I did a quick count of North American Top 100 standings in Masters (that's my group, which is why I did it).
6 FL
6 TX
6 OH
6 WA
6 Mexico
5 Canada
5 CA
4 OR
4 MA
3 IL
3 CO
3 TN
3 NC
3 MO
2 MN
2 NJ
2 GA
2 LA
2 IN
There are more states that had two, and a bunch that had 1, but I did not include those because they didn't have anyone in the Top 50. The states which are tied for number are sorted by the rank of those in their state. For example Florida and Texas both had 6, but Florida had 3 in the Top 10 and TX only had 1. TX is ahead of OH because while they both had 1 in the T10 and 3 in the T25, TX had two more in the T50 while OH had none.
It seems large populous states with multiple borders have an advantage. This lets the good players stay away from eachother while not restricting the amount of tournaments they can go to. Bob in Miami can clean up while Joe up in Talahassee can attack Georgia.
Now, you still have to be good to go and win consistently, so I am not bashing players from those states.
But what I do want to say about this is that I feel that this means that in the bigger tournaments, like Regionals and Nationals, the players from these states might not make as good of a showing. A group of 4 really good players from MA for example, none of whom are in the top 25, but are in the 26-100 ranking, might be better than FL's top players, but because they compete with eachother they keep their ratings down.
Again I'm not bashing anyone I know Bobby is amazing, don't know the other guys but I'm sure they're good too. I just used FL as my example because its got the most.
So in summary, I don't think that these numbers will be an accurate prediction of the results of Nationals.
Let's see what happens.