Don’t concern yourself about the C feedback chopc. It’s hardly a standardised admissions process there. When DS told me his interview score had a decimal point in it, we just laughed.
I read your post about how C gets built up to seem like the “ultimate pinnacle” and it got me thinking... When DS did the entrance exam for his school, there were 1,400 kids for about 140 places. They all sat the same exams in various sittings over one or two days. Then they interviewed the 450 with the highest scores (contextualised). But unlike at C, it wasn’t 30-odd colleges, making up their own questions and doing their own thing in terms of selection formats. It was a standardised interview in which they all had to respond to the same material and the same questions were asked. Even then, they don’t claim it’s an exact science by any means and they know full well that the sheer numbers mean that it’s not far off a lottery.
Also, the palaver of 11 plus in parts of London, in our experience at least, was, in some ways, a case of “when you get what you want but not what you need” if that makes sense? DS had failed to get into this school at the prep age, but was convinced (as was I) it was the perfect school for him. So when he came back and got in 3 years later, it kind of felt like the “ultimate pinnacle” of effort. Well, it was not, to be perfectly honest. The first two years were very rough, socially-speaking. I have to say, it did get much better and I can’t fault the school academically. He has brilliant friends now so all good. But the reason I’m waffling about all this is that you can think something is the perfect school / uni, but then so often, the experience doesn’t live up to the reality. It will mainly depend on the people they meet there and this is totally unpredictable.
Anyway, still nothing from LSE as far as I know...