At Miss USA 1992 with the same panel of judges evaluating the candidates for the preliminary and telecast finals, Miss Texas finished 1st place in the preliminaries while Miss California just barely made it in the first cut (Top 11) finished in 11th place. But when semifinals began, all scores from the preliminaries are erased and started the competition with a clean sheet. Then a huge turnaround when Miss California made it to the Final 6 (because of her high onstage interview score) while Miss Texas was eliminated despite she finished 1st in the prelims. Eventually Miss California won Miss USA despite she never placed 1st in any semifinal or final events prior to the Final 3.
The same case as Miss USA 1997, this time there were two separate panel of judges. Miss Rhode Island came on top in the preliminaries but eliminated after the Final 6 were chosen. Miss Florida came on top in the semifinals but almost made it to the Final 3 by few thousandths of a point. Miss Idaho placed 1st in the Final 6 Judges' Question (which was her forte at that time of Miss Teen USA 1989 where she won despite she finished 5th in the semifinals) but ended up as runner-up to Miss Hawaii and later inherited the Miss USA title after the original Miss USA winner won Miss Universe. Miss Hawaii's wit and strong communication skills won the crown despite she never finished first in the prelim, semi and Top 6 although she won the onstage semifinal interview.
Why do you think "back to zero" method was very important at MUO pageant system unlike at Miss America where the preliminary scores carried over to the telecast finals except the final round lately? Do you think it was fair or unfair to some favorites?