm not saying that may not be how they go about choosing who to admit/deny/WL, but in order to maintain a certain median this isn't necessarily true.

[Nelson]

Not sure why this is a shock. Harvard has always held a lot of candidates and a lot of people get in after being held. But the people who get in have Harvard numbers. Harvard is very predictable.

Talk more about these "Harvard numbers."

173+/3.85+ Be over one and close to the other.

They may have held more than usual but they aren't going to budge on the medians.

You wouldn't necessarily have to be over one and close to the other in order for them to maintain medians. I'm not saying that may not be how they go about choosing who to admit/deny/WL, but in order to maintain a certain median this isn't necessarily true.

Except they have a 3.7 GPA floor and don't seem to dip below 170. Harvard takes a ton of URMs and connected folks so they shun splitters.

[cogitoergosum]

Anyone think a superlatively positive LOR from a professor who is also an HLS alum makes me one of the "connected folks"?

ETA:

[thelawschoolproject]

Anyone think a superlatively positive LOR from a professor who is also an HLS alum makes me one of the "connected folks"?

ETA:

I mean...I dno the degree of connectedness, but yes to some extent I think so. This is what I did for Yale.

[EMZE]

Anyone think a superlatively positive LOR from a professor who is also an HLS alum makes me one of the "connected folks"?

ETA:

Not sure if you will be deemed connected, but the idea sounds good.

[jetissent]

Not sure why this is a shock. Harvard has always held a lot of candidates and a lot of people get in after being held. But the people who get in have Harvard numbers. Harvard is very predictable.

Talk more about these "Harvard numbers."

173+/3.85+ Be over one and close to the other.

They may have held more than usual but they aren't going to budge on the medians.

As much as I selfishly love the numbers you've chosen, I think you should highlight that while many people who are accepted from the hold will fit those criteria not everyone (perhaps not even a majority--holds are hard to track on LSN) of those who are +173/+3.85 and held will be admitted.

[EMZE]

Not sure why this is a shock. Harvard has always held a lot of candidates and a lot of people get in after being held. But the people who get in have Harvard numbers. Harvard is very predictable.

Talk more about these "Harvard numbers."

173+/3.85+ Be over one and close to the other.

They may have held more than usual but they aren't going to budge on the medians.

As much as I selfishly love the numbers you've chosen, I think you should highlight that while many people who are accepted from the hold will fit those criteria not everyone (perhaps not even a majority--holds are hard to track on LSN) of those who are +173/+3.85 and held will be admitted.

Agreed, and no offense to you Nelson, but that sounds like a little bit too much of the standard TLS kool-aid. BUT, if you had to create a general rule about where to feel comfortable numerically applying to Harvard, those would be the numbers. That someone is held with those numbers means something different than for someone with my numbers, probably.

[whentheworldcavesin]

Do you guys think most held applicants will be interviewed? or just those with Harvard numbers?

[Nelson]

Agreed, and no offense to you Nelson, but that sounds like a little bit too much of the standard TLS kool-aid. BUT, if you had to create a general rule about where to feel comfortable numerically applying to Harvard, those would be the numbers. That someone is held with those numbers means something different than for someone with my numbers, probably.

Yeah, I didn't think that my original post was that controversial. Lots of people get in after being held, but they are usually people with Harvard profiles to being with. This means that people with Harvard numbers who were held (jetissent, Elendil, etc.) should still feel pretty good about their chances. For the rest of us, getting held doesn't mean we're any better off than we were. You're obviously not your average TLS candidate so YMMV.

[seanPtheB]

Do you guys think most held applicants will be interviewed? or just those with Harvard numbers?

Ya I think they'll interview all 2000+ held peeps

[jetissent]

Do you guys think most held applicants will be interviewed? or just those with Harvard numbers?

The people who did go through TLS/LSN and attempt to gauge chances after a hold said they saw about a 25% admit rate. Which is at slight least an improvement over their 11% general acceptance rate.

Not sure if the hold pile is likely to have better or worse average stats that the overall applicant pool because both the top and bottom are theoretically removed--though obviously not in equal number. Oh well, might as well stay optimistic/ignore all laws of statistics and insist that we have double the likelihood of getting in now than we did before the holds.

TL;DR: No. The future is bleak for most holds. Pray you're one of the luck ones.

[boosk]

I think (but I'm not completely sure, maybe somone can substantiate this) that we have a better shot than those that were rejected...

[EMZE]

Agreed, and no offense to you Nelson, but that sounds like a little bit too much of the standard TLS kool-aid. BUT, if you had to create a general rule about where to feel comfortable numerically applying to Harvard, those would be the numbers. That someone is held with those numbers means something different than for someone with my numbers, probably.

Yeah, I didn't think that my original post was that controversial. Lots of people get in after being held, but they are usually people with Harvard profiles to being with. This means that people with Harvard numbers who were held (jetissent, Elendil, etc.) should still feel pretty good about their chances. For the rest of us, getting held doesn't mean we're any better off than we were. You're obviously not your average TLS candidate so YMMV.

Nothing controversial about your post, I think that I just failed to emphasize that there is no such thing as comfortable numbers at these schools absent a unique background. Those individuals stand a better chance at getting in because, well, their numbers are better. But if H realizes they want to add a veteran to the class, those applicants aren't, in this case, considered.

Held is better than rejected because you have met their numbers bar. Now its up to the adcomm to figure out what they want their class to look like.

[Elendil]

Agreed, and no offense to you Nelson, but that sounds like a little bit too much of the standard TLS kool-aid. BUT, if you had to create a general rule about where to feel comfortable numerically applying to Harvard, those would be the numbers. That someone is held with those numbers means something different than for someone with my numbers, probably.

Yeah, I didn't think that my original post was that controversial. Lots of people get in after being held, but they are usually people with Harvard profiles to being with. This means that people with Harvard numbers who were held (jetissent, Elendil, etc.) should still feel pretty good about their chances. For the rest of us, getting held doesn't mean we're any better off than we were. You're obviously not your average TLS candidate so YMMV.

Nothing controversial about your post, I think that I just failed to emphasize that there is no such thing as comfortable numbers at these schools absent a unique background. Those individuals stand a better chance at getting in because, well, their numbers are better. But if H realizes they want to add a veteran to the class, those applicants aren't, in this case, considered.

Held is better than rejected because you have met their numbers bar. Now its up to the adcomm to figure out what they want their class to look like.

Errr... where are you drawing this conclusion from? Personally, I've only interpreted "Held" as meaning "Not auto-reject for one reason or another."

EDIT: Obviously, held is better than rejected because well, you're not rejected. I meant the "numbers bar" part.

[fingerscrossedxx]

Yeah, I didn't think that my original post was that controversial. Lots of people get in after being held, but they are usually people with Harvard profiles to being with. This means that people with Harvard numbers who were held (jetissent, Elendil, etc.) should still feel pretty good about their chances. For the rest of us, getting held doesn't mean we're any better off than we were. You're obviously not your average TLS candidate so YMMV.

Nothing controversial about your post, I think that I just failed to emphasize that there is no such thing as comfortable numbers at these schools absent a unique background. Those individuals stand a better chance at getting in because, well, their numbers are better. But if H realizes they want to add a veteran to the class, those applicants aren't, in this case, considered.

Held is better than rejected because you have met their numbers bar. Now its up to the adcomm to figure out what they want their class to look like.

Errr... where are you drawing this conclusion from? Personally, I've only interpreted "Held" as meaning "Not auto-reject for one reason or another."

EDIT: Obviously, held is better than rejected because well, you're not rejected. I meant the "numbers bar" part.

Wouldn't the assumption be that if you hadn't met their "numbers bar" you would have been outright rejected rather than held?

[edits]

Agreed, and no offense to you Nelson, but that sounds like a little bit too much of the standard TLS kool-aid. BUT, if you had to create a general rule about where to feel comfortable numerically applying to Harvard, those would be the numbers. That someone is held with those numbers means something different than for someone with my numbers, probably.

Yeah, I didn't think that my original post was that controversial. Lots of people get in after being held, but they are usually people with Harvard profiles to being with. This means that people with Harvard numbers who were held (jetissent, Elendil, etc.) should still feel pretty good about their chances. For the rest of us, getting held doesn't mean we're any better off than we were. You're obviously not your average TLS candidate so YMMV.

Nothing controversial about your post, I think that I just failed to emphasize that there is no such thing as comfortable numbers at these schools absent a unique background. Those individuals stand a better chance at getting in because, well, their numbers are better. But if H realizes they want to add a veteran to the class, those applicants aren't, in this case, considered.

Held is better than rejected because you have met their numbers bar. Now its up to the adcomm to figure out what they want their class to look like.

Errr... where are you drawing this conclusion from? Personally, I've only interpreted "Held" as meaning "Not auto-reject for one reason or another."

EDIT: Obviously, held is better than rejected because well, you're not rejected. I meant the "numbers bar" part.

I would take this to mean that those of us who were held were not rejected based on our numbers (i.e. they didn't see our numbers and toss us out). Reasoning being that if our numbers were auto-reject material, we would have just been rejected. Right?

[Elendil]

Yeah, I didn't think that my original post was that controversial. Lots of people get in after being held, but they are usually people with Harvard profiles to being with. This means that people with Harvard numbers who were held (jetissent, Elendil, etc.) should still feel pretty good about their chances. For the rest of us, getting held doesn't mean we're any better off than we were. You're obviously not your average TLS candidate so YMMV.

Nothing controversial about your post, I think that I just failed to emphasize that there is no such thing as comfortable numbers at these schools absent a unique background. Those individuals stand a better chance at getting in because, well, their numbers are better. But if H realizes they want to add a veteran to the class, those applicants aren't, in this case, considered.

Held is better than rejected because you have met their numbers bar. Now its up to the adcomm to figure out what they want their class to look like.

Errr... where are you drawing this conclusion from? Personally, I've only interpreted "Held" as meaning "Not auto-reject for one reason or another."

EDIT: Obviously, held is better than rejected because well, you're not rejected. I meant the "numbers bar" part.

Wouldn't the assumption be that if you hadn't met their "numbers bar" you would have been outright rejected rather than held?

I guess that you're right and I'm just being overly picky... I just feel like numbers are still going to play a pretty big part at this point, making it kind of irrelevant to talk about meeting a "numbers bar" already.

[WhiteGuy5]

I think getting held this year meant that you're not a super auto-reject (meaning: even if you saved a species from extinction or something you'd still have no shot). The vast majority of the holds came in when the KB --> JS switch was happening. I think KB made the call that she's not going to let in any more students because the next Dean should have that right. So pretty much anyone close to and within the 25th-75th range was put on hold.

Being on hold = you're close to/within Harvard's 25th-75th range...but you knew that before you applied.

[sach1282]

I have nowhere near Harvard numbers yet I was held. They didn't even have a spot for my GPA addendum that helped explain a bad freshmen year, so it was the only school not to receive one.

There's nothing to do but wait and hope for the best.

Cheers and good luck my fellow holdees.

[WhiteGuy5]

I have nowhere near Harvard numbers yet I was held. They didn't even have a spot for my GPA addendum that helped explain a bad freshmen year, so it was the only school not to receive one.

There's nothing to do but wait and hope for the best.

Cheers and good luck my fellow holdees.

171/3.69 = Close enough.

Edit: Think about it, she held everyone she thought JS MIGHT accept/want to decide for herself. And a 171/3.69 (especially if you were a URM) has that slight chance of getting in, IMO.

[EMZE]

Agreed, and no offense to you Nelson, but that sounds like a little bit too much of the standard TLS kool-aid. BUT, if you had to create a general rule about where to feel comfortable numerically applying to Harvard, those would be the numbers. That someone is held with those numbers means something different than for someone with my numbers, probably.

Yeah, I didn't think that my original post was that controversial. Lots of people get in after being held, but they are usually people with Harvard profiles to being with. This means that people with Harvard numbers who were held (jetissent, Elendil, etc.) should still feel pretty good about their chances. For the rest of us, getting held doesn't mean we're any better off than we were. You're obviously not your average TLS candidate so YMMV.

Nothing controversial about your post, I think that I just failed to emphasize that there is no such thing as comfortable numbers at these schools absent a unique background. Those individuals stand a better chance at getting in because, well, their numbers are better. But if H realizes they want to add a veteran to the class, those applicants aren't, in this case, considered.

Held is better than rejected because you have met their numbers bar. Now its up to the adcomm to figure out what they want their class to look like.

Errr... where are you drawing this conclusion from? Personally, I've only interpreted "Held" as meaning "Not auto-reject for one reason or another."

EDIT: Obviously, held is better than rejected because well, you're not rejected. I meant the "numbers bar" part.

Not attempting to be secretive, but this was told to me in confidence and I will respect that. But anyway I spoke to one of the rare few people that was actually informed on the process, and they said H does have a numbers bar (I don't think URMs fall under the same one). Applicants that the adcomm is interested in who aren't initally accepted, with rare rare exception, must be above that bar.

If you are held, you are above it. Again, please don't ask me to post or PM data specifically.

[Elendil]

Not attempting to be secretive, but this was told to me in confidence and I will respect that. But anyway I spoke to one of the rare few people that was actually informed on the process, and they said H does have a numbers bar (I don't think URMs fall under the same one). Applicants that the adcomm is interested in who aren't initally accepted, with rare rare exception, must be above that bar.

If you are held, you are above it. Again, please don't ask me to post or PM data specifically.

Alright, I'll take your word for it.

[boosk]

I have nowhere near Harvard numbers

c'mon man

[Killingly]

Not attempting to be secretive, but this was told to me in confidence and I will respect that. But anyway I spoke to one of the rare few people that was actually informed on the process, and they said H does have a numbers bar (I don't think URMs fall under the same one). Applicants that the adcomm is interested in who aren't initally accepted, with rare rare exception, must be above that bar.

If you are held, you are above it. Again, please don't ask me to post or PM data specifically.

Alright, I'll take your word for it.

That must be a low-ass bar, I was held and my GPA is pretty low.