BoaDci Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 (edited) Has anyone realized how common a score that is? Here are SOME examples: Bluecoats 2016 finals Blue Devils 2015 finals Crown 2012 finals Cadets 2000 finals Cavaliers 2000 Vanguard 1999 semifinals These are only SOME I could find, but it seems like this score come up alot. Probably nothing. Edited January 9, 2017 by BoaDci Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadevilina Crown Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 The 2000 Cadets tied with the Cavaliers for 1st at Finals, so add the 2000 Cavaliers to your list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Lancer Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 7 minutes ago, BoaDci said: Has anyone realized how common a score that is? Here are SOME examples: Bluecoats 2016 finals Blue Devils 2015 finals Crown 2012 finals Cadets 2000 finals Vanguard 1999 semifinals These are only SOME I could find, but it seems like this score come up alot. Probably nothing. Well it isn't nothing ... it is 97.65. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkvillain Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 97.65 is no 98.4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Lancer Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Yorkvillain said: 97.65 is no 98.4 Thank you, Lloyd Bentsen. Edited January 9, 2017 by Jurassic Lancer 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleran Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 20 minutes ago, Yorkvillain said: 97.65 is no 98.4 Or 98.6 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoaDci Posted January 9, 2017 Author Share Posted January 9, 2017 Ok nvm....:l Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadevilina Crown Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 14 minutes ago, Eleran said: Or 98.6 Or 99.15. ...or 99.65. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 (edited) Edited January 9, 2017 by garfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouooga Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 I've said it before on these boards, but scores are all dependent on the competing corps (which is why you can't compare scores from year to year). The better the top 12 (top 6?), the lower the final score, and vice versa. I absolutely love years where the top score is in the 97s. To answer the question, 97.X is probably the lowest score anyone would accept as championship. If someone won in the modern era (now/last 30 years) with a 96 or lower, we'd all probably scratch our heads and/or say it was a down year. Why the .65? That part, I've got nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.