[srtjstjsj]

> Does he honestly believe that First Round is biased against founders from elite colleges?

Maybe FR is. Imagine that elite college is highly predictive of success, so you prefer to pick elite college grads, all other available evidence being equal. You're biased toward elite college grads, right?

But what if elite college grads really are phenomenally more successful, and you can't see the detailed reason (high school experience, network, whatever), to the point that they are all better than all non-elite college grads. Then even selecting 90% of your pool from elites, and 10% from the rest, is biased against the actual merit of the applicants.

[these numbers are totally made up. I'm not saying elite college grads really have these characteristics.]

The trickiness is that you can't see everything when you evaluate, so you have to assign weights to the factors you have, and leverage corellations to hidden important factor.