Okay, Olys are over, there are brand new champions in each event, to the delight of many and to the chagrin of others. When some fans argue a result, the usual defense is that the champion won "according to the system," explained in detail by the protocols. And with that criteria, I can't argue.
But--just for a moment--let's forget the system. Are the best performances winning? And do we like the programs being put out there on the ice?
My own opinions:
There's much I like about IJS, but feel that the whole doesn't equal the sum of its parts. I was especially heartbroken by the poor skating in the mens event. The quality of performance of the top competitors in free skating was sad. Casual fans were saying: "THESE are Olympic skaters?" I don't disagree with the results, based on the system, but I agree with Kurt Browning (and others) in that the programs are just too difficult. And let's face it, the top men skaters are amazing. I cannot remember a more dismal night of mens skating in Olympic history. Can you?
I hate the idea of levels on step sequences and spins in singles/pairs. Footwork and spin combos have now become my least favorite part (and, IMO, the ugliest part) of almost every program.
The D/W - V/M debate will go on for years, I'm sure. But the fact is that D/W won, using the system very well, acheiving ideal levels, etc.
(Please let's not go into "fixed" results, let's save that for another thread. I'm not buying into that, anyway.)
I hate the idea of anonymous judging.
Most fans seem to be okay with the pairs results. The ladies have sparked controversy. The answer is always that the protocols tell all. Well, do they?