I'd like to revisit this topic that I started awhile ago for the sake of the MS3's coming up behind us. It's amazing how little you know about this process before you start. Demystifying different aspects to the "ortho application game" can only help.
I started this thread with the following question:
Many (but not all) felt that to limit the number of interviews that you go on is folly for a number of reasons (you never know where you're going to like, it's not going to help out "less fortunate applicants" too much, etc). Do people still feel this way after interviewing? I personally did limit my interviewing to 10 interviews. While my expected rank list did change quite a bit, I am completely happy with the programs that I saw and have no regret about passing over some. In the end, I found that the differences between programs is smaller than I expected and because of that QOL issues, location, etc ended up playing a larger role than I had anticipated. Furthermore, I was exhausted after 10 interviews. In canceling interviews, I had many coordinators thank me for being honest and canceling early so that they could offer the interview to someone else since the qualified applicant group is always bigger than the group that can be interviewed. Obviously, we haven't matched yet, so I may regret this strategy later (I doubt it though). For the non couples match applicant getting enough interviews to entertain the idea of being choosy (getting 15+ interviews I would say), do all of you still think more is better? Personally I'm glad to have the extra dough to spend on a vacation this spring. Just my opinion- clearly there is no right answer. People should do what they want. What I am questioning is the necessity and true utility of interviewing so broadly. Does doing so really make a difference in the end? Thoughts?