Should i go for top uni's in my 5 UCAS options?

Including a lower tier university (at least 1) in your choices would be ideal.In your case AAB, incase you don't make the grades nxt year. However LSE I would argue is more prestigious than Warwick. Your subject choice has made you a very versatile and well rounded competitor. Well Done!

I would argue that your actually at an advantage taking the subjects you did. It's clear you have a solid understanding of numbers/statistics through Physics and you've got very good analytical and essay writing skills for History and English which are very important. People always forget just because they're applying to Economics/Accounting/Maths or any numerate degree that they won't write any essays but you will have to do many!

Go for it! Maybe apply for 2 A*AA courses (LSE and Warwick), an AAA course and an AAB- course so that you'll have two solid options to choose to insure with.

I believe LSE is super competitive on personal statements and may ask to check UMS (so if you were scoring low As you might not fare too well) but I really don't profess much knowledge - I think they are this competitive because they don't actually do interviews, so your application is all they know about you. When I considered it they did require further maths, but only if your school/college offers it (as not all schools do) - you'll want to check whether yours doesn't. If it does, definitely consider picking up an AS in further maths and make sure to get an A grade prediction for it, otherwise your application probably won't be hugely competitive. I believe they also require the A* to be in mathematics, but obviously you should check their prospectus for that because that was the case for me for 2014 entry, might not be now.

Warwick is a solid option as another A*AA course. The great thing about Warwick is that they *don't* ask for further maths and they (this is what their head of department said in 2013, anyway) actually quite like students to have a wider understanding of broader topics - including the arts. So they don't think doing further maths is a great advantage as essentially you're not expanding your skill sets beyond one particular type of thinking. They played up how competitive their course was to get into during their open day (which put me off in the end) because they want to create the allure of exclusivity and want to be considered as equals with Oxbridge and the LSE - to be fair, their department is ranked just about the same. So yeah, don't be worried about that because you might as well take a gamble on one or two of your applications, your grades should be fine for any AAA course (St Andrews do a BSc in Economics (AAA), Edinburgh do an MA (which I think is AAA), then I'd consider your standard Russell Group universities after that: e.g. York, Manchester, Southampton as I believe they are all in the AAA-AAB range.

I would argue that your actually at an advantage taking the subjects you did. It's clear you have a solid understanding of numbers/statistics through Physics and you've got very good analytical and essay writing skills for History and English which are very important. People always forget just because they're applying to Economics/Accounting/Maths or any numerate degree that they won't write any essays but you will have to do many!

Thanks, I've just heard substantial amount about the significance top uni's such as LSE place on further maths, and wasn't sure of the extent of any hindrance caused by it may be. The diversity of economics is actually something I look forward to! I enjoy essay writing as much as the quantitative parts so that's music to my ears haha.

Thanks for the reply! I was just wondering as I have heard about the extent of emphasis LSE put on the requirement for further maths to receive an offer. My UMS is good for the most part a few 100's in maths and history, not sure if I received under 90 UMS for any particular module. I was definitely thinking of applying to Warwick as its very highly rated and I liked the open day, was just a question of whether to even apply to LSE, as could just be a wsste of an application.
Which Uni's did you apply to and wich did you receive offers from if you don't mind me asking? You seem to be in my sort of scope if you were looking at warwick, lse etc.
I will be predicted A* in maths and an A is further maths AS if I pick it up (assured by tutor and respective maths teacher), so that shouldn't be much of a hindrance.
Are you also aware if my absence of economics at A level is significant? It is offered in my school, as well as further maths. Thanks!

No problem!

I wasn't quite in your league as my AS grades tended to be middling As (~85-88 UMS) so I didn't rate my chances highly for the LSE, especially given the fact that I did have the option to take a further maths A2 but couldn't stomach the first few weeks of the course, so ended up doing just regular maths (it may have been because I thought 5 AS's was a good idea to start with, haha).

The reason why I make a lot of these posts urging people to gamble is because I didn't really. I'm a pretty risk-averse person, and wanted to be sure of getting all 5 offers. As I said I considered Warwick and felt as if it was too competitive - but I think it was only because they wanted to market their course as such, and it may not have been as crazily difficult to get in as I had been given the impression of. I really should have taken a gamble because one of my choices I didn't even really want to go to, but it's grade requirement was relatively low (even when I applied to another course with the same low grade requirement).

I ended up firming at Bath, which I absolutely loved during the open day, and am happy to be here now - but I do accept that academically Warwick is a better place to be for economics (though not enough to have made me take a gap year and reapply). I also applied to Nottingham (A*AA), Birmingham (AAA), York (AAB) and Surrey (AAB). I received offers from all of them, and quickly regretted not taking a gamble (as I had been predicted A*A*A and had a really solid personal statement).

As for whether an Economics A level is deemed important, I couldn't honestly say. It's not required for any top-tier Economics BA/BSc courses, but of course having it does show an interest in the subject, so they may question its absence when looking at your application. If your personal statement is strong enough in terms of being directly related to economics though, I don't think universities are going to flat out reject you for not having taken it.

Also, I must say, your UMS looks really solid. I would definitely have a go at LSE in your position! Good luck!

I got AAAC at AS level in maths, further maths, economics and history respectively and I also want to study an economics degree (Bsc). I'll likely be predicted A*AA or A*A*A. Do you think my grades are good enough to warrant offers from Bath, Bristol, Nottingham and Exeter as long as my personal statement and reference are strong? My GCSE's weren't great if it matters: 2A*, 5A, 3B and 1C. Thanks in advance

Yes! Don't read too much into the hype about AS grade or GCSE A* requirements at the 'tier 2' type universities. As long as your personal statement is strong, go for it (but obviously pick something else that isn't A*AA so that you have an insurance) - personally I really liked York as an insurance option but there are equally good other mid-tier RG universities to consider as an insurance (really just get a feel for them on open days, odds are you won't be going to any of them anyway).

(Also out of all of them, if you have career prospects in mind and don't mind being at a 'small' university, firm Bath. Totally not biased.)

Thanks for the response! Yeah I'm gonna have UEA as my backup I think, AAB entry requirements I am definitely consdiering Bath to be my firm if I get an offer