Based on the limited information released to the public regarding SB>1 schedule status, it is impossible to guess with any certainty when they will fly next year.
But having worked in aerospace for 40 years I can recognize the pattern of a program that doesn't have control of their ability to perform to a schedule.
The SB team waited until they were just 6 months before promised first flight date before announcing to the public they were half a year (or more) behind schedule. Once a program has to slip a schedule to this degree so late in the program, another major slip is more than likely going to occur.
Personally as an engineer I wanted the SB>1 to fly when promised. It would have been great to have both aircraft flying in "competition" at the same time.
But I am also of the opinion that SB>1 management may have some of the same attitude as big banks before 2008: "We are to big to fail". So not performing to schedule commitments is no big deal.
I fear that the problem is deeper than just management, but may lie with the fundamental technology itself. Tying this wit another recent post of mine, the record of ABC/X2 technology has not proved to be that good.
The XH-59 underperfomed, not just in vibration levels. The X2 demonstrator was quite late and missed Sikorsky's own schedule(s). Didn't fly that many hours and when it finally achieved the speed it was intended to demonstrate, in the entire program it only spent ~ 20 minutes total time there.
What's also interesting is that drawings of operational vehicles prior to X2 flying showed the rotors and mast above the main cabin, allowing the entire area to be used, as with regular helicopters. Since X2, all drawings show the cabin having to be forward of the mast, which may indicate the mast/propulsion system may need to be much larger than originally thought.
S-97 was way late to fly, and progress since has been glacial. It took 18 months before it even retracted its gear and most flights seem to have been confined to their won airspace, mostly over the runway or ramp. It's noteworthy that they said earlier this year they would absolutely demonstrate high speed cruise by June, that date being a year later than the dates predicted in 2015, which already had been delayed from the original plan. I haven't seen any announcements that they actually did demonstrated their high speed cruise. Apparently the second demonstrator they built is not going to fly at all
Now, SB-1 is following the pattern and is also going to be late. We may be seeing evidence of something more than just management issues.