UCL chemical engineering predicted grades

Is it worth applying to UCL chemical engineering with these predicted grades:
Physics - B
Chemistry - A
Maths - A
EPQ - A*

I know the entry requirements are AAA, but i was wondering if anyone had been given an offer with AAB.

I mean it's one university out of 5, why not? I think everyone should have at least 1 aspirational university and you got A's in the essential subjects (Chemistry and Maths). The EPQ may help if it's relevant to your course. Just make sure you meet the entry requirements for your other universities. I would also suggest that you check if you are eligible for a contextual offer. If you want some security then you should contact UCL or look at their offer rate for that specific subject.

Is it worth applying to UCL chemical engineering with these predicted grades:
Physics - B
Chemistry - A
Maths - A
EPQ - A*
I know the entry requirements are AAA, but i was wondering if anyone had been given an offer with AAB.

no unless you are contextual you will get rejected immediately if u dont meet min grades

Hi I'm in a similar situation this year. Is it worth applying to UCL BioChem/Chem engineering with predicted AAB( B in Chem)?

This is not true. Do you have evidence to support the claim?

it's a global top 10 uni and extremely competitive. most applicants are sitting on A*A*A. they get many applicants and will not be able to filter through thousands of lower grade offers so will assumptively filter out the lesser competitive applicants.
it's a flawed system, i know, because you could be generously predicted or harshly predicted, but that's just how it is, and there's always the ability to re-apply with your actual AL grades next year if you overperform.

It is not true that a student below the minimum requirement would be instantly rejected unless they are contextual applicants.
Having applicants with A*A*A does not mean that they wont consider other applicants below the requirement. They review applications holistically.

someone on reddit claimed that they had 3A*s, 1 A in Math but the minimum req was A* in math atleast and they said they emailed UCL and UCL said not to apply. I can link the post if anyone wants me to idk if the person is telling truth or not but I dont see a reason for them to lie. May also be a subject by subject basis but again no evidence for that, that ik of.

someone on reddit claimed that they had 3A*s, 1 A in Math but the minimum req was A* in math atleast and they said they emailed UCL and UCL said not to apply. I can link the post if anyone wants me to idk if the person is telling truth or not but I dont see a reason for them to lie. May also be a subject by subject basis but again no evidence for that, that ik of.

Yh ofc I agree. Main issue is only, a holistic approach from UCL may still rule out ppl with under req grades, unless the reference states that are actively high achievers or sat AS (which is more uncommon now) if it is the case of misinflated predictions. And I dont think many places will show you your reference before sending, which also in turn makes it less likely as whilst I believe Admissions Tutors will be their best to be as fair and contextually accurate as possible, its just improbably for them to access their "nearly 80,000 applications for our undergraduate programmes."(yes ik thats in total not per course) in a manner that gives someone under the min req a chance. If anything, due to UCL global standings, they may even be more likely to be more considerate towards higher achievers, as most will be predicted/achieved highly so differentiating between those candidates makes it less likely for someone under to get a place.
Again this is not to say someone with lower prediction has never gotten an offer in place of someone with higher (clearly showing contextual consideration), and ofc OP (idk if tsr uses that) should have an aspirational of UCL, but they did say on their website "Due to the high number of applications and level of competition, it is very unlikely that we will make an offer to a student with predicted grades below our entry requirements." Very unlikely is not a no, but could also be hinting at the contextual students or people with key extenuating circumstances.
If unis had the management and perfect knowledge of each schools contextual situation to give as close to a fair judgement as can be then the world would be a bit better. but its not and we dont know "OP's" situation other than predicted.

A holistic approach means that they consider all the available information present on the applicant before making their decision. I have also pointed out that predicted grades are not as strong as people assume that they are.
The application review would be on a case by case basis and not a standard auto-rejection of candidates below the threshold.

Yes... Hence why I said they would try their best with their limited info, but obviously (as UCL said themselves) its very unlikely as predicted grades would be a strong section of application.
I also did say "Very unlikely" (UCL words) is NOT a no, in other words NOT an auto rejection. Instead I bring the idea of being REALISTIC and instead of simply arguing that "Its not auto-rejection" I bring evidence to show "Its not auto rejection but a very slim CHANCE" as OP Qs infers he wants to know likely hood of offer with lower predicted grades and whether its WORTH. If worth to u means "may aswell try" then yes its worth. If he wants to know likely hood and worth meaning "do I stand a decent change", UCL states unlikely.
- "but i was wondering if anyone had been given an offer with AAB."
Again I think OP should still try apply (Indicating I doubt it would be auto rejection) as aspirational are a thing

For most applicants, UCL is a reach university so the chances are minuscule for a vast majority of applicants. That does not or should not diminish the applicant’s attempt applying.
To reduce the heat, I agree with your overall point. It makes no sense for an applicant with BCD to apply for a course with reqs of A*AA. However that would be different to a profile like the OPs with A*AAB for a course with A*AA.

Agreed. A top uni is low chance for all so I tried my best provided most reliable evidence by UCL themselves to give OP better decision evidence but ig just differed opinions as I would see that as a make or break for someone without maxed grades, as even the top applicant that apply to UCL, make up probably few 000s of the applications, being globally top.
Yes didn’t mean to make it sound heated but I think his is where some misunderstanding comes in 😆 The A* OP has for EPQ, whilst recognised by UCL as independent research, it does not form part of the offer and won’t be used along his grades for entry requirement. And for chem eng the entry req for UCL is AAA compared to OP AAB hence why he asked- not A*AA

Yes, as it was noted earlier, the OP has to apply and hope for the best (like other top applicants). I doubt UCL would discount their A* in EPQ when the OP is applying for an engineering course with the potential for research during later years.