how real you want me to be with my answer? I WANT THE REAL REAL x100 << yall mofos strap in because im about to open a beer and lay it to em - meme king <<Overall I don't think there is that much "hate." It is hard for derm applicants since many without interviews are also really great applicants. Derm usually has the highest stats (step/pubs/etc) for unmatched applicants as well, so it can be disheartening after all that effort.
< yo is this guy writing war and peace what's going on
Well, this guy mentioned that he's getting a beer first
mb you go ahead, my dude. let it all out << omg i literally choked a bit on my beer at that 'writing war and peace', fuckin hilarious dude that shit made me cackle <PS: HOW FUCKING COINCIDENTAL ---> <- As the OP of this row, thank you for your time and candor << meme king here, no problem, i love when a real-life example presents itself to reinforce my assertions
<< lol preach. do you think limiting the # of places we can send apps to (e.g. <20 derm programs) could help solve this? << I think limiting number of interviews could be good. Even a high limit like 15 which guarantees a match based on past data would help distribute spots and help programs use their interview slots more efficiently since it would make the people with more than that make decisions earlier << what % of applicants realistically get 15+ interviews though? I feel like an interview cap won't help even out the distribution unless we were talking something lower, like 8. Which no one would agree to .
The match statistics show 28 survey respondants with over 15 fyi so not huge, but not insignificant << wow is the 28 statistic official from ERAS, or just this spreadsheet?
here's my analogy: let's play russian roulette with 2 bullets loaded in a 10-chamber system. you feel good about those odds? no? then shut the fuck up about 80% matching, because that other 20% means you fucking DEAD. no, in fact i think it'll make it worse. the top-tier applicants will go 80/20 split top and mid, us mid-tiers will go 10% top 90% everywhere else, programs will be similarly inundated and there will be zero trickle.
< I disagree that programs will be similarly inundated. If applicants apply to 60 programs on average, reducing the number of apps each applicant can submit will reduce the number of apps programs review accordingly << each program thinks they're going to get lucky with the top applicants that safety-apply to their program and think "this is our standard" and eschew the other applicants. so yeah maybe you're right, but i dont think so.
That would explain the dermatology residents from top 5 schools who end up in really random programs.
As someone at a top 5 school, I am praying for a random program. Most tend not to interview us unless there is some geographic connection
< I hate that it's become an arms race and I feel compelled to apply to programs I'm less interested in (who also likely isn't interested in me) just so that I can say I did everything I could << Programs are likewise trying to depersonalize and streamline the process with standardized LOR, Case-Western-esque "what's your rank" forms, etc. I feel like it's getting worse for everyone. << SLOE for EM situation, exactly << It's awful. Effectively screws over 50% of applicants who get bad evals.
I'd be so stressed if i was applying EM with those SLOEs < Unpopular opinion, but I think that long supplementary applications should required by every program (not the nonsense like Wake Forest's, though). It really helps people to explain why they would specifically like to go to an institution and people would only be filling them out for programs that they are serious about. Two of my interviews came from Supplementary Applications << I agree. It saves me from the pressure of writing a LOI too because I feel like I had the chance to say what I wanted to say in the supplemental.
Let’s be honest for some of us we really would go ANYWHERE vs not matching so even if it is “dead last” if they’d still be willing to go what’s the issue? << hoarding interviews i just said that. i literally just said that. the game is the game, but seriously wtf at these people. << the issue is that as it is, everyone is dropping thousands of dollars applying to dozens more programs than are likely to interview them. There has got to be a way to improve the efficiency of the system so that there is a more even distribution of interviews among every applicant << I've been thinking of a "match" type system for interview invites. Applicant must list top 20 schools of interest. If program wants to use "demonstrated intrest" as a factor in sending out interviews, they can do that. Top tiers would still get swamped, but I think smaller programs would be reassured that students actually want to go there.
< more like wtf at programs inviting the same people who can only go to 1 in the end << oh believe me if it's one thing i hate more than the applicants who hoard interviews, it's the fucking PROGRAMS above all else.
agree
do you actually believe that there are people with 8+ interviews at this stage? I feel like everyone I've talked to have like at most 5. << I absolutely believe it. << yes with 50% of interview invites released, there are absolutely people with high single/low double digit interview invites.
for sure the same 1-2 people are getting the invites at my school x2
maybe it's a good thing I don't talk to co-applicants at my school about the # of invites they have. sparing myself the mental stress.
<< /thread
DAMN IM OUT YOU SAID IT ALL
Damn, shots fired
So there are a lot of layers to "why be angry at people who have lots of interviews". I want to go back to making memes. 1. I don't think anyone is GENUINELY angry at applicants with tons of interviews because by definition, their CV is good enough that they earned them. It's ironic that some of the programs that choose the applicants to interview think the applicant will actually rank them in their top 4 or 5 or to actually match unless the program is similarly stupendous. Okay UVermont, I get why you're jizzing in your pants over the 275/275/15 pubs/AOA candidate that is fake-gushing over your program, but is he more likely to rank UCSF or your university? These programs invite the top-tier candidates who have multiple interviews at places they won't actually go to, leaving candidates within the residency's "league" out in the fucking cold, and then both program and applicant are left wondering what happened come match time. It's a huge waste of time for both people. Just think back to medical school interviewees who hoarded interviews or acceptances. You fuckwads out there with 12 interviews at 10 locations you'd never realistically want to match at are playing the game, no shame in that, but absolutely fuck the entire process come rank time because unlike med school interviews, it's one and done this time. 2. The rest is more personal and if you don't understand an inferiority complex you'll never understand what I would have typed anyway.