I started thinking about this when other posters where analyzing Miki's and Allissa's scores in the GPF (if Miki had skated clean in the SP, they may have been almost tied and then.....).
One of the things that bugs me about the COP is how few scores are actually used, versus how many are given. So my understanding is there are 9 judges, but only 5 scores are really used - just a little over half. First 2 judges scores are just randomly eliminated, then the high and low scores of the remaining are eliminated and then the rest are averaged.
The part that seems oddest to me is the eliminating of the two, because that is random, and in a close competition, which judges are eliminated could make the difference between 1st and 2nd or between on the podium or off. That seems to be introducing an element of luck into a system that is trying to be more standardized. We have 9 experts there - why not use all of their scores? And are the same judges eliminated in for all skaters in the event - or is re-randomized for each skater? Or even each element?
I think the USFSA is closer to this - with 9 judges and all 9 count (do they eliminate high and low score?). To me that makes Jeremy's loss to Ross more concrete then if a different random selection of judges would have put him in 3rd.
I would assume the ISU looks at all 9 score sheets - anyone know if any competitions have been won or lost based on the random selection of judges?