nikhilNossal ik i said we have to move on but since everyone is so adamant to find out here's what i think, i just think that top 20, top 10 are superiors, however top 10 is high superior, and top 20 is low superior, often people who used to miss out on schools but had more superiors than someone who did, and this can be quite maddening. Now, lets take two examples using old rankings, John: 3 superiors, 1ha, 1 average, Oscar: 2 superiors, 2aa, 1avg. Oscar gets in lets say. Now, if we were to use the new acer rankings, Johns scorecard was: 3 top 20's, 1 aa (placeholder for ha) and 1 avg. Oscar's is: 2 top 10's, 2aa, 1 avg. Selective schools want those who are the top of the top, meaning, those with probably at least 2 top 10's. Those who get 20's (mostly) are still high performing, but don't score in that top bracket. Yes john scored more superiors, but oscar was the one who was the cream of the crop for 2/5 tests, which is still good and thus the school can benefit from these assets. So maybe it was just to determine the best of the best in each test. Ik, there will be people who have scenarios that oppose this but there's nothing you can do, avoid Below averages at all costs because this practically means you are one of the worst at your respective subject. Average means you score ok, nothing special, aa, you are scoring well, but still much room for improvement, top 20 you are scoring brilliantly, but still not enough to be the top of the top, top 10, you are excelling. Thats just my take
