Why do I still read about how important it is to have a difficult 3-3 in the LP under the COP? It just doesn't make sense, I think it's totally unwise, as far as strategy is concerned.
Ok, I finally found out the rationale of equating the the score for a 3-3 to the sum of the respective individual jumps performed separately and why a 0.8 factor is accorded to a 3-3 jump sequence. The people who devise the scores for triples have different perspective of the 3-3s. They see it as a licence to the 7 jumping passes barring the 3A, and nothing more. That clearly signifies that the COP is gravitated more to the in between elements than jumps and it also means the impending demise of jumping beans.
I don't like that, I feel 3-3s should be awarded. Ok, since that's the way things are, then it's totally unwise to go for the 3lz/3lp or to have 2 3/3s. What for? The risk is not worth it. Why not go for the simplest yet slightly dificult combo like 3t/3lp or 3s/3lp or even 3t/3t, to obtain 7 jumping passes and then include 2 3Lzs and 2 3Fs to maximize the scores for jumps?
As for Michelle, stick to 3t/3t and she shouldn't go beyond 3t/3lp or 3s/slp. Just get the 7 jumping passes and don't fall. Now how many ladies have been consistently landing 7 3s in the last decade? What makes everyone think under COP, Michelle will lose as far as 3s are concerned? For Michelle, her weaknesses are her spins. This is the area where she can be trounced by many skaters if she doesn't upgrade them.