Any list of the top five NCAA gymnastics cliches must include “It’s all about the team,” otherwise either you’re not trying hard enough or you’re trying too hard to be unique. I see right through that. For now, let’s spend a moment making it not about the team. I hope you can handle it.

The main event of semifinals day is always the actual qualification to Super Six, but tracking the individual all-around standings can be a fun little side story. The 2012 AA competition was rather unique in how many legitimate contenders there were, with what felt like a million at least fairly realistic title pursuers. While there are a bunch hanging around again this year, I don’t see this competition as quite so inclusive. There are just a couple clear frontrunners this season, and I have broken them down (emotionally) below.

I considered previewing the event finals alongside the AA, but the event qualification is such a crapshoot that I’m holding off until we know who has advanced. I could go through all the favorites for each event, and then none of them could qualify to finals. This is especially true for vault where I can count literally thirty people who could advance to finals. As discussed last December, gymnasts will perform only one vault in event finals instead of the usual two. This will serve to eliminate the Yurchenko layout parade, but it also probably ensures that the most boring Yfull will win over vaults with more difficulty and originality. One hundred points to any gymnast that goes for difficulty (safely) even if it costs her the title. 

In the all-around, Kytra Hunter won the title last year with a 39.725. I think it is going to take at least that and probably higher to win this year, so gymnasts should be evaluated on their potential to reach that level. While there are many strong AAers, there are far fewer who can realistically break into the 39.650-39.700 plateau.

Session 1:

The most dangerous competitors in the first session will be from (shock!) Florida, and defending champion Kytra Hunter is the best bet. On vault and floor, she has gone beyond being 9.950-capable to being 9.950-likely. This season, she has also improved her form and landing consistency on bars to make that event less of a weakness. Beam is still a little susceptible to wobbles, but if she hits it, she will be in the 39.7s again. Her 39.800 is the highest AA score recorded in this season. I wouldn’t bet against her to repeat.

Bridget Sloan is not far behind Hunter at all in terms of scoring potential, and if she stays healthy, she will have to be a favorite to win an AA title at some point in her career. This year, I think she is hampered a little too much by her early positions in lineups. Other than bars, where she has the edge on Hunter, she competes in the early half of the lineup, so she won’t have the benefit of the team to build her up. She’s a bit more likely to get 9.900s to Hunter’s 9.950s.

Now that Johnson has returned on bars, Dickerson is out of the AA. However, after Stageberg’s injury, Marissa King has pranced through the revolving door of lineups right into the position of all-around contender even though she has been back on all four events for approximately eleven seconds. If she hits beam and floor to capability, those will be her starring scores. Her bars routine can be very nice but perhaps a little too 9.850y too often, and even though it seems crazy, her amazing vault may her biggest AA obstacle for reasons already discussed in the Florida preview. I would be the happiest little gentleman in gymnastics-dom if she won the title, but if she is actually scoring in the 39.7s at this meet, it probably means Sloan and Hunter will be closing in on 39.8.

Also contending in this session is LSU’s Rheagan Courville, and she is not one to be overlooked. She received a 10 on vault at SECs, and is certainly an event finals candidate on floor, where her strong tumbling mixed with a very 9.9y preceding lineup can bring her some big numbers. The beam routine is an interesting creature. It’s amazing, a perfect mix of difficult acro and hit dance elements, but is still risky enough to be a wobble concern. Remember, this is NCAA. A balance check is enough to lose the AA title. She had a bars fall at regionals, but she has fixed her shoot to high bar after problems early in the year, so if she gets through the routine, it may not bring her down to the degree it might have earlier.

Ivana Hong‘s gymnastics makes everything better, and she makes it very difficult for the judges to take anything from her routines. Both of the last postseasons, she has gotten that Yfull down to a science, so expect another 9.950. And beam, I mean . . . come on. The troubles for her winning the title will be bars and floor. With that compact little form of hers, I thought floor would be a crowning achievement for her in NCAA, but injury concerns have kept her from excelling or gaining consistency. Bars can certainly be great as well (and the coaching staff has done wonders with her DLO), but that damn tkatchev will be the death of me. She’s worth so much more than that skill that I wish it would just go away.

This year, there are a number of individual competitors who would have been major contenders for the AA title had they qualified with teams. Chief among them are Emily Wong and Jessie DeZiel of Nebraska and Sharaya Musser of Penn State. All three have reached at least 39.650 this season, but the odds are against them now. They will be competing in the first session and have the added challenge of doing so without their teams, which can be a problem both because of the absence of team scoring and because of the fundamental change in environment in competition and training. It must have been difficult to stay motivated this past week and a half now that the rest of the team has nothing to train for. Occasionally, seniors in this position become sentimental favorites (see McCool on beam in 2010), but with a number of other big scorers around, it will be difficult for these three to beat everyone.

Because they don’t boast the same scoring potential, it will be even more challenging for other individuals in both sessions like Aubree Cristello, Caitlin Atkinson, Bri Guy, and Chelsea Tang to make a dent.

A few other prominent AAers from the first session will probably peck around the 39.500 mark, but they either have one weak event or enough 9.850s in their repertoire that it seems very unlikely that they will suddenly outscore a crop of other 39.7ers. Among them are Brittany Rogers of Georgia, Jessie Jordan of LSU, Ashley Morgan of Stanford and Alina Weinstein of Illinois. Top-ten finishes are possible for all, but the title will be too far.

If you’re looking for an underdog to support in this session, might I offer Lindsay Mable of Minnesota? She is ranked 14th in the country in the AA and scored a (granted, friendly) season-high 39.600 at regionals. Her vault was spectacular, and her beam and floor work is probably the strongest on the team. Breaks on bars will keep her down in the rankings, but she is certainly one to watch.

Session 2:

If the first session feels like it begins and ends with Florida, the second session may begin and end with Vanessa Zamarripa. She’s a fifth-year senior competing at a home nationals, and she also just happens to be Vanessa Zamarripa. That’s enough to make her a favorite for the title. A lot will depend on the foot and the ability to stick. If she’s getting her landings, vault and bars can realistically be assumed as a 10 and a 9.950. Beam started well this season but had begun to deteriorate even before the regionals fall, so that will be the key routine. She often has to steady herself out of the onodi for what becomes an unexpectedly notable wobble, so watch that skill in particular. Zamarripa and Hunter are the only ones in this competition who can go 39.650+ on a blah day, which makes them very dangerous for the title even when just mostly hitting.

If Zamarripa doesn’t get it done, the next most likely gymnasts to take advantage of being in the second session are Joanna Sampson and Katherine Grable. Even though regionals didn’t go exactly to plan, Sampson has been excellent all year on vault and floor, and until the last few weeks, she was among the most reliable floor 9.950s in the country. If that routine isn’t back on, she won’t be in the conversation, but if it is, she could be one stellar beam routine away from a major finish. I still think she is a bit too 9.825 on beam too often to win, but it just takes one wobble-free routine at the right time to make that concern go away. Also, don’t count out Sampson’s teammate Katie Zurales. She’s just coming back from injury but is very 9.900 on three events. A 9.850 on floor probably takes her out of it, but she is one to root for if some of the favorites are out of sorts.  

For much of the season, it appeared that Katherine Grable was not having the same kind of season she did last year, but she blew that concern away with her 9.950 parade at regionals. Like the majority of people contending in this competition, vault and floor look to be the booster scores. Those routines are both creative and spectacular and completely deserving of those 9.950s. Beam is also quite strong but buried in the leadoff position, and bars is unlikely to get the 9.900+ she would need to win. 

Other than those three, the second session is much sparser in terms of viable AA candidates, largely because Oklahoma and Alabama are still undergoing some shifting lineups and are not particularly reliant on AAers this season. For Oklahoma, Keeley Kmieciak is capable of doing the AA but is still coming back from the tonsillectomy and is unlikely to compete floor. Brie Olson has also scored very well this year, but has been removed from beam. That leaves Taylor Spears as Oklahoma’s lone viable candidate. Spears should have no trouble bringing in a big score for her stellar beam work, and bars and floor aren’t too shabby either (though the early spot in the floor lineup could hurt). Vault is not as much her event, and even her best ones are probably going to get 9.850-9.875s, which is very difficult to recover from in a title context. I’m fairly comfortable with her top-ten potential, but the title will be too tough.

Alabama had two AAers at regionals in Kim Jacob and Ashley Priess, but it’s entirely possible that neither will compete AA at nationals. If Gutierrez and Sledge are able to go on vault, both Jacob and Priess may come out. Priess, however, might have earned her vault spot with a 9.900 at regionals, the second-highest score of the rotation. Even if Jacob competes AA, she is a two-event standout on beam and floor and likely won’t keep up on vault and bars. Priess has the talent, certainly, but may find it difficult to eke out big numbers on vault and floor from early lineup positions. I think a lot of people will be rooting for Priess if she does end up competing AA, but she’ll need help to win.

A couple mostly two-event gymnasts, Olivia Courtney for UCLA and Tory Wilson for Utah, will stick around much like the crop of 39.500ers from the first semifinal. Georgia Dabritz is also not one to be overlooked in this meet. With three potential 9.900 events, she can be right in it with many of the favorites, but it’s too hard to get past that beam consistency to consider her one of the major AA contenders.  

What’s the good of being a top seed if it doesn’t feel like it? This session is anarchy, and a seeding in the top three means almost nothing. Could the top three still advance? Of course, you imbecile, but that is no more likely than a number of other scenarios.

We’re nearly there now. Just hold on a few more days. It’s about to get very good.

[2] Oklahoma

It has been a good long while since a top seed in a semifinal failed to advance to Super Six, and while the path for the Sooners looks strong, they by no means enjoy the same level of comfort and self-determination that the Gators do. If we look at the Sooners’ road performances this season, just once have they broken that crucial 197.500 barrier that teams will have to reach to begin to feel a degree of comfort in this session.

Oklahoma’s home regional performance was marked by a number of strong scores but an absence of huge scores. Only one routine, Mooring’s vault, reached as high as 9.925. The 197.375 final score was built on a foundation of many, many 9.875s and 9.900s. While that scoring will not be good enough to contend during Super Six and will have to be improved through (guess what?) better landings, that level of scoring can be more than manageable in a semifinal scenario. For instance on bars, the Sooners underperformed their RQS at regionals, but repeating a 49.400 on that event will certainly put them in the top half of teams and could be strong enough to win the session on the event.

I expect bars to be the most reliable event for Oklahoma, which perhaps could allow some distance over Alabama and will most likely provide a good buffer against UCLA and Utah should it be needed. The only time I saw Oklahoma actually struggle on bars this season was as a result of rather significantly missed landings from Olson and Spears. Stick those final dismounts, and the score should be pleasing. Floor was the other stronger event from regionals, and some concerns over Brewer’s landing consistency notwithstanding, I expect to see a confident, controlled rotation. These routines don’t hit you over the head with power or difficulty, so conservative judging in that very first rotation could be an issue. If the judges are sticking in the 9.850 area for these routines, which is quite possible, Scaman’s performance will gain significance. She is a step higher in difficulty and power than the rest of the team, so she’s the most likely to shake out a 9.950 from an icy panel and ensure a healthy rotation.

The Sooners did not land well on vault at regionals, recording just one stick and showing a rather surprising lack of control. They rely significantly on those landings, so keep an eye out. Also, watch the body position on landing and how the judges feel about that. That rotation could be anywhere from 49.100-49.500 depending on both of those factors, and the degree to which the judges evaluate amplitude and body position on landing for all the teams will be very influential in the overall result. I’d like to see a bit more separation than we saw during the season with all the 9.925 parades.

The Oklahoma beam rotation is in a state of flux. Olson had been struggling mightily with her consistency (and has never been a true beamer), so she was removed from the lineup when Kmieciak returned. At regionals, Kmieciak performed fourth, however, instead of in her normal leadoff position. The Sooners ended up counting her 9.725 after Clark also received a 9.700. Apart from the hit at Alabama, it has been many weeks since we’ve seen a strong Oklahoma beam rotation. I’m not willing to give up on this as their best event, yet. This is best opportunity for the Sooners to cultivate a multiple-tenth advantage in this session, and the score cannot be a paltry 49.100 again. I’m betting it won’t be.

If floor and vault go well, and Oklahoma is in a top-two position at the halfway mark, I think it is unlikely that they will give a lead away on bars and beam. In evaluating their level of competitiveness for Super Six, count the number of 9.9s. It was seven at regionals, and it’s going to need to be more like ten or eleven to even hope to challenge. 

[3] Alabama

Alabama is doing what Alabama does, riding close through the postseason before pouncing on a mistake, however minor, at the end. Like Oklahoma, Alabama cruised to a regional victory but did not perform overwhelmingly impressively in the process. They showed enough breaks in that meet to allow for some degree of concern. Still, I fully expect Alabama to advance to Super Six and to be at least consistent enough to keep the Gators on notice.

If things go wrong for Alabama in semifinals, it will be because of three reasons: the bars handstands, the vault lineup decisions, and the early beam consistency. Those handstands on bars are  well-covered territory, but I’m still not convinced anyone but Sledge and Priess has high scoring potential in a nationals context. DeMeo’s consistency is also a slight worry. A bunch of 9.850s from the middle of the lineup would be fine for Friday, but it would not do at Super Six. They should be living in handstand in training at this point.

This vault lineup is all over the place. Gutierrez and Sledge were still not able to go at regionals, but for Alabama to cultivate the kind of advantage they are capable of (they should be winning this event), both will need to be in the lineup. Jacob has improved on vault but lacks the scoring potential of the others. Williams remained in that first position at regionals and once again had the best vault on the team. This could become a problem later. Don’t bury your 9.950s.

A newer problem is the early beam lineup. Kayla Williams has looked as solid as Kayla Williams for most of the season, but she has been a ball of 9.7s a few times lately. Milliner is usually quite secure in that leadoff position, but Clark had a fall at regionals and DeMeo has many risky features to her routine. If Alabama gets through those four without having to count anything under 9.800, they’ll be set going to floor. They begin the meet on bars and beam, and if they’re averaging 49.300s on both events, that will probably be enough to carry them through since I do expect lots of 9.9s to come from the power events.

If Alabama is to challenge for the eventual championship, these concerns will become heightened because they must not just be addressed for 9.825s but conquered for 9.875-9.900s. In addition, the late routines cannot tolerate any slight errors. At regionals, half of Alabama’s 5th and 6th routines scored 9.850 or under while just one of Florida’s went as low as 9.900. Championship-contending teams are always expected to put up the huge scores at the end of lineups, and Alabama must eradicate those errors for nationals in order to keep pace. No 9.775s for Milliner on vault or 9.800s for Jacob on floor.

[6] UCLA

For the Bruins, it’s all about the Zam. With all the injuries, UCLA has been shoved into a position of relying preposterously heavily on Vanessa Zamarripa, and it’s a testament to her talent that she has carried them to a #6 seed. Any analysis of UCLA’s nationals prospects must begin with a discussion of her now-famous foot injury at regionals. There was a slip on the beam dismount, then a limp, then a hit floor routine, then a boot, then a steel plate, then some missed training, and I’m pretty sure Angelina Jolie is starring in the film adaptation entitled Vanessa Zamarripa: A Foot Called Hope. Anyway, she’ll be back for nationals. She just has to be. (Otherwise, the team might arrive wearing white flag inspired leotards.) The major question is how this injury will affect her landings. Will she be able to control them at all?

Vault is the biggest concern in that regard because the first three vaulters in that lineup are very likely to be bogged down around 9.800, which will not score competitively with the contending teams in this session. Sticks from Baer and Courtney and a 9.975-10.000 from Zamarripa will be necessary to keep the Bruins with the other teams. If Zamarripa is capable of only one of her bad ones for 9.900, UCLA will have lost a major tool in remaining competitive.

In addition to the depth issues on vault, the flood of injuries to this team has ensured that some lower scores will be counting on the other events. Too many of the gymnasts in the bars and beam lineups are scoring 9.775-9.800 too regularly to expect that will suddenly go away at nationals and everyone will be swimming in an indoor pool of luxurious satins and 9.875s. A few of those bars routines, particularly Wong’s and De La Torre’s, have a faint glimmer of going 9.900, but 9.850s are probably more realistic for them. That means Zamarripa must have that dismount together in spite of her foot. She got a 9.875 at regionals after landing lowish and hopping forward, so the judges are going to be very willing to give a big score.

Nearly the same situation applies on beam but with the added help of Danusia Francis. Everyone should be rooting for a big score for her in semifinals because she needs to be in beam finals for the vague hope that some brave hero will talk her into competing her sideways side aerial. Otherwise, what’s the point of anything? The Baer score is also crucial. We know we’ll see some 9.825s for hits from Wong and Courtney, so another Baer 9.875 could be a helpful tool toward 49.300, which should be the target number.

The Bruins can get through bars and beam, but I don’t have a ton of optimism for big scores, which makes the floor rotation all the more vital. Sadiqua Bynum has risen from the grave to return to the lineup, and she hit her best routine of the season for 9.850 at regionals. These early routines aren’t what we’ve come to expect from UCLA, but they are 9.850 capable when the tumbling is on. Alyssa Pritchett is a nice little standard candle on floor in that she performs predictably every time, so we can judge the level of the scoring compared to previous meets. Away judges never feel very 9.950 about her routine, but it has happened twice at home this year. A Pritchett 9.950 will be the cue that this might just turn into UCLA’s day.

UCLA must have a significant lead on Michigan at the halfway point. We’re talking multiple tenths. This will be accomplished by several Bruin beam 9.875-9.900s. Without that lead, they will probably bleed tenths on the final two events and will struggle to advance.

[Also note that tomorrow (April 17th) marks the opening of the spring NLI period, so keep eyes out for announcements.]

You can smell it, can’t you? The session of weird. The fact that I deeming the night semifinal the session of weird probably confirms that it will be everything but weird, yet what makes this semifinal so interesting is that it has no normal, no expectation. In the first semifinal, it’s quite possible that the bottom three seeds will fall away early on and Florida, Georgia, and LSU will slide through by heaps of tenths, but if the top three seeds advance from the second session, that would still be strange and interesting. What happened to Michigan, then?

There is much less order and safety in this session, so previewing the action is less about what one certain team needs to do to pass one other certain team. They could all fall in so many different arrangements that, for every team, it will come down to getting those borderline 9.9 routines up into the secure 9.9s and avoiding counting any 9.7s. All six teams have at least a couple concerns in both of those categories.

[7] Michigan 

The Wolverines, perhaps alone among the title non-favorites, have not suffered a meltdown this year. Tellingly, they would be the #4 seed at these nationals if we were going solely by season average because they have so consistently hovered around 197 this year. And yet without huge 198s propping them up, they have continued to drop slowly down the actual rankings to this lowly 7th position. It seems a strange place since this team is too mid-197 capable to be considered an underdog.

Michigan will be encouraged by the fact that they had an overall sluggish regional performance and yet still scored within range of the closest competition, .225 behind UCLA and Arkansas. With the Zamarripa foot questions, Michigan should feel that Super Six is a very attainable possibility this year with a hit meet. At regionals, vault received underscores across the rotation by about .025-.050 per routine, so expect some larger numbers at nationals. This team is very capable of sticking for a rash of 9.9s. I would pick Alabama to win vault in this session, but Michigan lands well enough and has enough talent early in the lineup from Zurales and Beilstein to take that second spot, which would be a tremendous boost, one that may be necessary because of beam and, now apparently, floor.

Michigan didn’t floor to the best of their floorability at Big 10s, and I dismissed it as uncharacteristic and therefore irrelevant, but the same thing happened at regionals. There’s a bit of a question mark in that second spot with Colbert/Casanova. Neither is too reliable, so more pressure is put on the other five. Sampson had a near-fall at regionals as well, and there goes the rotation score. Sampson is too delightfully 9.950 to be anything but for this team, and they all will need to channel their performances from last time they were at UCLA. It may potentially hurt scoring potential to have Beilstein buried in that opening position, but she still has been scoring well most weeks. This is a strong floor session overall, and Michigan absolutely cannot afford another low 49 when others are going 49.500.

Speaking of low 49s, the Wolverines squeaked through beam again at regionals. The opening fall from Gies opened up a couple counting 9.7s, but Miele came through in a big way for 9.875 and Zurales scored 9.900. Everyone in that lineup makes me nervous except Sampson and Zurales. Casanova anchored at regionals, which is always a risky game for a question-mark routine. The Michigan and UCLA beam performances in the first two rotations will define the session. UCLA probably needs to beat Michigan by multiple tenths. Michigan’s victory would be counting nothing below a 9.800.   

Before beam, the Wolverines open on bars, which can be a great event for them. This team has mastered the art of powerful but clean. Often, powerful bars workers are all over the place with the form, but this team is not. Zurales should be back in the lineup, which can only help the scoring potential. This bars rotation has the potential to win the session but should certainly be in the top three regardless of sticks. It is much, much more reliable than UCLA or Utah’s, especially in the landings, and a lead can be established here. If Michigan is even at 98.650 after bars and beam, they will probably need to be just regular on the remaining events.

[10] Utah

The importance of this happening cannot be overestimated.

Because of the depth of this session, most have written off the Utes in favor of constructing this as a Michigan/UCLA showdown, but this is Utah. In spite of the drop off in quality over the last four seasons in the post-Baskett era, they have still managed to trundle into Super Six every time, often when picked to be eliminated. This semifinal will be an even bigger test.

Utah isn’t expected to contend with the other teams largely because this team lacks the heartiness of past Utah squads, much less depth than usual, and because of the rough regionals score of 196.400. Some brush off that low score because of harsh judging on the beam the level of which Utah has not seen this season, but it cannot be so easily dismissed. To my eye, the Utah beam routines ended up being underscored by about .075 (some more .050, others more .100). Add it up, and that’s still not a great score. In a session where beam questions can be asked about nearly every team, that usual Utah sturdiness could have been an asset to take advantage of others’ mistakes, but not this team, not this year. The Utes will end on beam, meaning Dabritz, with all her consistency issues, could be the deciding performance for Utah’s 2013 fate. It’s not one to be missed, I’ll say that.

There are many teams in both sessions that just have to get through beam, and if Utah can do that to the same level as the likes of Michigan, they will still be in contention. The Utes, however, do not have the potential bars scores that the Wolverines do, so that does put a bit more pressure on the beam. In many ways, Utah will have to adopt that LSU/Minnesota strategy of building up an advantage on vault and floor and riding it through the other events. Utah begins on those better events, so expect them to be very competitive early. They will need an advantage to help them through beam, probably something around 98.800 after two events to feel competitive.

That strategy is dependent on hitting floor exceptionally well, so the regionals performance on floor may be even more troubling than the performance on beam, especially because there was no observable underscoring on floor. The routines that received the lower scores had clear mistakes, and even Tutka missed her mount landing to bring her down to a 9.850. Every single team in this rotation is capable of anchoring floor with a 9.950, so anchor 9.850s no longer cut it. In fact, that goes for every team on nearly every event. Who is getting your 9.950s? It has to be someone.

[11] Arkansas

The regionals score of 196.950 for the Razorbacks was rather unexpected. They were always going to be in the meet if one of the top seeds broke down and ran the wagon into a gully as OSU did, but the score itself was the surprising part. It tied UCLA for the third highest regional score from this semifinal session, but that hasn’t translated into more buzz for Arkansas because it more or less reflected the best possible outcome. It’s hard to imagine them doing much better, and it will take 197s to advance here.

Katherine Grable had a total blinder for 39.650, and she will obviously have to do the same again for Arkansas to have a shot at challenging. It’s still going to take another gully affair, but that’s what Arkansas has to play for. Grable gets many more 9.8s from the rest of her team than Alina Weinstein does at Illinois, which makes Arkansas more likely to contend, but everything still rides a bit too much on her shoulders. Last year, it took Best Actress Jaime Pisani and Best Supporting Actress Katherine Grable to push this team into Super Six after pouncing on Georgia’s mistakes, and while Grable has certainly earned her promotion to the lead category, she still doesn’t have that brassy, wise-cracking assistant to play off. There are some potential 9.850-9.875s here and there, but nothing else significant.

At regionals, Arkansas got through what we would have expected to be rough routines very well. Freier’s 9.800 on vault helped that event become a legitimate six-gymnast rotation, and the team was able to drop Glover’s early disaster on bars. Beam was a get-through, and I wouldn’t expect the same kind of scoring at nationals. Of the three lower seeds, Arkansas does have the best routine in Grable’s, but the middle of the lineup will get hit for form in addition to balance issues, which makes it unlikely that they will gain an advantage there. The Razorbacks begin on vault, which has been a struggle this year. Given the 49.400+ scores I expect there in this session, they desperately need another 49.250 or greater to stay in the conversation. Anything lower and it’s hard to envision them staying in without a basket of other falls.

Grable’s individual exploits may be the most interesting facet of Arkansas’s semifinal performance. She could realistically contend for a title everywhere except bars. If Zamarripa isn’t landing well because of the foot, Grable may also utilize that advantageous evening AA position to challenge for the win, but watch for Sampson as well.