Funny that Ross Miner resembles Jeremy very much.
Looking at the protocol, I thought the judges were very fair with him on the GOE of his TES, I would have scored him very similarly on the GOE of his elements. The Tech Panel appears to be doing a fair job as well, I see no evidence of sympathy points on the 1st mark. Level 2 on the Step Sequence, Level 2, 3 and 4 on each of the three spins. The Tech Panel also refused to count his 2nd Quad as a combo even though he had a double toe there as his stumble disrupted the flow and they think he added an extra step for it to be called a jump combo, which is another -20% on the base value. Though they did give him the 1st Quad at full value, which was borderline of being under-rotated so Bradley got a little break there.
So why did Bradley got such good TES score? His planned content was very challenging and had high base value. Although he didn't execute them well, he didn't downgrade or UR his jumps - he executed 2 Quads and 2 Triple Axels, plus one of every other kind of Triple from Lutz down to Toe Loop. So he has the full repertoire of the Triple jumps covered. In short, my quick analysis of the his TES score indicate the panel did a very fair and thorough job, something I would be personally willing to vouch for their integrity, without a doubt. \
That said, my criticism of the 2nd marks remain the same. Although looking more carefully at the individual judges, a few definitely dinged Bradley as I would, with some 5s in for Transitions but by & large, the PCS he got here is not justified, not even in the context of a national competition. Like I said though, tonight is a tough night to be a judge in this competition, it's just way to whacky and awfully hard to remain cool headed.