[vlad]

To get to the interview stage:

Good college +2

Done with schooling +3

Single Founder -5

No Hackers on Team -4

Mention Lisp +2

Mention Smalltalk +2

Mention Python +1

Zero Hackers Willing to Relocate -5

Past or Recent TechCrunch Coverage +2

Past or Recent Mainstream Coverage +2

Google search finds many top blogs or major news sources linking to current or past project +3

Team of hackers previously founded a web startup +1

Team of non-hackers previously founded a web startup +2

Not drinking age -3

Average age 23 to 26 +4

Average age 30 to 35 -1

Average age 36 to 45 -2

Average age older than 45 -10

Knows idea should be a web app +3

Short and sweet application +3

Estimated scores for some companies at the time of application: Xobni 12 (MIT hackers), Auctomatic 13 (No hackers at time of application), Justin.tv 25 (Lots of pluses, no negations)

I'd say at 10 you have a good chance at an interview, at 13-15 an excellent chance. This is derived from Paul's writings, speeches, videos, and comments.

The actual idea doesn't matter because Paul will either tell you he likes it or recommend changing it during the interview. If you're not done with college, now is the time to say you will focus on the project instead.

Again, this is just a rough guide and I have zero qualifications to even write this. After the interview, only your execution matters.

[imp]

I predict that tomorrow someone will take these scores and turn them into a webapp that rates applications. It looks like ycombinatorrater.com is available...

[euccastro]

"Good college +2" seems counter to some of his latest writings. I guess "No Hackers on Team" would be a way greater penalty. I'm curious: why is the bonus for "founded a web startup" higher for a team of non-hackers?

[yters]

If non hackers created a successful web startup, then they must have some other kind of talent going for them, which is a plus since most others in the YC community have the hacker thing going for them.

[dcurtis]

Yeah, but looking at the Y Combinator funding trends, the majority of their companies that succeed are by founders from "good colleges."

[jey]

Correlation does not imply causation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_caus...

Being a motivated high achiever probably correlates well with going to a good college, and with getting into YC.

[dcurtis]

Right, thus going to a good college = +2.

[falsestprophet]

Well whatever the case, your college didn't teach you statistics.

[dcurtis]

I completely understand the difference between correlation and causation. But in the grand scheme of things, the human brain is designed to recognize correlation when developing internal rating systems. You would have to be stupid to not automatically give more clout to a graduate of Harvard than to a drop out of some state university. The state university student may or may not be less qualified than the Harvard graduate, but in the vast majority of situations he will be.

Even if YC doesn't give "real" points to graduates/students of good universities, just the mere emotional response to reading "harvard" or "yale" or "berkeley" sparks an automatically positive regard for the applicant. Isn't that enough cause?

Thus, good college = +2.

[alex_c]

>Past or Recent TechCrunch Coverage +2

Does Mashable count? :p