Should PCS be put on the iconic 6.0 scale now that we are seeing 10s in the protocols
Should PCS be put on the iconic 6.0 scale with a corrective multiplier now that we are seeing 10s in the protocols, which was supposedly an unobtainable cap? TES would remain unlimited.
I am not sure it would make a difference. They will figure out to manipulate whatever system is being used. FS is a subjective sport and I don't think it's possible to completely remove the subjectivity.
I dont even see the point in having 5 different program component categories when the judges dont even differentiate which is different than another. They score skaters in the same order on each. I even heard they are reprimanded if their scores in each various component show any glaring inconsistency which I find completely wrong, as what is the point of having different components if you wont distinguish between them. For instance Cohen at the 2006 Olympics got the highest PCS in the short, and 2nd highest in the long. This was deserved, however her skating skills were on par with Slutskaya and Arakawa in both programs, and superior to Suguri. This is not at all reflective of reality, her strength in PCS is in the other areas. However due to the threat of varying marks she is given laudy skating skills scores she does not deserve.
Chan at times has been another example. When he falls it severly affects his performance and interpretation. He is arguably not the absolute best (although not weak by any means) in those areas to begin with, even before his mistakes. Yet he usually scores well above the field in those two things, even the times he has fallen often. Skating skills, transitions, and at times choreography it makes sense he is the highest. The judges dont differentiate.
As much as I like Plushenko many of his programs got top transition scores which cant really happen when you look at many of his programs post 2004 say. However he does deserve very high marks in some other aspects.
Lambiel got huge marks in skating skills, even though he was less than stellar in that area with short choppy little crossovers, but excellent in most others.
Might as well go back to 6.0 and multiplication factors for the 2nd mark.