As teams move into February and March, the discussion will turn to finding 9.9s and how to turn 9.8s into 9.9s. The conventional wisdom is that it takes around twelve 9.9s (three per event) to have a strong shot to win a championship. At this point in the season, that is an unrealistic expectation. The expectation right now is that the top teams will begin to eliminate those scores under 9.800, the ones that have no place in a March or April lineup and that are unlikely to ever become those reliable postseason scores.
Looking at the proportion of scores that top teams are recording under 9.800 gives a good sense right now of how much work needs to be done in terms of both eliminating falls and finding the competitors with the highest scoring potential. Whether it’s a 9.775 or a 9.300, that score cannot be accepted later in the season by the best teams.
Because there is so much inconsistency in the first few weeks of a season, teams recording 9.750 after 9.750 can be ranked fairly well, but that team is unlikely to feature in the postseason and that will be reflected in these percentages as opposed to teams who counted disasters but are soon to improve.
% of routines scored under 9.800 for top 25 teams
1. UCLA [1] – 25.00%
2. Michigan [2] – 27.08%
2. LSU [5] – 27.08%
2. Florida [3] – 27.08%
5. Oklahoma [3] – 31.25%
6. Alabama [6] – 37.50%
6. Georgia [8] – 37.50%
6. Utah [15] – 37.50%
9. Auburn [24] – 52.08%
10. Nebraska [7] – 54.16%
10. Arkansas [9] – 54.16%
10. Arizona [13] – 54.16%
13. Stanford [10] – 57.45%
14. Denver [11] – 58.33%
14. Minnesota [12] – 58.33%
16. California [17] – 60.42%
17. Maryland [17] – 62.50%
18. Kentucky [14] – 66.66%
18. Central Michigan [16] – 66.67%
18. Ohio State [21] – 66.67%
18. Oregon State [23] – 66.67%
22. NC State [19] – 70.83%
23. West Virginia [22] – 79.17%
24. BYU [25] – 81.25%
25. Southern Utah [20] – 83.33%
Utah and Auburn (in particular) are strong examples of teams that outperformed their rankings and are likely to move up soon based on the proportion of 9.800+ routines.
Although I agree this is a fun way to look at numbers and I enjoyed it..I think it would be more interesting to include the stats for the 9.9 routines for the meets at home versus away..having more than one daughter in the NCAA over the years..there is a lot more 'home cooking' in some conferences then others..
Great stats! I agree with Anon that taking into account hone/away would helpful. OU is probably the most impressive of the bunch with 2 away meets, although home and away teams tend to score well at UGA. While UCLA has had the least amount of 9.8s, the scoring at both of their home meets has been so generous, that it's hard to take their scores seriously or know where they really stand. It's great to see Michigan scoring so well.
Fun post! I like the idea of testing the team's post season potential this way, and will be interesting to see how those percentages change as athletes upgrade / get more consistent, and as new faces are introduced in line ups. Also, I found myself wondering about the 9.9's — are we talking about potential to hit a 9.9 on a good day, or consistently performing (e.g., with an rqs) above 9.9?
Finally, I ran these numbers to amuse myself:
team jan 14 rank preseason rank pre season versus jan 14
Michigan 2 10 -8
L.S.U. 5 8 -3
Georgia 8 11 -3
Arkansas 9 12 -3
UCLA 1 2 -1
Florida 3 3 0
Oklahoma 4 4 0
Nebraska 7 7 0
Oregon State 12 9 3
Stanford 10 6 4
Alabama 6 1 5
Utah 11 5 6
-Markey