PCS scores from event to event

[skateboy]

It's been a full week since US Nationals and perhaps the dust has settled, at least a little.

Among various controversies, many people were upset by Ashley Wagner's PCS score (including Ashley herself). So my questions are these:

1) How much can, or should, a skater's PCS scores be expected to vary from one event to the next?

2) Do we believe that a skater's performance can vary from one event to the next, with consideration to speed, attack, edging, skating with inspiration "in the moment," etc., or no?

3) Do we believe that technical mistakes should result in a lowered PCS score? Do we believe that a clean program with difficult elements should result in a raised PCS score?

BTW, I would prefer not to get into a discussion of how Ashley's PCS score was held down while the girls that placed ahead of her received a boost... that has already been discussed quite a bit. Really, I'm just using Ashley's scoring to discuss PCS and whether or not we should expect much in the way of variance, from one event to the next. We could use a number of skaters as examples... should Patrick Chan never receive anything lower that 9.00 for any PCS category, even if he skates an error filled program? What about Hanyu, Shoma, Boyang, Medvedeva, Osmond, Miyahara, etc., ?

Is it realistic that a skater might deserve to score in the 9s at one event, and 8s at another (Nationals inflation aside)?

I'd really like to hear people's opinions.

 

[vesperholly]

I think clean programs and consistency get a boost and sometimes too much. Medvedeva's (and Zags to some extent) PCS gap in particular seems out of line. She's not PChan and shouldn't be scoring so much better (IMO).

In particular, I'm very interested in seeing Tennell's PCS at the Olympics. Her PCS went from low 7s at Lombardia Trophy to high 7s at Skate America and high 8s/low 9s at Nationals, and her TES base was about 62 points at all 3 events (ie, she skated technically similar programs). Nationals inflation notwithstanding, that's a massive jump in one season.

 

[barbk]

I care less about PCS scores from event and more about the way they often take giant leaps between event segments when a skater has done unexpectedly well in the short program.

The relatively tiny degree of variance between the different PCS elements when aspects (like skating skills and transitions) vary significantly is still a significant problem.

 

[tony]

I think 99% of the time, the whole scope of the PCS really doesn't change significantly from event to event. People seem to think that a freak fall or trip or little stumble should decrease the Skating Skills score from 9.50 to 7.00. That's not realistic and not what the criteria is stating. But fluctuation is possible- take Pogorilaya's meltdown at Skate Canada this season. She completely gave up on listening to the music, probably took a lot of her choreography out when she was sulking around the ice, and just went about her elements at her own pace, finishing way after the music.

But World Rankings (start order in the SP) and starting group in the LP obviously seem to help boost or lower the scores. Just like in 6.0 when the first skater in the segment was typically given a median score (which was shown to the judges and they could adjust accordingly), the early skaters of IJS seem to get hit hard. And skaters that may end up in later groups are sometimes judged increasingly generous, even with the GOEs.

ETA- not to pick on Max Aaron, but when he won his National Title, his PCS went up over one full point average between programs IIRC.

 

[Bellanca]

3) Do we believe that technical mistakes should result in a lowered PCS score? Do we believe that a clean program with difficult elements should result in a raised PCS score?

Yes, obviously, to both questions. If you are wiping out on the ice, PCS should go down. If you are burning it up on the ice, PCS should go up. Not necessarily WAY up, unless the performance is extraordinary, but at least a little bit if there is a clean skate from start to finish. Also, there should be a marriage, if you will, between TES and PCS, not the unfair, built-in, inflated PCS, TES manipulated practice that we have now which has shamelessly used one or the other to hold skaters up and influence the outcome, repeatedly.

It has always been a significant challenge to keep subjective opinions, emotional reactions and the influence of such things from reflecting in the judges, etc. and their scores. It will (most likely) continue to be this way which is a terrible habit.

 

[skateboy]

It seems to me that fans seem to believe that if a skater scores, say, in the 7.00 - 7.75 PCS range for a few events, then that is ""their" range, and anything higher or lower is incorrect, or lousy judging.

I don't necessarily agree with this. For one, judging panels are never the same from event to event. One judge's 7.75 can be another's 8.75, especially with the subjectivity of PCS.

Also, the idea that a skater's PCS should be pretty much the same all season doesn't allow for improvement or regression in PCS categories, which I do believe can happen.

Anyone agree/disagree?