|
|
Post by LeanderMomma on Jun 22, 2021 11:22:52 GMT -6
Hebron reigns supreme for now That 2015 prelims score was phenomenal for sure. Too bad Reagan didn’t attend GN ‘19. I’m not normally one to jump on the whole WHAT IF bandwagon, but I’m firmly in the camp that thinks Reagan would have set a new record at GN like they did in San Antonio. It would have been a beautiful thing to see! |
|
|
|
Post by Marching Observer on Jun 24, 2021 14:57:52 GMT -6
There is no doubt in my mind that if Ronald Reagan had come up in 19 that they would have won. Setting a new record on the other hand, now that is certainly a debatable topic 😊
|
|
|
|
Post by Subito Fortissimo on Jun 24, 2021 21:39:53 GMT -6
There is no doubt in my mind that if Ronald Reagan had come up in 19 that they would have won. Setting a new record on the other hand, now that is certainly a debatable topic 😊 I'm also not convinced they would have set a new score record. Scores are completely relative to your competition and also somewhat dependent on performance order. In a weaker GN finals the winner is likely going to have a higher score if they perform later, and lower if they perform earlier since the judges have to leave room at the top for potentially better bands. In a strong GN finals the winner's score will be more dependent on how early stronger bands perform, and in 2019 the two strongest bands in the bottom 6 went on first. With the top 6 in 2019 being exceptionally strong, had Reagan been there I think they probably would have had to perform last to have any chance at breaking the score record. |
|
|
|
Post by TXHillCountryBands on Jun 25, 2021 15:05:32 GMT -6
There is no doubt in my mind that if Ronald Reagan had come up in 19 that they would have won. Setting a new record on the other hand, now that is certainly a debatable topic 😊 I'm also not convinced they would have set a new score record. Scores are completely relative to your competition and also somewhat dependent on performance order. In a weaker GN finals the winner is likely going to have a higher score if they perform later, and lower if they perform earlier since the judges have to leave room at the top for potentially better bands. In a strong GN finals the winner's score will be more dependent on how early stronger bands perform, and in 2019 the two strongest bands in the bottom 6 went on first. With the top 6 in 2019 being exceptionally strong, had Reagan been there I think they probably would have had to perform last to have any chance at breaking the score record. Hypotheticals - Hypotheticals. Using your logic it could be said that the Top 6 in SA were more competitive than those at GN yet Reagan was still able to pull an almost full point ahead of the present GN Champion. Performance time debates opens a whole new can of worms that BOA theologians can debate another time. Rather than trying to check a programs hypothetical placement Let’s just appreciate their Encore performance in SA! 🍿. |
|
|
|
Post by LeanderMomma on Jun 25, 2021 18:18:57 GMT -6
There is no doubt in my mind that if Ronald Reagan had come up in 19 that they would have won. Setting a new record on the other hand, now that is certainly a debatable topic 😊 I'm also not convinced they would have set a new score record. Scores are completely relative to your competition and also somewhat dependent on performance order. In a weaker GN finals the winner is likely going to have a higher score if they perform later, and lower if they perform earlier since the judges have to leave room at the top for potentially better bands. In a strong GN finals the winner's score will be more dependent on how early stronger bands perform, and in 2019 the two strongest bands in the bottom 6 went on first. With the top 6 in 2019 being exceptionally strong, had Reagan been there I think they probably would have had to perform last to have any chance at breaking the score record. Were either of y’all in attendance at BOA San Antonio that year? 😉 If not, you just don’t get it. 😄 |
|
|
|
Post by supersound on Jun 26, 2021 16:19:58 GMT -6
A lot of shows that go to Grand Nationals are designed with room to grow. Reagan’s show peaked when it was designed to peak and it did so spectacularly.
Reagan never planned to take Secret World to nationals. They did what they had to do with San Antonio as the finish line and they did so greatly.
|
|
rickofavon
Senior Member
Never let the drumming die.
Posts: 75
|
Post by rickofavon on Nov 17, 2021 10:40:24 GMT -6
Just something random to add on to highest scores ever list. I did the number crunching and found some interesting things:
There's never been a GN Finals with all bands score 90+. There's been a few times where the top 11 bands did but 12 got sub-90.
2021 (was the closest we've ever gotten to seeing that happen .1 away for Vista Ridge)
2018
2016
2006
The smallest point spread in finals from 1st to last is 6.7 in 2003 and hasn't hit sub 7 since. The most common spreads are around the 9 to 10 point margin.
|
|
|
|
Post by banddad85 on Nov 17, 2021 11:16:25 GMT -6
Just something random to add on to highest scores ever list. I did the number crunching and found some interesting things: There's never been a GN Finals with all bands score 90+. There's been a few times where the top 11 bands did but 12 got sub-90. 2021 (was the closest we've ever gotten to seeing that happen .1 away for Vista Ridge) 2018 2016 2006 The smallest point spread in finals from 1st to last is 6.7 in 2003 and hasn't hit sub 7 since. The most common spreads are around the 9 to 10 point margin. In my opinion, when you don't randomize finals performance order & have clear, known semifinals results & a clear idea of a segregated performance order in that same round due to prelims performance (across multiple panels & days), finals judges' jobs are made much easier. I bet that you would see some significant placement differences if not for the corruption, in my opinion, of the subjective mind by not randomizing performance order both in semifinals & finals, but more importantly, giving much more weight to prelims & semifinals performances. It feels like a band can actually drop out of finals contention with a weaker prelims show or a strong Eagle contender can get blown out with a tough semifinals panel. The system sucks. No one needs to know the results of class competition until the very end. They should advance the top couple of bands in each class automatically to finals & have the real competition then. The scores are relative to the high school competition & not relative to perfection. It's hard to deny that a 98 isn't an excellent score, but no one really cares about the records other than people who don't understand what's going on. |
|
|
|
Post by Allohak on Nov 17, 2021 12:24:28 GMT -6
Just something random to add on to highest scores ever list. I did the number crunching and found some interesting things: There's never been a GN Finals with all bands score 90+. There's been a few times where the top 11 bands did but 12 got sub-90. 2021 (was the closest we've ever gotten to seeing that happen .1 away for Vista Ridge) 2018 2016 2006 The smallest point spread in finals from 1st to last is 6.7 in 2003 and hasn't hit sub 7 since. The most common spreads are around the 9 to 10 point margin. It feels like a band can actually drop out of finals contention with a weaker prelims show or a strong Eagle contender can get blown out with a tough semifinals panel. The system sucks. No one needs to know the results of class competition until the very end. They should advance the top couple of bands in each class automatically to finals & have the real competition then. The scores are relative to the high school competition & not relative to perfection. It's hard to deny that a 98 isn't an excellent score, but no one really cares about the records other than people who don't understand what's going on. 1000000000000000000% |
|
|
|
Post by hewhowaits on Nov 17, 2021 12:58:16 GMT -6
In my opinion, when you don't randomize finals performance order & have clear, known semifinals results & a clear idea of a segregated performance order in that same round due to prelims performance (across multiple panels & days), finals judges' jobs are made much easier. I bet that you would see some significant placement differences if not for the corruption, in my opinion, of the subjective mind by not randomizing performance order both in semifinals & finals, but more importantly, giving much more weight to prelims & semifinals performances. It feels like a band can actually drop out of finals contention with a weaker prelims show or a strong Eagle contender can get blown out with a tough semifinals panel. The system sucks. No one needs to know the results of class competition until the very end. They should advance the top couple of bands in each class automatically to finals & have the real competition then. The scores are relative to the high school competition & not relative to perfection. It's hard to deny that a 98 isn't an excellent score, but no one really cares about the records other than people who don't understand what's going on. 1000000000000000000% At least it's not like DCI where performance order is set based on placement in the previous round or competitions leading up to the show. Performance order for DCI Finals 12th place corps 11th place corps ... 3rd place corps 2nd place corps Presumed champion |
|
|
|
Post by Allohak on Nov 17, 2021 13:02:30 GMT -6
At least it's not like DCI where performance order is set based on placement in the previous round or competitions leading up to the show. Performance order for DCI Finals 12th place corps 11th place corps ... 3rd place corps 2nd place corps Presumed champion Just because a system is better than an even-more-flawed one doesn't make that system good. |
|
|
|
Post by banddad85 on Nov 17, 2021 14:13:09 GMT -6
At least it's not like DCI where performance order is set based on placement in the previous round or competitions leading up to the show. Performance order for DCI Finals 12th place corps 11th place corps ... 3rd place corps 2nd place corps Presumed champion Just because a system is better than an even-more-flawed one doesn't make that system good. If BOA is not supposed to be as competitive as DCI, by design, then why on earth would they have wanted to segregate performance order after years of not doing so? People may not like my criticism of the organization or their handling of certain things, but they should very much take a look at how they advance bands. The current system may ultimately find the right champion band, but I didn't think that was the point to the contest. It tells any band who 'competes' in earlier time slots that they have virtually no chance to medal, win, or jump up beyond 7th place. As an audience member, I think it's a waste of time. Competitively, I would just bother showing up for the supposed Top 6 instead of all 12. Make it more mysterious, BOA. More importantly, NO BAND who advances should be limited from potentially jumping a massive amount of spots in any given round, especially when BOA institutes a very flawed prelims system. If a band scores 23rd and not 22nd, does that mean that the 22nd place band (performing at 12:00pm) has a bigger psychological advantage & a much better chance at finals. You bet! Head-to-head, yes. This feels like an easy fix to make, but I'd like to know why the rounds have to be so segregated in the first place? I understand the class qualifier situation and perhaps having those bands go on early or late, but am totally anti placement results, etc. prior to the end of finals. The judges are human and believe me, based on what I heard at my visit to Yard House, they talk a lot. If these judges are the best at what they do, they shouldn't need crutches to figure out that Broken Arrow, even if they were performing first, performed a championship-worthy show. If the show is THAT good, it should be able to survive the night. |
|
|
|
Post by mk72 on Nov 17, 2021 18:10:28 GMT -6
Just because a system is better than an even-more-flawed one doesn't make that system good. If BOA is not supposed to be as competitive as DCI, by design, then why on earth would they have wanted to segregate performance order after years of not doing so? People may not like my criticism of the organization or their handling of certain things, but they should very much take a look at how they advance bands. The current system may ultimately find the right champion band, but I didn't think that was the point to the contest. It tells any band who 'competes' in earlier time slots that they have virtually no chance to medal, win, or jump up beyond 7th place. As an audience member, I think it's a waste of time. Competitively, I would just bother showing up for the supposed Top 6 instead of all 12. Make it more mysterious, BOA. More importantly, NO BAND who advances should be limited from potentially jumping a massive amount of spots in any given round, especially when BOA institutes a very flawed prelims system. If a band scores 23rd and not 22nd, does that mean that the 22nd place band (performing at 12:00pm) has a bigger psychological advantage & a much better chance at finals. You bet! Head-to-head, yes. This feels like an easy fix to make, but I'd like to know why the rounds have to be so segregated in the first place? I understand the class qualifier situation and perhaps having those bands go on early or late, but am totally anti placement results, etc. prior to the end of finals. The judges are human and believe me, based on what I heard at my visit to Yard House, they talk a lot. If these judges are the best at what they do, they shouldn't need crutches to figure out that Broken Arrow, even if they were performing first, performed a championship-worthy show. If the show is THAT good, it should be able to survive the night.SCREAM THAT LAST PHRASE LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by jeremiah on Nov 17, 2021 18:30:02 GMT -6
If BOA is not supposed to be as competitive as DCI, by design, then why on earth would they have wanted to segregate performance order after years of not doing so? People may not like my criticism of the organization or their handling of certain things, but they should very much take a look at how they advance bands. The current system may ultimately find the right champion band, but I didn't think that was the point to the contest. It tells any band who 'competes' in earlier time slots that they have virtually no chance to medal, win, or jump up beyond 7th place. As an audience member, I think it's a waste of time. Competitively, I would just bother showing up for the supposed Top 6 instead of all 12. Make it more mysterious, BOA. More importantly, NO BAND who advances should be limited from potentially jumping a massive amount of spots in any given round, especially when BOA institutes a very flawed prelims system. If a band scores 23rd and not 22nd, does that mean that the 22nd place band (performing at 12:00pm) has a bigger psychological advantage & a much better chance at finals. You bet! Head-to-head, yes. This feels like an easy fix to make, but I'd like to know why the rounds have to be so segregated in the first place? I understand the class qualifier situation and perhaps having those bands go on early or late, but am totally anti placement results, etc. prior to the end of finals. The judges are human and believe me, based on what I heard at my visit to Yard House, they talk a lot. If these judges are the best at what they do, they shouldn't need crutches to figure out that Broken Arrow, even if they were performing first, performed a championship-worthy show. If the show is THAT good, it should be able to survive the night.You've stumbled upon the truth without realizing it. It's a subjective activity, and the best people are the ones designing and teaching the shows, making them unavailable to judge due to conflict of interest. |
|
|
|
Post by thewho on Nov 17, 2021 18:50:01 GMT -6
Just because a system is better than an even-more-flawed one doesn't make that system good. If BOA is not supposed to be as competitive as DCI, by design, then why on earth would they have wanted to segregate performance order after years of not doing so? People may not like my criticism of the organization or their handling of certain things, but they should very much take a look at how they advance bands. The current system may ultimately find the right champion band, but I didn't think that was the point to the contest. It tells any band who 'competes' in earlier time slots that they have virtually no chance to medal, win, or jump up beyond 7th place. As an audience member, I think it's a waste of time. Competitively, I would just bother showing up for the supposed Top 6 instead of all 12. Make it more mysterious, BOA. More importantly, NO BAND who advances should be limited from potentially jumping a massive amount of spots in any given round, especially when BOA institutes a very flawed prelims system. If a band scores 23rd and not 22nd, does that mean that the 22nd place band (performing at 12:00pm) has a bigger psychological advantage & a much better chance at finals. You bet! Head-to-head, yes. This feels like an easy fix to make, but I'd like to know why the rounds have to be so segregated in the first place? I understand the class qualifier situation and perhaps having those bands go on early or late, but am totally anti placement results, etc. prior to the end of finals. The judges are human and believe me, based on what I heard at my visit to Yard House, they talk a lot. If these judges are the best at what they do, they shouldn't need crutches to figure out that Broken Arrow, even if they were performing first, performed a championship-worthy show. If the show is THAT good, it should be able to survive the night.Several things: -You do realize BOA began the segregation after 2015 after a band finished 1st in semifinals stepped off 1st for finals, and consequently finishing 3rd after the 1st and 2nd place bands performed just about 6-8 bands ahead? And you know who that band was? Hebron. -The top 22, next 8, class qualifiers have always been a part of semifinals. BOA History Buff can correct on this if I'm wrong, but this has been in play for nearly 11 years and beyond that too. While I understand your points (and hold validity), it tends to ignore the duties and difficulties of judging. Judges need to slot bands accordingly to their captions by number (this isn't UIL where the scores are scored by rankings), so they need to account the bands that go after the ones that performed. What happens when a band has a superhuman performance from the first slot worthy of a perfect GE score? The judges need to score the next 11 bands. Who tf is going to call the competition from the first band? This was a necessary change to protect the integrity of actually crowning a champion band. The whole point of semifinals is get the 12 deserving bands to finals. Class champions are awarded also, but the semifinalists are judged by an equal standard. I'll have to ask someone to dig through the statistics (God, I really need to be doing this myself...), but the likelihood of a band making finals from 23-30 is practically 0%. The judges can at least have a more accurate and less biased picture of Finals-worthy bands from a pool of 22. I guess you can promote bands to finals from preliminaries, but I'll reserve the right to ask and question one's stamina to accurately score (NOT rank) 99 bands across two days. Good luck, I guess. Also, with the top 6/7 changes, it falls to the chief judge to whip their judges in line about which bands need to be scored closer to the top 6/7 (which I'm surprised John Phillips was able to do correctly). The only ones I trust are Gary Markham and Richard Saucedo, and that comes from years of experience of being the only choices for those positions. BOA saw a lot of new chief judges with both of them stepping back, which also may have played into the whole top 6/7 disparity even more. That being said, I agree that the top/bottom 6 is faaar too harsh of a change. The judges are much more versed in what the captions demand (and these BOA judges aren't people to sneeze at), but obviously they aren't infallible to human error. We've seen far too many bands get stuck in the loop of not scoring high enough after scoring close to the top 6/7 in prelims/semis. The one change I would want to see is none of the top, say 8-9 bands, are not guaranteed to perform in the first slot or something, and then the increasing placements would have a little more privilege, such as 8th would have the guarantee of not performing 3rd while 9th is entered into the draw for that or something. (This was off the top of my head, so I haven't really fleshed this out) |
|
|
|
Post by Allohak on Nov 17, 2021 18:51:23 GMT -6
15 additions to the 95.00+ list this season
2 in San Antonio finals
4 in Grand Nationals prelims
4 in Grand Nationals semis
5 in Grand Nationals finals
|
|
|
|
Post by nomorehoney on Nov 17, 2021 18:53:58 GMT -6
View AttachmentDoesn't include 2019, but that's every 95.00+ score ever achieved I love you data nerds. 🤪 So what do we make of this list overall? Got any brilliant deductions to share with us other than this Hebron semi finals score being an indicator of how good “the show that didn’t win in finals” was that year? (And that it was why the top half/bottom half rule was created). Will we see a 98 in the near future? Here we are, 2021 |
|
|
|
Post by Allohak on Nov 17, 2021 19:38:29 GMT -6
Notable new bests:
1st Place GN Finals - Broken Arrow 98.250 - 0.500 higher than Avon 2008
3rd Place GN Finals - Avon 96.650 - 0.100 higher than William Mason 2016
4th Place GN Finals - The Woodlands 96.200 - TIED with Marian Catholic 2009
5th Place GN Finals - Flower Mound 95.625 - 0.175 higher than Marian Catholic 2001
3rd Place GN Semifinals - Avon 96.500 - 0.350 higher than LD Bell 2008
1st Place GN Prelims - Broken Arrow 97.500 - 0.400 higher than Avon 2010
3rd Place GN Prelims - Avon 95.400 - previous best under 95.000
4th Place GN Prelims - The Woodlands 95.250 - previous best under 95.000
|
|
|
|
Post by marchingmaniac on Nov 17, 2021 20:44:18 GMT -6
15 additions to the 95.00+ list this season 2 in San Antonio finals 4 in Grand Nationals prelims 4 in Grand Nationals semis 5 in Grand Nationals finals Interesting. I thought the high scores in Grand Nationals were well deserved given that this was one of the most competitive Grand Nationals in recent history, but I actually thought San Antonio was a bit underscored, especially closer to the top. I certainly expected Hebron to break 96 and score closer to what CTJ, Flower Mound, and Reagan scored when they won San Antonio in 2017-2019. |
|
|
|
Post by boahistorybuff on Nov 18, 2021 5:50:14 GMT -6
If BOA is not supposed to be as competitive as DCI, by design, then why on earth would they have wanted to segregate performance order after years of not doing so? People may not like my criticism of the organization or their handling of certain things, but they should very much take a look at how they advance bands. The current system may ultimately find the right champion band, but I didn't think that was the point to the contest. It tells any band who 'competes' in earlier time slots that they have virtually no chance to medal, win, or jump up beyond 7th place. As an audience member, I think it's a waste of time. Competitively, I would just bother showing up for the supposed Top 6 instead of all 12. Make it more mysterious, BOA. More importantly, NO BAND who advances should be limited from potentially jumping a massive amount of spots in any given round, especially when BOA institutes a very flawed prelims system. If a band scores 23rd and not 22nd, does that mean that the 22nd place band (performing at 12:00pm) has a bigger psychological advantage & a much better chance at finals. You bet! Head-to-head, yes. This feels like an easy fix to make, but I'd like to know why the rounds have to be so segregated in the first place? I understand the class qualifier situation and perhaps having those bands go on early or late, but am totally anti placement results, etc. prior to the end of finals. The judges are human and believe me, based on what I heard at my visit to Yard House, they talk a lot. If these judges are the best at what they do, they shouldn't need crutches to figure out that Broken Arrow, even if they were performing first, performed a championship-worthy show. If the show is THAT good, it should be able to survive the night.Several things: -You do realize BOA began the segregation after 2015 after a band finished 1st in semifinals stepped off 1st for finals, and consequently finishing 3rd after the 1st and 2nd place bands performed just about 6-8 bands ahead? And you know who that band was? Hebron. -The top 22, next 8, class qualifiers have always been a part of semifinals. BOA History Buff can correct on this if I'm wrong, but this has been in play for nearly 11 years and beyond that too. While I understand your points (and hold validity), it tends to ignore the duties and difficulties of judging. Judges need to slot bands accordingly to their captions by number (this isn't UIL where the scores are scored by rankings), so they need to account the bands that go after the ones that performed. What happens when a band has a superhuman performance from the first slot worthy of a perfect GE score? The judges need to score the next 11 bands. Who tf is going to call the competition from the first band? This was a necessary change to protect the integrity of actually crowning a champion band. The whole point of semifinals is get the 12 deserving bands to finals. Class champions are awarded also, but the semifinalists are judged by an equal standard. I'll have to ask someone to dig through the statistics (God, I really need to be doing this myself...), but the likelihood of a band making finals from 23-30 is practically 0%. The judges can at least have a more accurate and less biased picture of Finals-worthy bands from a pool of 22. I guess you can promote bands to finals from preliminaries, but I'll reserve the right to ask and question one's stamina to accurately score (NOT rank) 99 bands across two days. Good luck, I guess. Also, with the top 6/7 changes, it falls to the chief judge to whip their judges in line about which bands need to be scored closer to the top 6/7 (which I'm surprised John Phillips was able to do correctly). The only ones I trust are Gary Markham and Richard Saucedo, and that comes from years of experience of being the only choices for those positions. BOA saw a lot of new chief judges with both of them stepping back, which also may have played into the whole top 6/7 disparity even more. That being said, I agree that the top/bottom 6 is faaar too harsh of a change. The judges are much more versed in what the captions demand (and these BOA judges aren't people to sneeze at), but obviously they aren't infallible to human error. We've seen far too many bands get stuck in the loop of not scoring high enough after scoring close to the top 6/7 in prelims/semis. The one change I would want to see is none of the top, say 8-9 bands, are not guaranteed to perform in the first slot or something, and then the increasing placements would have a little more privilege, such as 8th would have the guarantee of not performing 3rd while 9th is entered into the draw for that or something. (This was off the top of my head, so I haven't really fleshed this out) I pretty much agree with what thewho has said here. At Grand Nationals, the segregation of bands did begin after 2015. Aside from the Super Regionals, BOA did start segregating most of the regional all the way back in 1990. Keep in mind, Grand Nationals now has close to 100 bands performing in Prelims. There are also so many bands now performing at an incredibly high level. My goodness, judging Semi Finals and Finals has to be an enormous challenge. If you read the bio of the BOA judges, you will also see that these are highly accomplished and very qualified people to be judging. Over the years, BOA has certainly looked at the best possible ways to select performance time and implemented changes over the years to best address concerns. It is a highly complicated issue. |
|
rickofavon
Senior Member
Never let the drumming die.
Posts: 75
|
Post by rickofavon on Nov 18, 2021 9:47:25 GMT -6
We we are talking about segregating bands what does that entail?
Is that the partitioning of particular performance order blocks for example with the top 22 bands from prelims day 1 and 2 being reserved for semis performance order 4-26?
Is there anything like that done at Finals as well? I saw someone mention 6/7 a few times.
|
|
|
|
Post by ilikeguard on Nov 18, 2021 9:53:29 GMT -6
We we are talking about segregating bands what does that entail? Is that the partitioning of particular performance order blocks for example with the top 22 bands from prelims day 1 and 2 being reserved for semis performance order 4-26? Is there anything like that done at Finals as well? I saw someone mention 6/7 a few times. In finals, the performance order is not entirely random- the 6 bands that perform first (7 at a super regional) are among the lowest scoring, while the latter half are among the top scoring. Within those two halves it is random. This is to prevent medal contenders from being disadvantaged by an early performance time (and so that all bands are adjudicated fairly rather than based on the standards set by the first performing band, which in many cases may be exceptional and not reflect an accurate image of the entire group). |
|
rickofavon
Senior Member
Never let the drumming die.
Posts: 75
|
Post by rickofavon on Dec 14, 2022 12:30:14 GMT -6
Just some dumb stat work today for conversation:
A finals consisting of bands that placed the most frequent in placements and the highest score they achieved in that placement throughout MBA/BOA GNF. Included all 14 spots.
1st
1997 Marian Catholic - 96.050
2nd
2016 Avon - 97.450
3rd
2021 Avon - 96.650
4th (Tie)
2008 Marian Catholic - 96.200 / 2021 The Woodlands - 96.200
5th
2008 Carmel - 94.500
6th
2008 Broken Arrow - 93.350
7th
1998 Carmel - 92.550
8th
1994 Centerville - 88.400
9th
2006 Plymouth-Canton - 90.900
10th
2007 Lawrence Central - 89.700
11th
2019 Union - 88.250
12th
2019 Ayala - 88.100
13th
1989 New Philadelphia - 81.550
14th
1989 Western - 79.500
Finals consisting of the highest score for each placement throughout MBA/BOA history. Included 14 spots. Provided alternative placements if you didn't want repeats.
1st
2021 Broken Arrow - 98.250
2nd
2016 Avon - 97.450
3rd
2021 Avon - 96.650 (2016 William Mason @ 96.550 if not repeating)
4th (Tie)
2008 Marian Catholic - 96.200 / 2021 The Woodlands - 96.200
5th
2017 Flower Mound - 95.625
6th
2016 Leander - 94.650
7th
2015 Round Rock - 93.000
8th
1998 Lake Park - 92.500
9th
2021 Ronald Reagan - 91.450
10th
2016 Castle - 91.050
11th
2016 Homestead - 91.000
12th
2016 Marian Catholic - 90.050 (2021 Vista Ridge @ 89.900 if not repeating)
13th
2016 Dobyns-Bennett - 89.450
14th
1995 American Fork - 82.200
|
|
|
|
Post by bigtrombone on Dec 14, 2022 13:31:41 GMT -6
Since this hasn't been updated in awhile, here are the 18 new additions to the 95.00+ club from 2022
San Antonio Prelims (1):
Hebron 96.225
San Antonio Finals (4):
Hebron 96.750
The Woodlands 96.500
Ronald Reagan 96.000
Vandegrift 95.800
Grand National Prelims (3):
Broken Arrow 96.200
Carmel 95.350
Avon 95.250
Grand National Semifinals (5):
Carmel 97.050
William Mason 96.675
Avon 96.400
Broken Arrow 96.250
Tarpon Springs 96.025
Grand National Finals (5):
Carmel 97.500
Avon 96.150
Broken Arrow 96.050
William Mason 95.150
Tarpon Springs 95.000
|
|
|
|
Post by boahistorybuff on Dec 14, 2022 17:22:40 GMT -6
Actually the band that has placed 6th in finals more than any other band is the Centerville Jazz Band. They have finished 6th four times: 1984, 1995, 2000 and 2003. Broken Arrow, Marian Catholic, and Lawrence Central have all finished 6th place three times.
Tarpon Springs is also tied for the most 4th place finishes with four.
|
|
