Poorest pupils '55 times less likely to go to Oxbridge

I think this deserves the 'most bizarre mixed metaphor of the month award'.

Generally it doesn't pay to be so sure in yourself when it comes to Oxbridge. No one can know for certain that they will have a good interview. Plus I saw you want to go for architecture, which is one of the most oversubscribed courses at Cambridge. If I were you I'd be more cautious in being so sure in yourself, it'll only lead to you being too confident and then you might end up under-preparing for your interview. I had people telling me I would easily get it, and I had a pretty amazing reference too, but even then I wasn't confident at all, I prepared loads and it paid off.

Thank you, you can make what you will of the comment hopefully to the person intended it will have the correct consequences to force a rethink

Why do you want to force me to rethink, rethink what exactly?

Lol, sh!t! Well, thats not a very modest statement, my apologies. Well, it is a good personal statement and it should get me an interview... I assume I'm going to be disadvantaged because of my background.. Hence why I'm bigging myself up (compensation). Well, I calculated/deviced (which ever word is more appropriate) a way to design something that couldn't be done as it had never been done before and you had to be exceptional in order to do so (my lecturers words, not mine), so that was an outstanding accomplishment, I feel. I am very confident , but I don't know about overly, even though my previous statement may portray that. The AA?? I may be poor now, I don't want things to stay that way.. By the way I didn't neg rep you... I will pos rep you after this post, compare the times..

It is not unfair to suggest you are being a bit arrogant, and such a way of thinking would not reflect well in an interview and would prompt a shock. My original comment was more complex than I meant to be - I merely insinuated that your confidence is, naturally, a result of being a big fish in the small pond of your school/area, where you may well be the most intelligent person there. However if you get into Oxbridge you may well find you're the worst in your year because of how intelligent students are.

In turn, that means at interview you may well be up against people far far better. I know from coming from a grammar school of not much quality that I was miles ahead of everyone in my year, but some of the people I know at Cambridge are so much more intelligent than I am and were more intelligent than me at this stage too.

Coming across as overconfident in interview would have dire consequences too. A big part of the interview is putting across your ideas to some world experts in your field, which they may well rip you apart (as kindly as possible) as they did to me on a few ideas. If you don't have the grace to be able to see that you're wrong and backtrack and then incorporate new ideas in place of your old ones, you will guaranteed be declined. Remember at Oxbridge the interview is there not to see if you're intelligent but to see if you fit the supervision/tutorial system..

Hope this, just like the interview, merely makes you ponder a bit rather than be super confident.

It's good that your so confident!
Good luck in getting in to the uni.

Well it can't really be 55 times less, now, can it? I mean, what's 55 times less than, say, 1? -54?

I think that my confidence is justified, still doesn't guarantee me a place but one can only try.

pro tip: In the future don't "big yourself up"- firstly, you have no reason to do so. Secondly, it makes you look like a prat. Lastly, other people will certainly have much more impressive acheivements than being praised by a lecturer....

First two points are valid, as for the third one, you don't know me nor what I have achieved.

Maths, my darling, maths! I recommend it. Specifically, stats.

I doubt much is going to be done about it considering we have a Tory government. As long as there are private schools, the gap will remain.

Linguistics would help you more in the case of the above sentence.
If x is 2 times bigger than y, then x = 3y. Then, conversely, if x is 2 times smaller than y (still in terms of y, as the sentence is put) then that would make x = -y as y - "2 times y" = -y. What you're looking for is "1/55 as likely" which isn't at all the same thing.
Indeed, the best way to put it would be to focus on the well-off students and say "they're 55 times more likely" but because the article is trying to achieve a negative spin off the news, it would be counterproductive to focus on how much better off the well-off students are, rather than how much worse off the other guys are because the latter simply raises more sympathy for the group you're working for.