I tend to agree with you..... but also can see that taking the meaning of the words "best" and "most" so literally in your example might not be the only way to consider this.
The goal of CoP is to score the most points. But the skater who scores the most points could also be considered the best - since the rules are the same for all the skaters.
Looking back at Vancouver - some have claimed Mao with her 3A's and Plushy with his quads were the best because they both did jumps the Gold medal winners did not even attempt.
Perhaps under 6.0 the results might have been different. But if they were different what would it prove? Would it mean 6.0 decided in the fairest manner possible who the "best" skaters were ?
Isn't that the goal of CoP as well? Did CoP get it wrong in Vancouver?
I only questioned one podium - the bronze in Dance felt wrong to me as I had that team 5th. But the rest of the placements - under the existing rules - seemed OK.
I think the skaters who gave the best Olympic performances were also the same skaters who scored the most points.
Now if I were to consider US Natls - another story altogether
CoP is still so new. It needs some fine tuning but i think on the whole it does a good job of getting the placements right. A problem I have is with the levels - and how too many skaters are doing the same moves which I think has led to a loss of creativity.
Bookmarks