Going back to the issue of whether the state or independents are more selective, clearly there are stremely bright children in both.
If however, you look at the bottom end off most cohorts in the independent schools and you look at those who applied to both state super selectives and the independent, what is often the case, is that those bottom end of the cohort children got the independent but not the super selective state school offer.
It's difficult to be absolutely precise with this, because many of the children in the super selective state schools won't have applied to any independents due to cost and of course lots of the independent school children won't have looked at any statute schools. However, a fair number do sit both. Where they actually end up is determined by where they get offers from, what they can afford or not afford, where they live and what they decide is best for their families given those kind of oractical issues.
At the top end of the very selective independents (those who get academic scholarships) and the next levels down, you find that those who sat for super selective state schools got offers in those too. However, by the time you get to the bottom of the cohort, who are still clearly clever children, but perhaps got in off the waiting list, or were right at the bottom of those offered originally, you find that fewer who sat the super selectives such as Tiffin got those too. Yes, they are different exams, which makes it even harder to compare, but the fact remains that each year numbers of boys and girls who sit both types of exam get into the high achieving independent but don't make it into the super selectives against the couple of thousand who might be applying - huge numbers! Obviously, those who get into the super selective state schools have passed and got in - some have turned down independent places to be there, many haven't because they never applied to independent schools.
So, all I'm saying is that, amongst the independent selectives and the state super selectives, there is a range of selectivity. It is the super selective state schools where the numbers applying are so vast in relation to the places available that are the most super selective of all schools - Tiffin, St Olaves, Pates come to mind as prime examples.
Doesn't mean these are better schools. People like to quote the A Level and Oxbridge entry results and show that they add little value to the already hugely bright intakes. People like to stress the lesser extra curricular opportunities in those schools.....may all be valid and justify spending £X for the independent option if you have a choice between the two. At the end of the day, you should be getting something extra for all that cash!
And re below top 50 schools and Oxbridge offers - of course the doors are open to those students, in the same way they are to children from all schools across the country. I guess, it's just that statistically the numbers from the lower ranked schools who get places as a ratio of their sixth forms is lower. DIdnt the Sutto Trust show a huge proportion of Oxbridge places went to students from something like 6 institutions - can't remember the exact details. So statistically, if you're at one of those places, you probably have a better chance.....but then of course you are amongst the most clever in all likelihood if you are there to start with!