Thanks mm, I appreciate your answer and analysis. Actually, I thought this was a simple question - but under CoP nothing seems simple
I think a tricky part of my question is that so much depends on the "degree" factor (how bad of an edge take off, how bad was the telegraphing, or will it even be called, what type of a bad landing,- two foot, wrong foot, etc,).
As I imagined this in my mind Mao would come out of this scenario better under 6.0 as she would be doing every part of the jump very well except for her edge take off. Caro's jump would not be considered as good for only doing one part well - the edge take off. Again, here I am assuming that if her landing was sloppy then either her air position was not so good or she was either under or over rotating her jump. Caro seems to have many of these landings and I don't think she would have done as well under 6.0 as she has under CoP.
I could be wrong about that - but the second set of marks in 6.0 would not be so high if every other jump was either telegraphed or had a sloppy landing - or both.
As a fan I think I prefer a well done flutz over a sloppy but CoP acceptable lutz.
For me, this is one of the serious problems with CoP. The artistic beauty of figure skating is taking a backseat to tecnical requirements that can sometimes only be seen on a slow motion replay. Now they are asking for high definition slow motion replays. I say why stop there? Let's use laser technology to measure a as much as we can of each skaters performance. Many experts feel Cop is leading to less creative skating and we have heard the word "robotic" used. This is a not a good trend in a sport that has seen it's fan base sink in recent years.





That was exactly the proposal of the international coaches' committee that suggested sweeping changes to the IJS a year or so ago.
Bookmarks