I haven't seen anyone post the workings of their entire application. It's not hard to make yourself look impressive and mask your underlying weaknesses. I was rejected. I have 35 Math ACT, 35 English ACT, a 4.4 GPA, I played varsity football 3 years, I was a basketball team captain for 3 years, I was a JROTC officer for 2 years, I went to Boys State, etc etc etc. If you look at it probably makes it look like it's insanely hard to get into this school. But what you didn't get to see was all of the weaknesses in my application. My mile time on the CFA was 8 minutes. My class rank was barely in the top 20%. I took 10 PE credit classes in high school. My essays were crap. My BGO interview was crap. When people say they were rejected, I only see them bring up the good things. I don't see them bring up their weaknesses, and I'm sure everyone's application has some somewhere. Were the some of people that got rejected all around studs? Probably. But I don't think looking at people writing about how great they are and how they still didn't get in will do anything but cause unwarranted panic. I could have just left this in a post: "I was rejected. I have 35 Math ACT, 35 English ACT, a 4.4 GPA, I played varsity football 3 years, I was a basketball team captain for 3 years, I was a JROTC officer for 2 years, I went to Boys State, etc etc etc." and it would have probably caused a bunch of people to think "OMG this guy has a 35 ACT and he's athletic and blah blah blah blah I'm never gonna get in!!!" when in reality I wasn't all that great of an applicant, and there is a good chance the person reading post is a better applicant than me even if their ACT is 5 points lower. There are good ways to gage your chances, but looking at the surface of people's applications that got rejected is not one of them in my opinion. If you do that you're not getting to see the full picture, you're just getting to see the highlights of someone else's application.