Tag Archives: Stanford

Uncategorized

Michigan Regional Preview

3 Comments

Here it is. The big one. Are you excited? I’m excited. Ever since it became clear that Stanford’s ranking would not emerge from the pitiful category before the end of the season, we’ve all been waiting to see which of the poor souls that bothered to get good scores all year long would suffer the punishment of being placed with Stanford. The winners are Auburn and Michigan. It’s funny because the 6-7-18 regional is usually the boring one, the one where the top two teams have more than a fall of margin over anyone else, but this year, it’s the one everyone is anticipating the most. Yes, I just decided which regional you’re anticipating the most. It’s this. The end.

Of course, that means it will end up being super boring. Without a doubt. It always happens. All of the other regionals will be intensely close throughout, and then this one will be decided in the first rotation. You know it.

Competing teams (starting event) 
[6] Auburn (bye before bars)
[7] Michigan (beam)
[18] Stanford (floor)
[24] Eastern Michigan (bye before floor)
[25] Penn State (bars)
[33] New Hampshire (vault)

Competing individuals
Pittsburgh (Lindsay Offutt – AA; Tracey Pearson – AA; Miya Dotson – UB)
Rutgers (Libby Groden – AA; Nicolette Wilson – VT; Michelle Amoresano – VT)
Bridgeport (Brianna Comport – BB, FX; Christine Liautaud – UB; Randi Cutolo – FX)
West Chester (Majesta Valentine – AA)
Cornell (Kaitlin Green – BB)

 The fight – Auburn v. Michigan v. Stanford

No favorites here. There can’t be because someone very capable of a 197 will miss out on nationals, and any one of these three teams could be eliminated even with a hit meet.

Still, Stanford must be considered the challenger to the throne rather than the reigning monarch because of a few more clear weaknesses than the others and the lack of consistently competitive scores during the season. In spite of Stanford’s definite potential to hit 197 and reputation for suddenly turning great once the elimination meets roll around, there’s a reason Stanford is 18th and not 6th or 7th. The scores haven’t been there the way they have for Auburn and Michigan, and Stanford really will have to put together a season-best performance to make it out of this competition. Normal won’t be good enough. It has to be a Price/Hong 9.950, Rice/McNair 9.850 kind of day to pull out the 197+ score it will take to advance. 

Auburn and Michigan are separated by essentially nothing. Auburn is a wisp ahead of Michigan in overall RQS, while Michigan is a wisp ahead of Auburn on each specific-event RQS. That indicates that Michigan has slightly higher peaks on each event but that Auburn has put it all together in the same meet slightly more often. It’s all slight. The advantage of being at home may tip the balance to Michigan, which is why (in addition to Michigan’s season high being the best in the competition) I see Auburn as more vulnerable than Michigan if both hit their meets. Really, there should only be a tenth or two between them either way.

Ergo…landings, landings, landings. On vault, for instance, Michigan has more difficulty, and the Olivia Karas grand finale has scored higher than the Caitlin Atkinson grand finale, but we have seen multiple meets this year in which Auburn has earned a very competitive vault score because of high-level landing control. Since Michigan’s peak scoring potential has been higher this year, those landings are all the more important for Auburn to close any scoring potential gap.  

For both teams, the vulnerability is beam. In fact, it has been a vulnerability for Stanford at times as this year well (but will be absolutely critical if Stanford is to stay in this), all of which is made evident by New Hampshire being ranked as the #2 beam team in this regional.  Each of these top seeds has the potential for multiple 9.9s. Atkinson, Milliet, Demers, Artz, Chiarelli, Price, Hong. There’s no shortage of impressive beamers in this meet, but Auburn has a tendency to throw a 9.7 or two out there early in the lineup, and Michigan has been a sudden fall-fest in the second half of the season. Beam will be the most telling indicator about whether Stanford is in this meet because secure hits from both Michigan and Auburn (in rotations one and three) would take away the primary area in which Stanford is looking to pick up tenths (in rotation five).

Stanford must win bars and beam to have a shot. If Stanford’s combined UB+BB score isn’t multiple tenths higher than either Auburn’s or Michigan’s, then qualification is a near impossibility because Auburn and Michigan are deeper and stronger on vault and floor. Stanford really should win beam here. Even though there have been a few nasties this year, the 9.9 potential across the lineup is the best in the meet. It’s not just Price and Hong. We’ve seen Chuang get 9.9s, and Nicki McNair often merits them, even if she doesn’t get them in the first spot.

A huge beam score is all the more important if Price keeps getting 9.900ed on vault. 

Those “Perfect 10!” posters are basically picket signs at this point. This is the protest movement of our generation.

Because of the rotation order, expect Stanford to trail early on, probably by a hefty margin. Floor and vault aren’t the big scores. It’s not necessarily a bad order for Stanford because they’ll end on the events where they really need huge scores and will hope drunk-judging has set in by then, but there is the potential for things to get out of control early if floor looks a little too 9.700. We’ve seen that before, and there will be no coming back from it this time. It’s in Stanford’s hands whether this meet is interesting or not. It really only gets close if Stanford is having one of those meets like at UCLA, where this weird thing happened where the talent of the roster actually manifested in the performance and the scores.

To keep an eye on whether season-best Stanford has shown up, I’ve taken each team’s season-high performance (Michigan’s 197.425, Stanford’s 197.400, and Auburn’s 197.325) and used the event scores from those meets to tell us roughly what kind of pace teams will want to be on rotation-by-rotation if they’re going to repeat those season-best performances. It’s the marker of where Stanford needs to be with respect to Michigan and Auburn (and vice versa) in order to make this meet a thing.

Rotation 1: Michigan 49.450, Stanford 49.250, Auburn BYE
Rotation 2: Stanford 98.500, Michigan 49.450, Auburn 49.350
Rotation 3: Michigan 98.775, Auburn 98.650, Stanford 98.500
Rotation 4: Michigan 148.075, Stanford 148.025, Auburn 98.650
Rotation 5: Stanford 197.400, Michigan 148.075, Auburn 147.950
Rotation 6: Michigan 197.425, Stanford 197.400, Auburn 197.325

To me, 98.500 is an optimistic estimate for where Stanford will be after vault and floor (RQS tells us more like 98.200), but it will take an optimistic-level meet for Stanford to advance. It’s what Stanford does in the postseason, anyway. Note that even with an optimistic score at the halfway point, Stanford still trails Michigan by 0.275 and Auburn by 0.150. They’d be fine with that deficit. That’s manageable. More than that is trouble.

Michigan and Auburn don’t tend to have the same highs and lows as Stanford, but floor is a big, necessary score for both of them because it’s 2016 and it’s floor. Michigan will have gone on floor in the first half of the meet and Auburn will not, so Michigan must have a lead after rotation three, and really should unless there’s another beam debacle.

And the rest
Most of the attention has to be on the big three in this meet because even if one of them has a meltdown, there are still two other 197-quality teams waiting to take those spots. Quite honestly, it will take two different multi-fall meltdowns from the big teams for any of the others to get into contention.

For Eastern Michigan, even making regionals would have been a tremendous accomplishment, but doing so as a #4 seed and the 24th ranked team, ahead of a much more heralded program like Penn State, is verging on phenomenal. This hasn’t been achieved just been by virtue of a weird score or two. Eastern Michigan has managed 196s at home, away, and while dominating the conference championship, because of bars, because of beam, and because of floor. It has been a deep and varied season of strength. This was supposed to be George Washington’s upstart season, and Eastern Michigan managed to out-George Washington George Washington.

Eastern Michigan’s way into this meet is beam. They’re #20 on beam (their highest event ranking), and since there is beam-meltdown potential across the competition, Eastern Michigan could just go, “Hi, 49.250 please” and suddenly make a serious impression with the same bunch of 9.875s that helped them overcome bars mistakes at MACs. Do keep an eye on Kendall Valentin on bars, though. She’s in the top 30 and has been a 9.9 machine.

Aside from one strong score at home during that insane Big Five meet, this has not been a positive season for Penn State, featuring a bunch of 195s and a continued commitment to creating enough behind-the-scenes drama to fill three full internets and still not even be done. While other teams have “Get to know the gymnasts!” features, Penn State should have a “Who’s quitting the program in tears this week” feature just to keep us updated. It’s only considerate.

It was always going to be difficult for Penn State to maintain the relatively competitive level from last season without Welsh and Sanabria-Robles, and the disappearance of Sibson has made finding any semblance of depth all the more difficult. Picking up Kiera Brown post-Georgia has been a helpful addition, and she seems to have regained her beam after losing it in spectacular fashion last season. Still, for the most part the 9.8s have dried up and not really been replaced, hence the dramatic fall from a “could make nationals” 13th last year to an “and the rest” 25th this year.

New Hampshire represent the last of our regionals qualifiers, a team that made a big splash at the beginning of the season by being ranked at near-Oklahoma levels on beam even though it’s New Hampshire and that’s not supposed to happen. The scores haven’t followed from that January success, settling into the mid-195s for hit meets ever since with a vault rotation that’s going to score mid 48s sometimes. There is still the potential for a fantastic beam rotation that puts pressure on the others when when Lauter, Aucoin, and Pflieger all hit together, and we can also expect a strong bars number from Mulligan, who has hit 9.9s multiple times this season, to round out some of the individual impressions this team should make. 

Individuals
Someone among Auburn/Michigan/Stanford won’t qualify as a team, and since all of those teams boast legitimate contenders for an AA national title, the race for the two AA spots may very well be done before we even address the bottom-three teams. If Stanford doesn’t qualify as a team, obviously Elizabeth Price needs to go to nationals, and Taylor Rice would be a compelling option to go with her. Even Ivana Hong is in the mix if Stanford decides to secret-weapon her on floor at regionals, about which there has been some chatter. Of course, if Hong doesn’t do the AA, we’ve all agreed she needs to get a 10 on beam to advance to nationals as a specialist, right? Right?

I was about to say “to do that routine in event finals” until I remembered that’s not a thing anymore, making all of this individual-event chatter matter even less because…like we’re even going to be paying one teaspoon of attention to the individual event races on semifinal day. Not when there’s team qualification and AA to focus on. That’s going to be about priority #50. 

Artz, Karas, and Atkinson are the three other strongest AAers in this meet aside from Price and, as long as they hit, will all have spots if their teams don’t qualify.

Still, there’s a fair chance that we’ll see mistakes from the team that doesn’t go (and Auburn does have the just one AAer right now), so I’d imagine there could be an open spot still available for one of the three bottom teams or individuals. There are quite a few contenders in the mix, but the highest-ranked is Lindsay Offutt of Pitt. She’s here without a team, making things a million times more difficult, but I like her chances. If not Offutt, then Tsang of Penn State has gone 49.3s in her NCAA career, and Catie Conrad of Eastern Michigan can reach that mark as well on the back of a big beam score. Jessica Jones? Kiera Brown? Danielle Doolin? Perhaps, but if everything adheres to the seedings, my guess is two Stanford qualifiers, which makes it really tough for everyone else.

Pac-12 Championship

Pac-12 Championship Preview

1 Comment

Saturday 3/19
Afternoon session 4:00 ET/1:00 PT
Evening session 9:00 ET/6:00 PT

The Pac-12 should take pride this season in winning the award for the weirdest conference championship scenario. Stanford is the #6 seed and competing in the “who even are you?” afternoon relegation session in spite of being quite a realistic title contender and possible winner, which if nothing else, will serve to make sure we all pay more attention to the afternoon session instead of getting distracted by the simultaneous Big Ten, Big 12, and SEC action. Fun fact: there will be at least 30 minutes during which all four of those championships are going on at the same time. Well, we’ve had a good life.

Stanford’s last meet featured a relative crushing of Georgia and UCLA, so if that’s any indication, Stanford is currently in the midst of pulling a Stanford once again this year. But, let’s begin with the ones who were good all season long and qualified for the coveted evening session.  

EVENING SESSION
Utah, UCLA, Cal, Oregon State

Once again, Utah has earned the top seed in the conference on the back of resolutely having the fewest meltdowns. Hooray! Seven straight weeks of 197s coupled with breaking the 197.5 barrier in the last two outings has given the Utes a fairly comfortable ranking lead over the remaining Pac-12 teams, meaning they’ll be favorites heading in. Given what UCLA and Stanford can do, however, there shouldn’t more than a few tenths in this either way with hit meets all around (ahahahahahaha), so we have at least some reason to hope for excitement. UCLA is capable of busting out a massive day, and after Stanford goes, we’ll have the benefit of a legitimate pace standard through which to gauge Utah and UCLA’s performances. So, let’s break this thing down.

Rotation 1: UCLA vault, Cal bars, Utah beam, Oregon State floor

Event RQS for rotation 1:
Utah 49.290
UCLA 49.165
Oregon State 49.165
Cal 49.110

Of course UCLA is the team that drew its arch-nemesis, Olympic order, meaning the Bruins already have a four-tenth deficit, and the competition is two days away. It actually is probably beneficial to the Bruins as they make their money on beam and floor and would rather end there than begin there, hoping to squeeze out some home-meet level scoring as Cipra and Bynum on floor will be the last routines of the competition, at the end of a long day, once the judges are already halfway through the whiskey bottle. I know. That’s not right of me to say. They’ll obviously have finished the whiskey by that point and be on to the cooking sherry and rubbing alcohol.

As for vault, UCLA has lacked the required landing control and difficulty (having to rely on Bynum’s arabian and Pua’s roller coaster 1.5), often bouncing back on fulls and hoping to get a 9.825 out of them. The sticking shoes showed up just once a couple weeks ago to earn UCLA a 49.375, but more often the score has been about 49.1. It wouldn’t be the end of the world, but the Bruins will hope to go over 49.2 to keep pace early. None of the teams are starting on particularly strong events, so don’t expect anyone to run away with this thing at the beginning.

Utah’s beam will be among the key rotations to keep every eye on because of Stover Watch 2016. She may be able to compete beam at Pac-12s after all, and if she’s back in form, that bolsters Utah’s scoring potential by a solid tenth, maybe more, and seriously reduces the Fall Terror Index. It was rising considerably depending on who was going to have to come into the lineup. Utah has had its share of falls this season, but this isn’t among the most terrifying beam lineups in the conference. Lopez is currently doing the best beam work of her career, and if Utah can get at least 9.875s from her, Rowe, and Stover (?), along with two other hits, breaking into 49.300+ range seems doable, at least depending on how some of those early-lineup short splits are being evaluated. If the Utes emerge from beam in the first rotation with a true lead, that significantly fuels their chances because they’ll be heading off to higher-scoring, lower-risk events from here. If it’s 49.1 or lower, ring all the bells because it’s feeding time for the vultures. 

Oregon State hasn’t been as competitive as usual with the top of the Pac-12 this season, so while the Beavs remain a team to watch that could snatch this title at the last second (as has happened before), that scenario seems less likely this year. They’ve topped out in the high 196s, which is not going to be strong enough to win this championship. It would take a season high by a considerable margin, which would need to start on floor in the first rotation. Since floor is the highest-scoring event, Oregon State would need to nail that double pike parade with supreme control and use Perez powers to greatly exceed that paltry 49.1 RQS, which would guard against the inevitably dropped tenths coming on vault.

In contrast to Oregon State, Cal has recorded one score this season that could be good enough to win this title, but realistically it still looks like there’s another step between Cal and winning a conference title. The fact that it’s even a conversation this year, however, is a victory. Cal possesses great line on bars and has received some big numbers in a couple meets this season, but the performances I’ve seen have also included some flexed feet and missed handstands, so I’m eager to see how this rotation is evaluated. Bars was Cal’s highest-scoring event in that recent 197.5 result with a 49.475, and while there’s no need/reason to expect that again, the bars total needs to be at least in the same state as that 49.475. A 49.100 would severely compromise the team’s chance to hit 197. Exceeding RQS is key, but don’t necessarily expect Cal to be busting out with a lead in first half of the meet, starting on bars and beam. They’ll plan on making up ground on floor later on and pushing up through the standings from the back. 

Rotation 2: Oregon State vault, UCLA bars, Cal beam, Utah floor

Event RQS through 2 rotations (Event RQS for rotation 2):
Utah 98.755 (49.465)
UCLA 98.350 (49.185)
Cal 98.230 (49.120)
Oregon State 98.150 (48.985)

This is Utah’s rotation. RQS tells us that Utah should have a four-tenth lead at the halfway point, mostly because, in rotation 2, all the other teams go a weakness while Utah goes to the highest-scoring apparatus. Utah does not have big floor routines this year, but we’ve seen Schwab, Hughes, and Partyka (earlier in the season) earn some massive scores for going through cleanly and minimizing those landing deductions. It will be fascinating to watch how the judges respond to that and if they’re willing to give out 9.950s for double pike routines in the second rotation of a meet. The general scoring landscape and precedent leads me to think that they will, but we’ll see how this total compares to Utah’s home floor scoring (Utah has peaked at 49.425 for road floor, while the last three home floor scores have been 49.625, 49.575, and 49.525).

Meanwhile, UCLA will go to bars, so stop, drop, and roll. It has been a sloppy road this year. Without Peng and with Ohashi only able to show a couple routines so far, the lineup has been populated by too many just trying to squeak out a 9.825. Ohashi has returned to beam and floor so far post-sternum, but the bars lineup really does need her to elevate the scoring potential, along with one of Sophina’s good dismounts and some of that special magic that got Janay Honest a 9.950 last week. The goal for the Bruins here will be to minimize the deficit, because there will be a deficit versus Utah on floor. They’ll like their chances to gain ground later in the meet, so it’s about getting as close as possible. Getting closer than the RQS predicts would do.

Likewise, Cal will be looking to minimize damage in rotation 2 as beam has been the struggle event this season. It’s not nearly as worrisome as last year when it cost Cal the chance to upset Utah at regionals, but it’s still the event on which Cal is most likely to get stuck counting scores in the 9.7s. We are seeing shades of truly fine performances from the likes of Howe, and that RQS is over 49, but Cal will be relying more on bars and floor to bump up the score.

If you’re pointing to an event that has contributed the most to Oregon State’s falling a bit lower in the Pac-12 hierarchy, it’s vault. Vault is not traditionally Oregon State’s event, and this year the lower SV have exacerbated the issue with all those fulls struggling around the 9.750 territory. Sticking shoes will be absolutely critical because even though a huge score on vault is no longer the must it used to be, you still can’t win a big title with a sub-49 vault.

Rotation 3: Utah vault, Oregon State bars, UCLA beam, Cal floor

Event RQS through 3 rotations (Event RQS for rotation 3):
Utah 148.000 (49.245)
UCLA 147.590 (49.240)
Cal 147.485 (49.230)
Oregon State 147.410 (49.260)

And now the inverse of rotation 2. The RQSs in this rotation are very closely packed, which would suit Utah quite nicely. Utah would love every team to score around the same total in the 3rd and maintain the pace set in the previous rotation. The issue for Utah is the potential for other teams to put up big performances, since Utah’s peak vault score is 49.275, while OSU and Cal have gone into the 49.4s on bars and floor respectively, and UCLA can and has hit 49.5 on beam.

UCLA beam is not quite the force we expected it to be when presuming a healthy Peng (how silly of us), but Francis, Ohashi, and sometimes DeJesus can still deliver the numbers and Gerber has been a worthwhile leadoff this year. The Bruins are far better on beam than that 49.240 RQS suggests and will have to deliver on that potential (multiple tenths over the RQS) to expect a conference-winning total. Utah’s vault would not be able to match the scores coming from a nailed UCLA beam. While Utah is probably the best-vaulting team in the conference, that’s a bit like being the best listener at a school for the deaf. It hasn’t been a banner year for Pac-12 vaulting, and like the others, Utah has a lot of fulls getting stuck at 9.825. I like the lineup decision to put Delaney after Hughes because I still maintain it has the potential to bump Delaney up to a 9.950 for a stuck landing on the back of Hughes’ 1.5 and 10.0 SV, but Delaney has to stick. She hasn’t been sticking as much this season, so it’s basically impossible for her to do much better than the 9.875s she’s been scoring. Graduations and SV changes have conspired to sap Utah of all its vault 9.9s.

Oregon State’s bars have been an interesting animal this season, just in case you haven’t checked in for a while. Earlier in the year, bars looked like a struggle event with some serious dismount crazies bringing down the scores, but lately it has returned to being OSU’s strong apparatus the way it always should be. McMillan and Jacobsen are quite precise for possible 9.9s at the back of that lineup (I would say the most likely 9.9s the Beavs have across all the events), which must be taken advantage of if this is to be a serious score. Beyond trying to contend for the title, a strong score is essential if they’re to move out of #3-seed territory. It will take a 196.675 in this meet for the Beavs to have even a remote shot at a #2 seed, and that score would be built on bars 9.9s.

Cal is also fighting for a #2 seed but currently sits in 11th and therefore is working from a position of strength. The Bears can guarantee that #2 seed with a 196.475, which is quite doable as long as floor cooperates for something over 49. This is the event where Cal most takes advantage of Toni-Ann Business and the realistic 9.950 she can bring to send the score in a stratospheric direction. Add to that a double arabian from Robinson, a couple other deduction-minimal double pike routines, and an overall commitment to non-lame dance combinations (that doesn’t show up in the scores but I appreciate), and this should be Cal’s best-scoring event of the night.

Rotation 4: Cal vault, Utah bars, Oregon State beam, UCLA floor

Event RQS through 4 rotations (Event RQS for rotation 4):
Utah 197.395 (49.395)
UCLA 197.020 (49.430)
Cal 196.670 (49.185)
Oregon State 196.555 (49.145)

Note that these are the totals of the four event RQSs, not the teams’ overall ranking RQS.

None of the teams should be particularly distressed by where they finish the meet and all will feel, to varying degrees, like they can pick up ground on the final apparatus should that be necessary. Perhaps with the exception of Oregon State because of beam reasons, but BeaverBeam hasn’t been particularly terrifying the last few weeks. With Gardiner and McMillan, who both have creative and crisp routines, Risa Perez who has Risa Perez things going on, and the Colussi-Pelaii, we should have fairly high expectations for Oregon State here. More than some unmemorable 49.1.

Now, let’s talk about Cal’s vault because I suddenly have a lot of feelings about it starting now. Cal is the #2 vaulting team in the conference and among all the teams in the country, probably deserves the most credit for quickly and effectively adapting to the new SVs and using them to their advantage. They have a Tsuk full and a handspring-handspring pike (and a 1.5 occasionally for Williams), but on the negative side, they’ve also committed some serious counterfeit yurchenko arabian fraud in a couple instances. Seilnacht’s vault scores have been weirdly high, leading me to believe that she has been getting credit for an arabian, even though it’s definitely a yhalf. With four judges, in a championship scenario, are they finally going to crack down on some of these counterfeit arabians? Could be influential. And we all agree that vault needs to go down to a 9.950 next season, right?

Similarly to Utah, we’ll have to keep an eye on how UCLA’s floor is being evaluated compared to regular-season meets, but the Bruins do have the advantage of ending on floor in a way that might resemble a regular-season dual meet. We’ve seen DeJesus, Francis, Cipra, and Bynum all go into the 9.9s this season, which they’ll hope to use to zoom out of reach of Utah, in spite of Utah boasting quite competitive bars scores. The Utes have shown superior finishing positions in full turns this season to minimize some of the handstand deductions that smack the other teams, and when that is paired with stuck dismounts, the scores can go quite high, which is why that RQS verges on 49.4. Bars, however, is not as high scoring as floor this season overall, so UCLA will look to gain ground here and really should be the strongest team at the meet in both the 3rd and 4th rotations. We’ll just have to see if that’s enough to make up for the 1st and 2nd rotations. Or if Stanford has rendered the whole thing moot.

TRANSITION SENTENCE.

AFTERNOON SESSION
Washington, Stanford, Arizona, Arizona State

Since this is the Stanford session, it seems only appropriate that I use this section to nerd out a little bit. 

Because we have a title contender in the early session, a lot of focus will be placed (by me and maybe other people, but mostly me) on score building and whether the scores are being kept down in the first session so that they can rise in the second session. Scores being held down in earlier sessions and rising in later sessions seems to be the conventional wisdom in gymnastics, as we hear this theory every year in both elite and NCAA, though it’s very hard to make a compelling, evidence-based argument that it’s actually happening. At conference championships, the scores do indeed tend to be lower in the first session, but the teams are also weaker, so it’s impossible to attribute that to score suppression with any authority since the quality of the teams is the most significant influence there. A better indicator would be the national semifinals, where the scoring capabilities of the teams should be relatively equal between the early semifinal and the later semifinal. Let’s take a look!

This is the average score of the three teams advancing to Super Six (to weed out teams counting falls that might skew the numbers down artificially) from each semifinal session at nationals over the last six seasons. 

2015:
Semifinal #1: 197.375
Semifinal #2: 197.192

2014:
Semifinal #1: 197.300
Semifinal #2: 197.467

2013:
Semifinal #1: 197.417
Semifinal #2: 197.250

2012:
Semifinal #1: 197.242
Semifinal #2: 197.492

2011:
Semifinal #1: 196.658
Semifinal #2: 196.700

2010:
Semifinal #1: 196.683
Semifinal #2: 196.642

Overall:
Semifinal #1: 197.113
Semifinal #2: 197.124

It’s admittedly a very small sample size, but it’s enough to demonstrate that arguments of score suppression in earlier sessions don’t really have a recent factual basis. All of which is to say, there’s not necessarily a reason to think that Stanford will be held down in session 1 or is a less compelling contender because of this placement. At least heading in. We’ll see how we feel after Price gets a random 9.825 on bars.

With any kind of hit meet, Stanford should win this session in a landslide (potentially by close to a point) and will just have to wait and see what the evening teams produce and whether the total can be bested. Rest assured that Jim has already prepared all his golf analogies about Stanford setting the mark in the clubhouse.

Stanford competes in Olympic order, so the good parts will be bookended by the bad parts. Stanford’s most realistic path to a competitive pace will be to go over 49.2 on vault and floor and over 49.4 on bars and beam, which is about what happened during the season-high performance at UCLA two weeks ago. On vault and floor, that pretty much means everyone needs to make sure to go 9.825 and then Ebee gets a 10, fixing everything. It’s doable. But, as it is and always has been, through rain and shine and graduation, Stanford’s really events are bars and beam, and that’s where the winning would need to happen. I mentioned in the season previews that I was worried about Stanford on bars because there are exactly six usable bars workers on this team. Well, those six have managed to endure through the whole season, and with Price, Hong, and N McNair all able to warrant 9.9+ scores (even though it’s tougher for McNair in that first spot), bars remains a strong event that shouldn’t have to endure 9.7s of the type that have brought low vault and floor. 

Beam is pretty much the same as bars, though with several more lineup options. I also do have to credit Stanford’s smart rotation order on beam this year, putting Price and Hong in the 3rd and 4th spots. I like. Because they’re Price and Hong, they’re able to get the big totals anywhere in the lineup, pushing up the scores for Daum and Chuang in the last two spots and allowing them to get 9.9s they wouldn’t be scoring otherwise. Those 9.9s going to Daum and Chuang are a big part of why Stanford remains 49.5 capable on beam this year in spite of bleeding quite a bit of beam talent from last year’s roster that hasn’t really been replaced. 

I didn’t forget you, others! The Washington Huskies are having their best season in quite some time and are hosting the meet, which usually spells a massive performance in a championship meet. That doesn’t mean challenging for a victory, but I would not be surprised by another strong mid-196, which would be particularly valuable since Washington is another team in a seed fight, currently sitting at 17th with Stanford and Iowa lurking just behind. Since both Stanford and Iowa have higher maximums, Washington could get bumped down into the 19-36 pit-of-peasants territory regardless of performance, but a strong 196 would make it much tougher, particularly on Iowa. Iowa will have already competed by this point, so we’ll know exactly what Washington needs to do when the session begins.

Arizona is also mathematically capable of moving into that top 18, but it’s looking pretty unlikely and would require a whole heap of meltdowns from Stanford, Washington, and several others. Arizona is usually pecking around that 3rd-seed section, so Tabitha’s first season in charge has been relatively in line with what we expect from Arizona, if not breaking any molds. Although it should be noted that attendance is WAY up at this season, increasing 69% over last year, which is probably the most encouraging change we’ve seen from the new regime. It took a little while for the team to find its way, particularly adjusting to staying competitive on vault, but we’re seeing consistent 196s now. A mid-196 is a pounce score, the kind of score it takes to pounce on a better team’s mistakes at regionals, so let’s see if Arizona can turn those 196.2s into 196.6s this weekend.

And there’s Arizona State.

What a hitter.

Rankings

Week 9 Rankings + RQS Update

11 Comments

One more week of regular, normal, average action, then it’s on to the conference championships, and then after that, it starts being actually important to do well. So close! With some schools taking byes this coming weekend like lazy garbage teams, we now know a few maximum RQS totals, so we can see exactly how high those teams will be able to rise. Or not rise.

The most critical ranking development came from the significant scores posted by Stanford and Nebraska on Sunday, rendering things somewhat less precarious for both teams. And more precarious for everyone else because now Nebraska and Stanford have proven 197 potential and are going to make some unlucky team very disappointed some day. No one wants a 197ing #3 seed. The problem for them is that Denver and Arkansas have also proven to be 197 teams, making it harder to move up into cozier, higher penthouse floors.

The Race for the Evening Session at SECs is also winding down, with Georgia currently on the outside looking in and trying to snatch Auburn at the last second. Oregon State also currently sits in 5th in the Pac-12, but Washington is the host of the championships this year, so this may get a little wonky. When Cal hosted two years ago, the home team’s session was the evening one, even though Cal was in the B group. It didn’t go well, but do we know if they’ve received the memo on that or if it will be more of the same? The Big Ten does things a little differently, putting six teams in the second session, with placement decided by the results at the Big Five meets this coming weekend. 

In scoring news, it’s March. That’s all you need to know. The judges felt like they had permission to start throwing out the 10s like candy again, to least to everyone who isn’t named Elizabeth Price. Sloan got another beam 10, Gnat got another floor 10, and McGee also got another floor 10, all gymnasts who have already received 10s on those events this season. Then in UCLA’s own SEC-themed carnival of insane scores, Danusia got her first beam 10 for a couple years, and Brittany Rogers got her first 10 ever, just not on the event where she was supposed to get it.

As usually happens in meets like those, the craziest scores weren’t the 10s but unjustified 9.925s and 9.950s that pushed the totals up and made the 10s almost necessary. That’s why it was so funny that Price didn’t get a 10 from both judges this particular bars routine. (I’m not as worked up about vault because it was not a true stick, in spite of doing the DTY. You can’t decide not to see it simply because of difficulty, as many times as we’ve seen that happen. )

Sure, Price has done this identical bars routine four or five times and never received 10.000 for it, but this time is somewhat different because it’s not like the judges were keeping themselves clothed and professional, even the particular bars judge who went 9.950 (and who also gave Sophina 9.900 for one of her Evel Knievel dismounts). They were throwing panties on every event for all the teams, and then…

9.975. OK? You’re choosing now to have scruples?

Anyway, to the rankings! I’m taking the rankings down much lower this week for a look at who is in regionals contention and how close the race is. (It’s close.)

Week 9 rankings

1. Oklahoma – 197.765

RQS
Road Score 1: 197.925
Road Score 2: 197.675
Road Score 3: 197.550
Road/Home Score 1: 198.075
Road/Home Score 2: 197.900
Road/Home Score 3: 197.775

Oklahoma keeps putting away 197 after 197 and remains safe at #1 until at least the conference championships. It’s hard to pick at a team with these scores because while there are momentary issues like weaker vault landings over the weekend, Oklahoma is hitting us in the face with solid gymnastics week after week. The real question I have is, interestingly, about the beam lineup. Now, it’s interesting in part because I always pretend to have a question about the beam lineup and then it always ends up being better than fine in the postseason because it’s Oklahoma and beam. But then again, I look at Kmieciak, Lehrmann, Catour, Brown, Jones, and Capps (the recent six) and I think…is this really the team’s best beam lineup?

2. Florida 197.580

RQS
Road Score 1: 197.750
Road Score 2: 197.525
Road Score 3: 197.075
Road/Home Score 1: 198.175
Road/Home Score 2: 197.875
Road/Home Score 3: 197.675

Florida gained some ground on Oklahoma this week after a crucially large road total, but it’s a bit of a treadmill process when Oklahoma keeps getting just as massive or more massive scores. The Gators compete at home next weekend for senior night and will host the annual 198 party, so they cannot drop that low road score and catch Oklahoma quite yet. The real question this week is how much of a 40 Bridget Sloan is going to have on Senior Night. I mean the score. 40.000. I’m talking about gymnastics.

The #2 ranking is safe for now, and much of the potential to challenge for #1 will come down to what Florida can do at SECs to get rid of that peasant 197.075.

Fun fact: Florida has hit all six beam routines just once since January and hasn’t had all beam scores reach 9.8 since January 15th. The balance beam situation vulture eyes are on all over the place this week.

3. LSU – 197.340

RQS
Road Score 1: 197.900
Road Score 2: 196.800
Road Score 3: 196.750
Road/Home Score 1: 197.925
Road/Home Score 2: 197.825
Road/Home Score 3: 197.425

The Tigers recorded a season high and used it to pass Alabama into 3rd, which is quite a solid ranking for a team that spent so much of the early half of the season significantly under-ranked. I see no reason to expect LSU’s RQS ascent to stop considering that those two non-bold road scores are pretty pedestrian by LSU standards and would constitute a weak meet at this point in the year. Florida is unreachable until SECs, but there will be an opening at that point if LSU records a couple more big 197s. Traveling to TWU and then to SECs, it seems realistic.

4. Alabama – 197.325

RQS
Road Score 1: 197.525
Road Score 2: 197.300
Road Score 3: 197.250
Road/Home Score 1: 197.550
Road/Home Score 2: 197.375
Road/Home Score 3: 197.175

Maximum RQS: 197.400

That 196.200 disaster against LSU was not a good note on which to leave the regular season, but with no meet next weekend, Alabama will have to live with annihilating my fantasy team and heading into SECs with the poor taste of sub-49 scores on bars and beam still lingering. The bars problem shouldn’t really be repeated, although Jetter’s double front is always a case of pass-the-stabbing-knife, but beam has been a case of the beautiful disasters this year, especially disastrous when some of the beautifuls aren’t competing. Winston only did one event over the weekend. What even was that?

Because LSU looks very likely to increase its RQS and Alabama is capped at 197.400, it looks like the remaining score will be more about fending off the others.

5. Utah – 197.105

RQS
Road Score 1: 197.525
Road Score 2: 197.150
Road Score 3: 197.075
Road/Home Score 1: 197.150
Road/Home Score 2: 197.125
Road/Home Score 3: 197.025

Utah finally broke through with a much-needed giant score, putting together a complete meet across all four events and increasing the team’s ceiling heading into a home meet against Georgia followed by Pac-12s, both of which we can assume will be high scores as well. We’re hitting the point in the season in which many of the rankings, especially at the top, are solidifying. Utah can’t rise any higher than 5th after this weekend and would need to continue going 197.5+ in both remaining meets to have any shot at Alabama.

6. Michigan – 197.085

RQS:
Road Score 1: 197.275
Road Score 2: 196.975
Road Score 3: 196.900
Road/Home Score 1: 197.425
Road/Home Score 2: 197.225
Road/Home Score 3: 197.050

Michigan hasn’t been doing poorly exactly, but as other teams keep getting 197.5s, the Wolverines have begun bleeding a ranking spot per week. The weekend’s result will be quite disappointing, throwing away the opportunity for a season high by counting a fall on beam. For yet another team, beam is becoming worrisome as this falling issue has been lingering most of the season without ever being truly resolved. In fact, it has returned with strength in the last three meets, which have included a disaster, a half-disaster, and a barely-got-through. Depending on what Utah and Auburn score next time, Michigan is close enough to move back up to #5 with a recovery performance at the Big Ten semifinal. (Why don’t they call this meet the Big Ten semifinals again? Instead of the Big Ten Big Five Five Meet, or whatever?)

7. Auburn – 196.940

RQS
Road Score 1: 197.325
Road Score 2: 197.125
Road Score 3: 196.825
Road/Home Score 1: 197.275
Road/Home Score 2: 197.200
Road/Home Score 3: 196.275 

Auburn was presented with the golden opportunity of passing UCLA last weekend and comfortably did the job with yet another 197, bringing back the nailed-landings vault brigade that was so impressive that one time earlier in the season. The scary thing for the other teams is the 196.275 home score that’s still lurking around. Based on current form, we should expect Auburn to obliterate that this weekend. The Tigers have a peak RQS of 197.150 after the next meet, which means a ranking as high as #5 is conceivable.

In the other race, the one for the evening session at SEC Championships, a 196.950 would clinch Auburn’s spot and keep Georgia in the cold.

8. UCLA – 196.865

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.925
Road Score 2: 196.800
Road Score 3: 196.675
Road/Home Score 1: 197.475
Road/Home Score 2: 197.100
Road/Home Score 3: 196.825

Much like Michigan, UCLA falls in the rankings after a huge missed opportunity. In spite of competing without a number of important routines because of UCLA reasons, this meet was supposed to be a high 197. Continuing bars trauma and counting a fall on beam rendered the score barely usable instead of offensively huge. The Bruins will have another chance to snatch that huge score on senior day against Oklahoma, although moving up in the rankings will be a challenge with Auburn looking so likely to move up. Because UCLA’s bold scores are noticeably lower than those of the teams ranked above, it’s hard to envision much upward movement before regionals.

9. Georgia – 196.820

RQS
Road Score 1: 197.025
Road Score 2: 196.775
Road Score 3: 196.275
Road/Home Score 1: 197.525
Road/Home Score 2: 197.275
Road/Home Score 3: 196.750

This was not a weekend of rainbows for Georgia, but we’re starting to see them pull closer to a reasonable ranking for this roster’s talent level. The Gymdogs, however, still aren’t putting it all together, in the first meet of the weekend actually hitting beam but throwing up an anemic bars score, and then in the second meet of the weekend kinda-sorta hitting beam and then having an OOB fest on floor. Everything is still terrifying.

With that 196.275 still to drop, Georgia has a higher peak score than UCLA after this weekend and will view moving up as doable. Passing Auburn for that evening spot is also mathematically possible, but it can only happen if Auburn doesn’t hit that target score and Georgia goes, at very minimum, 196.900.

10. Denver – 196.605

RQS
Road Score 1: 197.050
Road Score 2: 196.350
Road Score 3: 196.125
Road/Home Score 1: 197.525
Road/Home Score 2: 196.825
Road/Home Score 3: 196.675

Sup, Denver. Denver has pushed into the top 10 (!) on the strength of two more big scores over the weekend. Significantly, Sunday marked Denver’s first truly huge road total, which had been one of the questions about this team. Was this just a home thing? Now, it was at Air Force, which wasn’t exactly a road meet (it’s like when UCLA used to go to CSUF). This same meet saw Minnesota record a season high by A FULL POINT in a loosely scored affair, so the next two weeks on the road will be critical. We know this is a 196 team. Whether it’s a high-196/197 team, which is what will ultimately determine Denver’s nationals hopes, is still up for debate. 

11. Arkansas – 196.470

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.700
Road Score 2: 196.200
Road Score 3: 196.150
Road/Home Score 1: 197.225
Road/Home Score 2: 196.700
Road/Home Score 3: 196.600

Arkansas drops a few spots this week on account of a mehish lowish 196 away against Missouri. Much like Boise State, Arkansas would always be hurt most by a case of the normal when the big teams start bigging, and that’s what happened. We just didn’t know that one of those big teams would suddenly be Denver. The HOGS now have to count a 196.200 road score, which really handcuffs their chances to move up, making placement in the #1 or #2 regional look like a solid bet. They’ll be fighting it out with a pretty equivalent team for a spot at nationals. 

Arkansas has been eliminated from contention for the evening session at SECs.

12. Boise State – 196.365

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.425
Road Score 2: 196.425
Road Score 3: 196.400
Road/Home Score 1: 196.575
Road/Home Score 2: 196.300
Road/Home Score 3: 196.275

Boise State has been inching up a tenth every week, leading to a season-high 196.575 on Sunday. Now, the fact that Boise State has been wildly consistent with these scores means there’s not a lot of room to move up, and because Boise State hasn’t faced any difficult teams this year or had any big wins, it’s almost certain that they will be the overlooked mystery heading into regionals even if they do maintain a solid ranking. The mystery is heightened because regionals will be their first meet against an opponent of quality. What to expect…

13. Stanford – 196.305

RQS
Road Score 1: 197.400
Road Score 2: 196.650
Road Score 3: 196.250
Road/Home Score 1: 196.675
Road/Home Score 2: 196.075
Road/Home Score 3: 195.875

Maximum RQS: 196.610

Stanford can breathe a little easier now with that 197.400 which shot their ranking up to a much more normal station. The Cardinal are theoretically capable of moving as high as 10th depending on their performance at Pac-12s, but since they’re out of action this coming weekend, they’ll also be quite vulnerable to getting passed by a number of teams (could theoretically finish the weekend as low as 19th, though a lot of huge scores would have to happen) including two Pac-12 foes.

Cal needs a 195.675 to move ahead of Stanford this week, and Oregon State needs a 195.850. Both teams should reach those marks rather easily, which means Stanford may very well be out of the big-girl session at Pac-12s. That would be a rather shocking turn of events. 

Stanford would take this #13 spot in a second if things were actually to finish this way. In a regional with Oklahoma and Boise State, Stanford would be favored to advance. It’s just…going to take a massive result at Pac-12s to make that happen.

14. Cal – 196.290

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.900
Road Score 2: 195.650
Road Score 3: 195.575
Road/Home Score 1: 196.825
Road/Home Score 2: 196.750
Road/Home Score 3: 196.650

This is what still makes Stanford a little vulnerable. Cal’s bold scores are good and very competitive. If Cal can continue scoring these mid 196s, a ranking of 11th or 12th is not out of the picture. 

15. Missouri – 196.235

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.625
Road Score 2: 196.050
Road Score 3: 195.825
Road/Home Score 1: 196.650
Road/Home Score 2: 196.625
Road/Home Score 3: 196.050

16. Oregon State – 196.205

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.350
Road Score 2: 196.225
Road Score 3: 195.325
Road/Home Score 1: 196.850
Road/Home Score 2: 196.800
Road/Home Score 3: 196.325

Oregon State was in a dire position a week ago, but three solid home scores in a row have solved a problem like a beaver. At least for the moment. There’s still the matter of that 195.325 that must be removed if Oregon State is going to avoid a nasty placement, but of course the good news about that score is that if the Beavs are indeed able to drop it, they could possibly move into the top 12.

16. Nebraska – 196.205

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.350
Road Score 2: 196.150
Road Score 3: 195.350
Road/Home Score 1: 197.350
Road/Home Score 2: 196.775
Road/Home Score 3: 196.400

Nebraska also came up with a season high and savior score over the weekend in a meet featuring the returns of Laeng and Orel, which served to make the team look much less sparse and horrifying. It was always a less urgent performance than some of the others because the real urgency comes this weekend on the road at the Big Five when that 195.350 must be eliminated. If that happens, expect Nebraska’s ranking to skyrocket, but if it doesn’t, that was the last chance since Nebraska is hosting Big Tens. 

18. Iowa – 196.200

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.275
Road Score 2: 196.275
Road Score 3: 196.075
Road/Home Score 1: 196.650
Road/Home Score 2: 196.375
Road/Home Score 3: 196.000

Iowa recorded a number of bigger 196s in the middle of the season, but the scores have leveled off in the last couple showings, meaning it’s likely that Iowa will act as a really dangerous spoiler as a regional host rather than a contender for a second seed, which was on the table earlier. But, with those home 196s this year, Iowa is certainly in the regional spoiler conversation. 

19. Minnesota – 196.105

RQS
Road Score 1: 197.225
Road Score 2: 196.300
Road Score 3: 196.175
Road/Home Score 1: 196.200
Road/Home Score 2: 196.075
Road/Home Score 3: 195.775

The problem with recording one giant score is that it must be dropped, so Sunday’s 197 only really helps Minnesota if it happens again.

20. Arizona – 196.080

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.375
Road Score 2: 196.000
Road Score 3: 195.775
Road/Home Score 1: 196.475
Road/Home Score 2: 196.150
Road/Home Score 3: 196.100

Arizona was able to drop another weak score with the performance at Oklahoma over the weekend, but it was not enough to change the ranking scenario. Competing at home next weekend, Arizona will not be able to move into the top 18 before Pac-12s and cannot make the top-seeded session. Vault has been the death of this team.

21. Kentucky – 195.965

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.700
Road Score 2: 195.800
Road Score 3: 195.800
Road/Home Score 1: 196.650
Road/Home Score 2: 196.050
Road/Home Score 3: 195.525

Note: Kentucky’s last two scores are 196.700 and 196.650. We can argue crazy scoring in both affairs, but that’s still something we don’t usually see from Kentucky.

22. George Washington – 195.905

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.175
Road Score 2: 196.075
Road Score 3: 195.750
Road/Home Score 1: 196.600
Road/Home Score 2: 195.800
Road/Home Score 3: 195.725

GWU is continuing to record good scores but not good enough to maintain that untenable early-season ranking. This is still a very solid RQS picture ,and GWU has a legitimate shot at staying in the top 25, which would a tremendous finishing point.

23. Illinois – 195.765

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.300
Road Score 2: 195.875
Road Score 3: 195.725
Road/Home Score 1: 196.525
Road/Home Score 2: 195.500
Road/Home Score 3: 195.425

Just when it looked like things were finally turning around, Illinois counts an 8 on bars. At this point, it’s highly unlikely that Illinois will snatch a #3-seed at regionals, but still, if I’m any of the teams, I don’t want to see Illinois end up in my section. This roster is still too impressive to tolerate as a #4 seed.

24. Washington – 195.750

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.250
Road Score 2: 196.175
Road Score 3: 195.350
Road/Home Score 1: 196.450
Road/Home Score 2: 196.325 
Road/Home Score 3: 194.650

Washington is trudging up the rankings toward something more realistic, heading out on the “road” to Seattle Pacific tonight with a chance to get rid of that 194 and potentially move into the top 20.

25. West Virginia – 195.665

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.225
Road Score 2: 195.250
Road Score 3: 195.250
Road/Home Score 1: 196.800
Road/Home Score 2: 195.800
Road/Home Score 3: 195.800

26. Eastern Michigan – 195.635

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.600
Road Score 2: 195.975
Road Score 3: 195.800
Road/Home Score 1: 195.750
Road/Home Score 2: 195.600
Road/Home Score 3: 195.050

27. Southern Utah – 195.595

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.000
Road Score 2: 195.250
Road Score 3: 195.050
Road/Home Score 1: 196.300
Road/Home Score 2: 195.975
Road/Home Score 3: 195.700

SUU is a competitive team being held down by weak road scores, which continued after counting a fall on beam over the weekend. High 195s are quite attainable for this group, so they’ll have a solid chance to move back up into the top 25 after the two remaining meets.

28. Penn State – 195.550

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.350
Road Score 2: 195.925
Road Score 3: 195.700
Road/Home Score 1: 195.675
Road/Home Score 2: 195.350
Road/Home Score 3: 195.100

The descent of Penn State grows ever more extreme. Remember three years ago when Penn State made nationals? When you go to Arizona State and are in a fight to see which team can be more of a mess, it’s not a good season. 

28. Ohio State – 195.550

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.350
Road Score 2: 195.975
Road Score 3: 195.275
Road/Home Score 1: 195.800
Road/Home Score 2: 195.675
Road/Home Score 3: 195.025

Also remember when Ohio State made nationals? 

30. New Hampshire – 195.400

RQS
Road Score 1: 195.800
Road Score 2: 195.225
Road Score 3: 195.100
Road/Home Score 1: 196.075
Road/Home Score 2: 195.550
Road/Home Score 3: 195.325

Early in the season, UNH was in a fight with George Washington to reign EAGL, but things have gone downhill for New Hampshire since the beam dominance and 196s of January. It’s particularly interesting that beam has been the downfall of the last two meets, since that’s supposed to be the strength.

31. BYU – 195.370

RQS
Road Score 1: 195.575
Road Score 2: 195.550
Road Score 3: 195.100
Road/Home Score 1: 195.750
Road/Home Score 2: 195.475
Road/Home Score 3: 195.150

32. Utah State – 195.350

RQS
Road Score 1: 195.750
Road Score 2: 195.475
Road Score 3: 195.100
Road/Home Score 1: 196.025
Road/Home Score 2: 195.425
Road/Home Score 3: 195.000

33. Central Michigan – 195.345

RQS
Road Score 1: 195.700
Road Score 2: 195.400
Road Score 3: 195.275
Road/Home Score 1: 196.125
Road/Home Score 2: 195.175
Road/Home Score 3: 195.125

34. Michigan State – 195.170

RQS
Road Score 1: 195.425
Road Score 2: 195.275
Road Score 3: 195.100
Road/Home Score 1: 195.575
Road/Home Score 2: 195.175
Road/Home Score 3: 194.875

35. Kent State – 195.145

RQS
Road Score 1: 195.325
Road Score 2: 194.625
Road Score 3: 193.725
Road/Home Score 1: 196.125
Road/Home Score 2: 196.050
Road/Home Score 3: 196.000

Now that’s a scoring disparity. Almost an identical thing happened last year, when counting a road 193 kept Kent State out of regionals despite more than competitive home scores. Will the same thing happen again? Two road meets left to fix it.

36. Iowa State – 195.100

RQS
Road Score 1: 195.625
Road Score 2: 194.725
Road Score 3: 194.200
Road/Home Score 1: 196.025
Road/Home Score 2: 195.650
Road/Home Score 3: 195.300

It’s a similar look for Iowa State, currently holding onto the final position but without any margin over the contenders.

37. NC State – 195.090

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.175
Road Score 2: 195.925
Road Score 3: 195.450
Road/Home Score 1: 194.900
Road/Home Score 2: 194.700
Road/Home Score 3: 194.475

This is the weird season for NC State, when venue renovations mean that this Saturday’s meet is the team’s first and only home meet of the season. This could finally be the chance to benefit from the kind of home score that all these other adjacent teams have been able to take advantage of, with Kent State and Iowa State having to head out for road meets. 

38. Bowling Green 195.050

RQS
Road Score 1: 195.725
Road Score 2: 195.350
Road Score 3: 194.800
Road/Home Score 1: 195.425
Road/Home Score 2: 195.150
Road/Home Score 3: 194.525

Bowling Green! And with an extra meet in hand coming up this Thursday to bump that score up!

39. Maryland – 195.015

RQS
Road Score 1: 196.025
Road Score 2: 195.125
Road Score 3: 194.400
Road/Home Score 1: 195.500
Road/Home Score 2: 195.350
Road/Home Score 3: 194.700

The rest of the teams are far enough back that we’ll deal with them next week if there’s still an outside chance they could get in, but this is most likely the contending group.

Live Blog

Sunday Live Blog – UCLA, Georgia, Stanford, Heart Medicine

64 Comments
Sunday, March 6
2:00 ET/11:00 PT – Ohio State, Bowling Green @ West Virginia – SCORES – Stream
2:00 ET/11:00 PT – George Washington, Pittsburgh, Texas Woman’s, Yale @ Maryland – SCORES – BTNPlus($)
3:00 ET/12:00 PT – Georgia, Stanford @ UCLA – SCORES – Pac-12
3:00 ET/12:00 PT – Utah State @ Nebraska – SCORES
3:00 ET/12:00 PT – Minnesota, Denver @ Air Force – Stream
4:00 ET/1:00 PT – Michigan State @ Boise State – SCORES – Stream
5:00 ET/2:00 PT – UC Davis, Brown @ San Jose State – SCORES – Stream
Exhibit A:
These are the current live rankings heading into today’s action, emphasizing the urgency to get a useful score for a number of the teams competing this afternoon. I’ve been obsessing over the potential regional excitement that will come from having some of these schools as #3 seeds, without taking too seriously the possibility that they could end up out of the top 18 and out of the seeded schools altogether. Without a meet next weekend, Stanford’s situation is particularly urgent. Utah would also prefer Stanford get a big score, like now, because if Stanford does have to be “regionally allocated,” then Utah’s regional is by far the closest geographically.
Nebraska’s RQS is being held down by a low road score, so we won’t really know where the Huskers stand until after next weekend’s meet at Ohio State.

Continue reading Sunday Live Blog – UCLA, Georgia, Stanford, Heart Medicine →