I can't agree with the argument that CoP punishes quad jumpers because it is hard to be a consistent quad jumper and also have everything else. It IS hard to be a quad jumper and have everything else not because of CoP, but because is just is-- regardless of the scoring system
One could say that, 'well in 6.0 a skater could be nothing but a quad jumper and get away with it' and this is probably true. 6.0 was primarily a jumping contest and one purpose of CoP was to get away from that -- which it does to some extent. So the problem is not with CoP, but with 6.0.
In CoP the quad jumper with everything else will win over the well balanced skater without a quad and the quad skater who is not well balanced. In the absence of the quad jumper with everyting else, it is a close contest between the well balanced skater without a quad and the quad skater who is not well balanced, with the well balanced skater having a reasonable chance to win. At least under the rules until now.
With the rules for 2010/11, to beat a Plushenko type performance (one good quad in the short and long but some weaknesses in other things) the well balanced skater will now have to try at least one quad to still win. That quad does not have to perfect. In fact it can be highly flawed (a fall even), but it has to be attempted.
At least that is what comparing the scoring scenarios say to me.