Paul and Islam: "No Matter What"

[kwanfan1818]

Aldredge/Eaton had a pretty great starting position for newbies to WC's -- 20th of 32 -- but they had a weak SD, and it wasn't clear they weren't going to get any credit for the last lift. The mistake going into the lift could have been called the lift attempt, giving them no credit instead of 2.21 points.

Compared to their 4C's SD, they lost 3.5 points on base, 2pts for getting L2/L2 instead of L2/L4 on the Finnstep, and losing two levels on the faulty lift, and they gained 1.78 in GOE vs. 3.07 at 4CC. Their PCS were slightly (.27) higher at Worlds than at 4C's.

 

[kwanfan1818]

I think Zoueva might be biding her time for teams to come to her when they don't get the results they want over the next two seasons with their current coaches, or when skaters aren't satisfied with the re-shuffling that will happen for 2014-15. By the end of 2015-16, a lot of things will have shaken out, with the front-runners and contenders established. I don't think she's going for the early peak in this Olympic cycle or to take a chance on teams who might not make it through mid-cycle; it's better to see where they politiks flow and let the other coaches do the heavy lifting. In the meantime, she's got a nice living just doing choreography, with coaching a few lower Top 10 teams on the side.

(Sorry for the double post: I thought I was in a different thread.)

 

[professordeb]

If W/P know what's good for them, they will stay far away from Canton. They are, in my estimation, in one of the best places they can be in for their training. I would also be very surprised if I/P went to her. Possibly G/P but only because no other top Canadian team would want to leave their current training ground. After seeing how things have been in Canton for the past number of seasons, if any Canadian team went to Marina AND she was also training an American couple, I wouldn't presume she'd be giving me what I need to win if I'm the Canadian team.

 

[skatingfan04]

If W/P know what's good for them, they will stay far away from Canton.

I have to agree with some of that. I think Zoueva is extremely skilled as a coach and choreographer, but there's something toxic about the atmosphere in Canton the last year or two that wasn't there before. V/M have looked visibly strained, as have the rest of the teams from there, and I don't think it was just the strain of rivalry. A lot of teams jumped ship when Shpilband left. I have no clue what's going on there, but it doesn't seem like anyone's all that happy anymore.

As for P/I and W/P, they've both flourished at DSC. Why on earth would either team leave? Krylova and Carmelengo seem to be great technical coaches and choreographers. They don't hesitate to call in experts when using a style they may not be as familiar with. They're masters at playing to their teams strengths, do a good job of identifying and repairing each teams' weaknesses, and most importantly seem to do a great job instilling confidence in their skaters (I think this was key for P/I). Furthermore, the environment seems to be a really great one. The skaters seem to enjoy themselves and get along with the coaches and one another. Sounds like the perfect place to be.

 

[skatingfan04]

P/I are listed as participants in the Margaret Garrison Ice Show coming up on May 10th.

http://skatecanada-centralontario.com/

For those in the Ontario region, the show usually has a great line up (Gabby Daleman and Nam Nguyen are listed so far), and tickets are free (can you believe it?), so consider checking it out. I've never been, but I think I'll finally make the trip this year.

 

[blancanieves]

It would be great to see these guys follow Massimo Scali to work with Marina. Training at DSC risks them being held back because W/P will be the number 1 team.

Sorry to get sidetracked. Is Massimo really no longer working at DSC?

 

[poirierpaul]

I think Zoueva might be biding her time for teams to come to her when they don't get the results they want over the next two seasons with their current coaches, or when skaters aren't satisfied with the re-shuffling that will happen for 2014-15. By the end of 2015-16, a lot of things will have shaken out, with the front-runners and contenders established. I don't think she's going for the early peak in this Olympic cycle or to take a chance on teams who might not make it through mid-cycle; it's better to see where they politiks flow and let the other coaches do the heavy lifting. In the meantime, she's got a nice living just doing choreography, with coaching a few lower Top 10 teams on the side.

(Sorry for the double post: I thought I was in a different thread.)

That can be dangerous though. As you said by the end of 2016 season the plot for 2018 Games will already be forming. If the main contenders for 2018 already are with an established coach that they are happy with, which they probably will be to have gotten to that point, she is out of luck.

 

[Emdee]

P/I are listed as participants in the Margaret Garrison Ice Show coming up on May 10th.

http://skatecanada-centralontario.com/

For those in the Ontario region, the show usually has a great line up (Gabby Daleman and Nam Nguyen are listed so far), and tickets are free (can you believe it?), so consider checking it out. I've never been, but I think I'll finally make the trip this year.

Tickets are not free but inexpensive. I bought on ice tics a few years ago for a very small amount! I may go this year but not sure . When I went patrick skated as did crone and Poirier. It was great to see patrick only a few feet away.

 

[Emdee]

Tickets are not free but inexpensive. I bought on ice tics a few years ago for a very small amount! I may go this year but not sure . When I went patrick skated as did crone and Poirier. It was great to see patrick only a few feet away.

Sorry it looks like they are free this year.....didn't read the details.

 

[skatingfan04]

Sorry it looks like they are free this year.....didn't read the details.

Yeah they are. I called and checked. I believe the only ones that cost $ are the on ice seats, and I believe that's because they provide food/drinks.

 

[kwanfan1818]

That can be dangerous though. As you said by the end of 2016 season the plot for 2018 Games will already be forming. If the main contenders for 2018 already are with an established coach that they are happy with, which they probably will be to have gotten to that point, she is out of luck.

It's a risk, but who would have expected Gailhaguet to pull P/B from K/C to send them to Shpilband? They didn't do well at 2013 Worlds, but another coach could hardly have fixed Borzat's injury or made up for the missed training time.

That doesn't mean she wouldn't take I/? if they fell in her lap.

 

[Marta24]

I think DSC is the right place for P/I. Think about it, P/I went from not even qualifying for a World`s spot to Top 10 at worlds in just two years. Besides, I sometimes have the feeling that Zueva is a little self-absorbed. With the DSC coaches I have a feeling that they put the needs of their couples in front and center of their work with them. For example they let their couples work with outside choreographers or they let Faiella and Scali work with Natalia Linichuk.

Regarding P/B, I think they probably would have had similar results, if they had stayed at DSC.

 

[The Observer]

If W/P know what's good for them, they will stay far away from Canton. They are, in my estimation, in one of the best places they can be in for their training. I would also be very surprised if I/P went to her. Possibly G/P but only because no other top Canadian team would want to leave their current training ground. After seeing how things have been in Canton for the past number of seasons, if any Canadian team went to Marina AND she was also training an American couple, I wouldn't presume she'd be giving me what I need to win if I'm the Canadian team.

I thought G&P might consider making a move from Toronto to Michigan, but since they got into the top 8 last week, perhaps Carol Lane is a good enough coach with enough rep power to get them up the World standings.

W&P might as well stay with Krylova for at least another year to see if they can get on the podium again next year, and then assess their options afterwards. Likewise, P&I have become much more consistent and no longer have the falls that they used to.

W&P, G&P and P&I are really the only 3 ice dance teams with podium potential right now (unless V&M come back!). The 2 teams that might want to make some changes are O&W and R&H. Neither one of them qualified for the minimum TES score at Worlds last month. Edwards & Pang ended up being named the Worlds alternates instead.

 

[NorthernDancers]

I thought G&P might consider making a move from Toronto to Michigan, but since they got into the top 8 last week, perhaps Carol Lane is a good enough coach with enough rep power to get them up the World standings.

W&P might as well stay with Krylova for at least another year to see if they can get on the podium again next year, and then assess their options afterwards. Likewise, P&I have become much more consistent and no longer have the falls that they used to.

W&P, G&P and P&I are really the only 3 ice dance teams with podium potential right now (unless V&M come back!). The 2 teams that might want to make some changes are O&W and R&H. Neither one of them qualified for the minimum TES score at Worlds last month. Edwards & Pang ended up being named the Worlds alternates instead.

I don't see any reason for W/P to leave Krylova. They are the top team, will get great attention, and have a full team of specialists in and out of the club to make sure they keep improving. Given how close the results were, I expect W/P to continue pushing themselves and getting better and better. P/I have shown that moving to Detroit was the best thing for them. With some more confidence from a stronger season, and some great opportunities next season, I expect they will continue to get stronger and better as well.

With regard to G/P, they need to take a page out of W/P experience. They put in a LOT of time to make sure they had stronger technique together. Poirier is really strong, but Gilles is not yet at his level. And she'll never get there unless they put in the time. I think that is probably best done out of the comfort zone, away from Scarborough, and with teams that will push them daily. I don't know about 3 top Canadians all at the same club, but they would definitely push each other. If not DSC, maybe G/P need to think about Novi. I also think that they need to work on different kinds of connection. I remember with C/P, they were lacking some chemistry. G/P connect on humour and originality, and clearly get along, but they need to work on more romantic connection. I love the originality out of this team, but they are going to need more.

As for the other 2, I don't see a lot of improvement any more with O/W. I also think R/H should have moved a couple of years ago. If they are going to continue, they definitely need to make a change. I'm thinking Montreal might be a good idea. In the meantime, there are others starting to nip at both these teams heels, including P/O, E/P, and others.

 

[The Observer]

P&I were never a bad team, the reason they didn't advance up the standings was because of inconsistencies and some major falls at the wrong time (like in the FD at 2013 Nationals). Their current environment has certainly helped improve their consistency and confidence, but they already had potential before they came to their current coaches. So while Krylova & co. deserve some credit for their improved results, it's not as if they were a terrible team when they came to her stable. They had been on the Canadian podium once and had some respectable results on the GP and elsewhere.

G&P are advancing fairly well for a team that's only been together for 3 years. And if they are smart they will continue to advance their technique, like you say. I think they've already done so since they got increased levels for their footwork sequences at Worlds compared to earlier in the season. After the surprise of not finishing on the podium at Nationals this year I would assume they realized they need to raise their game to the next level. I don't know if they will leave their comfort zone of Scarborough though - Paul in particular seems a bit stubborn about staying there. But maybe he's right that Carol Lane is still good for them. They did get into Top 8 last week.

O&W say they like being coached by Wing & Lowe on the West Coast, and R&H have been skating together since they were kids and say they are happy in the Scarborough group. But the challenge for O&W is that they will be in danger of being overshadowed by their own training mates of E&P if they don't have a stronger season next year. They edged out R&H at Nationals, but I think they finished behind P&O in the FD. And then O&W got beaten by R&H at 4CC's. R&H had decent results at 4CC's, but it's going to be hard for them to get on the Canadian podium and advance internationally unless W&P get injured or P&I or G&P have a major crash. The only reason O&W got to the podium in 2013 was because W&P were injured and P&I fell in the FD. You may be right that R&H should move to Montreal and be coached by Dubreuil & Lauzon. G&P will want to remain a Top 10 team, so Carol Lane will probably make them her main priority, and R&H might need a fresh coaching perspective.

 

[skatingfan04]

Just dropping in to wish all who celebrate a very happy Easter!

 

[spikydurian]

As for P/I and W/P, they've both flourished at DSC. Why on earth would either team leave? Krylova and Carmelengo seem to be great technical coaches and choreographers. They don't hesitate to call in experts when using a style they may not be as familiar with. They're masters at playing to their teams strengths, do a good job of identifying and repairing each teams' weaknesses, and most importantly seem to do a great job instilling confidence in their skaters (I think this was key for P/I). Furthermore, the environment seems to be a really great one. The skaters seem to enjoy themselves and get along with the coaches and one another. Sounds like the perfect place to be.

I too think that K&C are doing a great job with P&I and W&P. If the skaters are happy, there is no reason to switch coaches. I am looking forward to their growing and becoming a force in medalling.

 

[skatingfan04]

It's been far too quiet here, so I thought I'd share this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjNLG9ImZHU&feature=youtu.be

Further proof of how perfect P/I's unison is! (Not to mention those beautiful lines)

Also, P/I will be skating the COS show this coming Saturday. I'm going to be there, so I'll try and fill everyone in on what/how they skate ASAP.

 

[puglover]

Thanks for sharing that. They are so very lovely!

 

[DE93]

I will also be at the show this weekend too so I'll be sure to have photos for you guys (as soon as I have 45 minutes of time to edit/upload!)

 

[clarie]

Thank you for sharing SF04, not only do they have beautiful lines but they stay pretty much equidistant from one another during their twizzles, and Alex's posture and arms are comparable favorably to Tessa's. This is one gorgeous team.

 

[Emdee]

Clarie, good to see you back...

The one thing I think brings down this team is Mitch. He needs to add some vibrancy to his personality. He is in tough competition with Scott and Andrew and Poirier has a bubbly personality that translates differently onto the ice.

I can see under K&C tutelage this is much improved. Love Alex's dress at Olys. Of course her lines are excellent and she definitely has Tessa's bearing. Would be nice if they can bring more of their own personality.

 

[The Observer]

Emdee, I think your points are good. At the moment, I feel that Alex is the stronger of the two. And of course there's nothing wrong with the woman being the leader in the team - that makes a nice change. She also does have the beautiful balletic posture and grace that Tessa has, and her training in ballet shows through. I think both Kaitlyn & Piper should follow her lead in that area.

But you're right that Mitch needs to show some more personality and expression and loosen up a little. Maybe it's just a confidence thing because of some of the rough falls and ups & downs of the past. You're right that Mitch isn't as expressive yet as Scott, Andrew or Paul. I think this is one of the reasons why the judges marked them much lower on PCS at Worlds compared to Kaitlyn & Andrew and Piper & Paul.

I'm glad all 3 of our Canadian dance teams did well at Worlds. They each have their own strengths and each could gain by learning from what each other does well.

 

[lavenderblue]

From what I tend to value in ice dance, I always find the comments that Alex is the stronger partner than Mitch to be curious, because as actual skating goes, Mitch is probably the slightly better partner. They're extremely well-matched, for sure -- there's no imbalance there. But when I've watched one and the other stroking around separately during a competition warm-up or practice, Mitch gets a little deeper into the ice and more power from his strokes. Alex has the more obvious dance qualities, but I don't think she overshadows him in a negative way -- this is more like a frame and picture partnership, and he frames her very well.

 

[Emdee]

My issue with Mitch is not technique but expression and personality.

 

[canadablue]

Excellent post, lavenderblue, I totally agree. I think they compliment one another beautifully.

But you're right that Mitch needs to show some more personality and expression and loosen up a little. Maybe it's just a confidence thing because of some of the rough falls and ups & downs of the past. You're right that Mitch isn't as expressive yet as Scott, Andrew or Paul. I think this is one of the reasons why the judges marked them much lower on PCS at Worlds compared to Kaitlyn & Andrew and Piper & Paul.

My issue with Mitch is not technique but expression and personality.

If that's true, The Observer, as I suspect it is, then the judges did not apply the PCS criteria correctly. "Expression" is a very minor part of the PCS score to begin with. It is irrelevant except for 2 of the 5 categories - Performance/Execution and Interpretation/Timing. And the thing is that people criticize teams for "lacking expression", when usually they're just only recognizing one specific type of expression, a preference for which many fans do not share, when the PCS criteria very clearly allows for a more introverted style.

9.00+ criteria for PE says "projection exceptional (to audience or in themselves if music requires)". Within this category, expression is outnumbered by things like matching and unison, lines and posture, and precise movement. 9.00+ criteria for IT says "staying in character for the whole program", but this category also has heavy emphasis on moving and relating "as one", which would seem to indicate that a team's expression can be too extraverted, if it ignores the relationship between the skaters. In addition, this type of character/relating criteria is only half the IT battle, with the rest of the criteria dealing with correct timing, and proper expression of the style and character of the chosen dance - and that doesn't mean in the acting, it means in the dancing.

A strong argument can be made that P/I should outscore G/P on both of these categories. And when you look at the other 60% of the PCS score - skating skills, where both Mitch and Alex are stronger than Piper, and transitions, where P/I's program was absolutely of superior quality, I think it's very very hard to make a case that G/P should have outscored P/I in PCS. To say a bit more on the latter, I know some people consider P/I's program boring or something, but transitions aren't about what people find subjectively interesting - the variety and difficulty of P/I's footwork was superior to G/P's, and the complexity of the holds in their FD was absolutely the class of the field. Both skating skills and transitions also include the stipulation that the workload and abilities are equal for both partners, which is certainly much more problematic in G/P's case than P/I's. Choreography, of course, is the most subjective category, but I personally found G/P's FD to be overrated. They had some interesting positions, but the concept was more innovative than the movement - and a unique concept counts for almost zilch.

If some people don't enjoy P/I's expression because they don't find it appealing, that's obviously legitimate. I don't find teams with an angsty or flashy style appealing. But there is no explanation in the criteria - to do with expression, or anything else- as to why G/P should be outscoring P/I in the PCS mark as a whole. The judges are applying only parts of the criteria, or specific one-sided interpretations of certain criteria, or they're judging by reputation, G/P having had more international exposure at this point. I certainly hope the scoring goes more by the book, as it should, this coming season. Things like momentum shouldn't matter, but P/I certainly have it after this season.

 

[skatingfan04]

Excellent post, lavenderblue, I totally agree. I think they compliment one another beautifully.





If that's true, The Observer, as I suspect it is, then the judges did not apply the PCS criteria correctly. "Expression" is a very minor part of the PCS score to begin with. It is irrelevant except for 2 of the 5 categories - Performance/Execution and Interpretation/Timing. And the thing is that people criticize teams for "lacking expression", when usually they're just only recognizing one specific type of expression, a preference for which many fans do not share, when the PCS criteria very clearly allows for a more introverted style.

9.00+ criteria for PE says "projection exceptional (to audience or in themselves if music requires)". Within this category, expression is outnumbered by things like matching and unison, lines and posture, and precise movement. 9.00+ criteria for IT says "staying in character for the whole program", but this category also has heavy emphasis on moving and relating "as one", which would seem to indicate that a team's expression can be too extraverted, if it ignores the relationship between the skaters. In addition, this type of character/relating criteria is only half the IT battle, with the rest of the criteria dealing with correct timing, and proper expression of the style and character of the chosen dance - and that doesn't mean acting, it means dancing.

A strong argument can be made that P/I should outscore G/P on both of these categories. And when you look at the other 60% of the PCS score - skating skills, where both Mitch and Alex are stronger than Piper, and transitions, where P/I's program was absolutely of superior quality, I think it's very very hard to make a case that G/P should have outscored P/I in PCS. To say a bit more on the latter, I know some people consider P/I's program boring or something, but transitions aren't about what people find subjectively interesting - the variety and difficulty of P/I's footwork was superior to G/P's, and the complexity of the holds in their FD was absolutely the class of the field. Both skating skills and transitions also include the stipulation that the workload and abilities are equal for both partners, which is certainly much more problematic in G/P's case than P/I's. Choreography, of course, is the most subjective category, but I personally found G/P's FD to be overrated. They had some interesting positions, but the concept was more innovative than the movement - and a unique concept counts for almost zilch.

If some people don't enjoy P/I's expression because they don't find it appealing, that's obviously legitimate. I don't find teams with an angsty or flashy style appealing. But there is no explanation in the criteria - to do with expression, or anything else- as to why G/P should be outscoring P/I in the PCS mark as a whole. The judges are applying only parts of the criteria, or specific one-sided interpretations of certain criteria, or they're judging by reputation, G/P having had more international exposure at this point. I certainly hope the scoring goes more by the book, as it should, this coming season. Things like momentum shouldn't matter, but P/I certainly have it after this season.

There's nothing that I can add to this. I agree with everything.

 

[The Observer]

My issue with Mitch is not technique but expression and personality.

I agree with you that Mitch needs more expression (in terms of all that entails for the judges & the different elements). Scott Moir developed a very powerful, strong presence in his skating (perhaps too strong off-ice for some people! ) Andrew Poje is not quite as brash as Moir, but his looks, very tall height and glide give him some advantages. And Paul Poirier also has his own personality which can be quite musical and bubbly in some programs, but also gets praise for being more serious & darker in 'Hitchcock'.

We don't want skaters to copy someone else or try to change their own style and personality completely, but I think you may be on to something in terms of the way judges see these teams artistically or in terms of choreography and interpretation. I think Krylova will want to explore some different avenues for Mitch down the road, like she has with Andrew.

 

[canadablue]

@ skatingfan04

I agree with you that Mitch needs more expression (in terms of all that entails for the judges & the different elements). Scott Moir developed a very powerful, strong presence in his skating (perhaps too strong off-ice for some people! ) Andrew Poje is not quite as brash as Moir, but his looks, very tall height and glide give him some advantages. And Paul Poirier also has his own personality which can be quite musical and bubbly in some programs, but also gets praise for being more serious & darker in 'Hitchcock'.

We don't want skaters to copy someone else or try to change their own style and personality completely, but I think you may be on to something in terms of the way judges see these teams artistically or in terms of choreography and interpretation. I think Krylova will want to explore some different avenues for Mitch down the road, like she has with Andrew.

If the judges are following the ISU's rules, there is very little room for "the way judges see the teams", except to a limited degree with choreography, something which I clearly laid out in the post above that you just ignored. There isn't "did the team project in the way the judges like?" . It's "did the team project, in any of the ways that are acceptable per the criteria?" If you think P/I need to up their game at projecting a strong connection between the two of them, taking into consideration that extraverted or completely original projection is not a requirement for the highest possible PCS marks when judged fairly, then please, clearly explain why you think that is the case, and don't throw out vague stuff about needing to find what the judges are looking for. We already know what the judges are supposed to be looking for. You are entitled to find Mitch boring, but you are not entitled to conflate your opinion with the ISU rulebook.

Yes, judges are only human, and may perceive whether a team fulfills a criteria and to what degree differently, but they are not supposed to go "I dunno, man, if only he was tall, dark and handsome, then I could give him a better mark. If only this team were as campy as I'd like them to be. Or as exciting as per my personal definition of exciting. If only they made faces like this http://youtu.be/gKkmNwZsEnA?t=4m40s " Do you think the judges are correct to judge in this manner, and if so, could you please tell me what parts of COP lead you to that conclusion? Where is a team's "unique style and personality" in the rules? The only legitimate question about P/I's expression, if you're going to bring the judges and scores into it, that is, rather than your own enjoyment regarding the team, is whether they project - either to the audience, or within their connection - strongly enough. I think they have an excellent, spellbinding connection, but THAT is the question where a legitimate debate can be had. If that's the debate you are trying to have, please be more specific about exactly what facet of criteria you find Mitch lacking in, keeping in mind that he doesn't have to show he can do it all. The same way G/P won't ever be required to do subtle romance. If you want to discuss how entertaining you find P/I as a team, that is your perogative, but then it might behoove you to take the judges out of it, when you keep insisting on ascribing them powers they don't on paper have. And all of that is aside from the fact, that even if P/I could be legitimately scored lower than G/P in expression, that amounts to almost nothing when stacked up against the rest of the PCS criteria at which they excel and G/P as a team don't.

And actually - even with choreography, it is NOT, or at least is not supposed to be, about what the judges enjoy. It is the use of space, the use of music, the use of innovative movement - all of which can be subjective to grade, but it's still not "Was I entertained? Did I love it? Is this something that artistically spoke to me?" That is not the criteria. I as a judge couldn't mark down G/P just because I don't enjoy watching them. I'd have to mark them down for what was lacking specifically per the criteria. Therefore this whole meme - which certainly exists outside of the P/I vs G/P discussion, I realize - of "what the judges are looking for" is pure BS. Sadly, that seems to be part of the reality right now with judging, but that doesn't make it legitimate. If you think I have my facts re: CoP wrong, or if you think the judging system should be different than it is, or if you think it's just fantastic that CoP as written is often not applied as such, then say so. But your view of how the judges should judge does not match what the ISU's own documents say, so please don't ignore the informed arguments that others make in defense of P/I, when it's you who are choosing to hang out in a P/I thread to discuss P/I. And BTW, being "musical" isn't an expression choice. It's a requirement for every single program in the way a skater moves with the music.

Anyone who wants to learn more about what CoP says, the documents are here:
http://www.isu.org/en/single-and-pair-skating-and-ice-dance/isu-judging-system/ice-dance

 

[The Observer]

We already know what the judges are supposed to be looking for. You are entitled to find Mitch boring, but you are not entitled to conflate your opinion with the ISU rulebook.

Nothing personal, but you seem to be an uber-fan that has overreacted to a couple of rather mild comments by myself & Emdee. Neither one of us said anything to attack P&I - we were just discussing some ways they might get higher marks from judges.

It wasn't meant to be a serious discussion. I was just following up on what Emdee said - judges may be marking P&I lower based on a lack of expression/interpretation, or perhaps what they see as a lack of inventive, original & distinctive choreography. My post was not meant to be an exhaustive discussion of the judging system and all the elements that go into the score. I don't really have time for that long of a post right now.

even if P/I could be legitimately scored lower than G/P in expression, that amounts to almost nothing when stacked up against the rest of the PCS criteria at which they excel and G/P as a team don't.

But this is your opinion, not a fact. At Worlds the judging panel placed G/P ahead of P/I in almost every area of both TES & PCS. So actually, according to the judges at Worlds, G&P were the ones that excelled on all the PCS criteria. According to the way the judges used the rulebook you referred to, G&P were ranked higher than P&I. Maybe next year it will be the reverse. I think the two teams are close in ability and may flip back and forth. I can see the strengths in both teams.

And btw, I never said that expression was the only element of PCS. You're right that there are many other aspects of PCS - and G&P beat P&I on all of them at Worlds. So did Coombes & Buckland, The Shibutanis, Sinitsina & Zhighansin, etc. So this isn't about G&P vs. P&I -- it's about looking at how P&I are being evaluated in relation to all of the other teams too.

please be more specific about exactly what facet of criteria you find Mitch lacking in, keeping in mind that he doesn't have to show he can do it all. The same way G/P won't ever be required to do subtle romance.

Not sure what you mean by G/P not being 'required' to do 'subtle romance'. G/P have actually done a couple of playful/romantic programs. This year they moved on from the bubbly stuff of their youth and did a FD which had a darker obsession theme. A team doesn't have to be a real-life couple to try 'subtle romance'. Unless the team are Siblings, every dance/pairs team becomes a romantic couple in the eyes of the audience, while they are on the ice.

-

Anyways, as a Canadian, I like to appreciate all our dance teams and their different qualities. I hope fans of each team will praise their favourites without being too negative about their rivals. Btw, it would be good to discuss our Canadian teams without always having to discuss one vs. the other.

As I said above, they are also competing against other teams. The British team of Coombes & Buckland finished in between G&P and P&I at Worlds. So they are rivals too! I thought C&B were overmarked, particularly in their much higher PCS scores compared to P&I as their skating seemed very laboured and sloppy to me. So I'll be interested to see more about why the judges were so generous in giving C&B several points higher in PCS.