What's better AAAAB or AAAA?

Don't be silly - and don't listen to people who tell you so. The B shouldn't hold you back at all for cambridge if you have high UMS scores in your other AS levels (I'm assuming the B is your least relevant subject anyway?). Don't let people put you off from applying. If you get grades like those and you want a shot at going to Cambridge then you'll need to and should apply.



I think you'll get less negs if you don't start every post with 'if I answer I'll get negged'

That doesn't make any sense though. You don't need to average 90% in each AS level so the latter part of the sentence doesn't follow the former. Oh and I basically scraped an A in Chemistry and I know many others with similar circumstances.

My naivety? And where have you been in this process to know what can be considered naive? I've researched and talked to admissions staff extensively, along with having been through the whole process. Really with Cambridge we'd have to be a lot more specific. 90 90 90 90 70 (these are percentages by the way) would wipe the floor with 80 80 80 80 in the admissions process 'game' - well for the grades part any way. Cambridge explicitly talk about how they mainly care about how good you are at your subject and care very little for other frills. Do you think they're stupid enough to pick one physics applicant over another because one got a B in French?

Oh, and my reasoning was they take 3 subjects to calculate UMS, and my conclusion that was that that phrase/sentence whatever was wrong. I'm not going to pretend to have a brilliant vocabulary, English isn't exactly my subject of interest, so you can criticise it as much as you want.

Oh and if we're splitting hairs then you also said "really want to be average about" so who knows whether I should be paying attention to your suffixes or not?

I don't know, I think AAAAEE is pushing it quite far Would probably show either a lack of commitment to subjects you dislike or a pretty clear limit of the workload you can take on.

I think I could've probably added 3 or 4 Es onto my AS Levels with minimal effort but I don't think it'd have looked too good

They're not for unis like Oxbridge. They're seen as a weakness, especially two E's. If they're related subjects to the course you want to do, then you'll be at a disadvantage.

I cannot be bothered to continue with this, and have no agenda. I merely was trying to forewarn the OP that if he ends up with a B then it is a disadvantage, not necessarily a fatal one, but nevertheless a disadvantage.

I suppose it depends on the uni... I think for Oxford etc I would say AAAA because they want straight A students, but for the majority of unis AAAAB would be better, so it really depends which uni you apply to.

Oxford would still want AAAAB over AAAA - well they would probably treat them fairly equally I would have thought from what I have seen of this process. It shows workload plus Oxbridge would have to look at other factors, and Cambridge would be much more interested in UMS.

The later one four A's

Tbh I don't think it would really make much difference, but I think that Oxford might consider it a negative that you only got a B in one sibject, as it shows that you didn't cope as well when taking more than the norm.

I took 5 AS levels and I think I'm going to get AAAAB in them. Would I be at an advantage or a disadvantage if I was applying to top universities (e.g. LSE/UCL/Oxbridge) with AAAAB instead of AAAA if I only took four subjects?

Do you mean if you carry them on at A2?

Yeah

Real, or imaginary? I'm sure you're just repeating their half-baked logic, right? One or two people have now posted about Cambridge and UMS, which I accept. One would've thought that would have been a point you'd have raised, no?

Yes exactly. On a serious level, it won't matter at all. But strictly speaking, my feeling is that if you present with all As (albeit only 4 subjects), you are saying you did exceptionally well in every single subject you took. It also gives the impression that perhaps if you had taken another subject you would have got an A in that too. With an extra B, the question is already answered that 4 was your limit of how many you can handle exceptionally well.

You'd be amazed. That is all.

AAAACC or AAAAEE is better than AAAA... Though I would see them as pretty much the same tbh.

Lemme give you a counterexample to your logic

(and I'm fully prepared to be negged by the lurking retards of this thread)

-I took 4ASs and got consistent results (lowest was 95%, highest was 100%)
-I could have taken a 5th AS that was still very relevant to my firm uni course (Biology)
-If I would have got a B in Biology (70%-80%) my entire 'consistency' would have broken down
-I would never have come across as an exceptional all-rounded 'scientist'
-I would have definitely been asked "Why the **** did you get a B?" at interview
-I would have had a significantly lower chance of making it into my firm

As much as you might not like the sound of the above, it's the harsh truth...

Sometimes, a B isn't good enough

Well no you haven't. The achievement isn't getting 4 A grades. The achievement is getting A grades in every single A level you took.

A levels are not about how many you can 'collect'. With regards to the top universities, they would rather straight A grades. Otherwise you start wondering, why didn't they get an A in that extra A level. By your logic AAAACC or AAAAEE is better than AAAA.

Despite the fact that one set of grades show you were exceptional in every single one of your subjects whilst the other two show that you were mediocre at best in 33% of them?