Quote Originally Posted by heyang View Post
I think this may have been suggested in other threads, but it would be helpful to cite a 'maximum score'. The skaters would have to "declare" what elements that they will do with perhaps the opportunity to enhance 2 elements. i.e. Skater B could declare 3A with option to 4S. His max score is established. It would help the casual viewer to understand if the skater was as successful on all elements - same thing is done on gymnastics vault.

It helps the casual viewer to differentiate between a clean program with less difficulty vs a more difficult routine with a fall.
Given the way things work currently, it would probably make more sense to announce the "planned base value" of the program and to look after the fact at whether the skater achieved that base value, or higher or lower.

Often skaters will lose points if they don't get the levels they were aiming for on the spins or steps, or the rotation on the jumps (< or << calls, doubling out or popping), even without visible errors, although obviously they lose points for those as well. Or, of course, leaving stuff out or having whole elements disallowed because they don't fit the rules for some reason.

But they can also get extra points in positive GOE for well-executed elements. So it's useful to be able to point out where the skater made up for mistakes with high quality elsewhere.

The system is already designed to allow planned base value to be announced before the performance. Using a "maximum" technical score instead would require each skater to pretend to expect not only all level 4s but also +3 GOE from all judges on all elements, which means no one would ever come close to their maximum. Well, maybe Davis/White and Virtue/Moir.

Anything else based on maximums would mean redesigning the whole system.