That’s how I originally read it too, but looking at it now, I *think* it actually means (2nd or lower by total score)… in which case, in pairs, it would be basically equivalent of ‘by total score’"And so forth" implies to me that they go through the silver medalists first, then bronze, then 4th place, etc. until they fill the spots. Not that 2nd and 3rd are treated equally. But hopefully the ISU will put something out with the qualifiers so we know for sure.
But then it is matematically impossible they ever reach 3rd place with 4 finalists only. I think Lakernik, professor of maths, does not do this obvious error
Well, they also announced that they would have 7 spots in singles and dance, unless there were repeat winners. And they announced it after there had been repeat winners in every discipline. I don't necessarily trust the ISU to write things totally sensibly.But then it is matematically impossible they ever reach 3rd place with 4 finalists only. I think Lakernik, professor of maths, does not do this obvious error
Yes exactly. So we'll see what they actually meant when they announce the qualifiers.But yes, ISU is often not very clear, what they really want. Just remember olympic qualification process mismatch at the recent Worlds.
Or, if I remember correctly, where head of ISU technical comitee Faboi Bianchetti was a part of technical stuff in some competition (Japan Open?) and he gave edge calls on Kaori Sakamoto's flips instead of lutz