they are not. Simply put, 4 minutes of displaying how fast they can string all their well executed tricks together. Just a headscratcher. When they do their footwork sequences, there is no variation to the dance holds, and they are not close enough together.
Note that my remarks are directed to D&W vs. K&K, not vs. V&M. However, here's what the 2009-2010 ISU guidelines for dance tell you goes into the GOE for step sequences (p. 27):
http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=1442
STEP SEQUENCES
Pattern/Placement incorrect or incomplete 1 grade
More than two arms length between partners (Non-touching sequence) 1 grade
Inclusion of not permitted element/movement- e.g. stop, jump more than ½ rev. (per each) 1 grade
Skating in Hand-in–Hand hold in sustained position with fully extended arms (in hold) 1 grade
Separation to change a hold exceeds one measure of music 1 grade
Step Sequence does not reflect the character of the chosen dance (OD) 1 grade
Step Sequence is not skated to the rhythm pattern of the music ( OD & FD) GOE in minus
Lack of flow (movement across the ice) GOE in minus
Increase GOE by 1 grade for each of the following difficult characteristics:
Reflection of the rhythm pattern (OD & FD) and character of the dance (OD)
Skating with good speed and flow
Fast movement across the ice
Actually, close holds and close skating are not particularly rewarded in the current version of ISU Communication 1567 in guidelines for step sequences. However, speed and flow across the ice is worth a point in GOE.
So I would argue that D&W's TES are completely justified.
The place to ding D&W for this stuff would be somewhere in the PCS.
And for better or worse, PCS components have been linked as incremental bumps to speed since Grishuk's days (when it was the single 6.0 presentation mark). T&D skated much closer together, but speed won the day in 1994. And speed has ruled ever since. These days, the line item most related to speed is Skating Skills.
So let's check how PCS components are graded in dance for FD and OD: From Communication 1522, pp 33-34:
http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=1016
PCS components in the 9.0 to 8.25 region, which is where D&W score:
Note holds are not mentioned
Skating Skills (note holds are not mentioned)
- strong, sure, fluid edges
- supple knee action
- stylish, precise, interesting & neat
steps/turns
- ease in accelerating even during
difficult steps
- always multidirectional
- broad skill range for both,
Linking Footwork
Again what they do is offset by 'superior ice coverage' = speed.
- difficult, varied, sequences of
edges/steps/turns/holds for both
throughout
- one move flows easily into the next
- superior ice coverage
Performance.
This is one place where D&W could be dinged, but their Projection is excellent. And it is the effortlessness of change of holds as well as their relative difficulty that is required for the grade, not the closeness that is explicitly called out. But the way judging is done, if you gave them 9 for SS, you might drop them to 8 for Perf if their holds deeply offend you. And that would be counteracted by the fact that their projection (and for that matter those of the Kerrs) is excellent.
- coordinated movements- excellent
matching
- superb carriage & lines
- effortless change of difficult holds
- project strongly
OK, let's look at I
nterpretation
Nothing about holds:
- skaters and music meld – internal
motivation
- very good range of interesting
movements/gestures
- excellent ability to relate as one to
reflect rhythm of music
Choreography
No holds here
- superior choreography-clearly
understandable
- variety of innovative moves that
develop theme
- change of pace/tempo incorporated
with ease
- excellent use of music /space
/symmetry
Timing:
- -skaters and music meld – internal
motivation
- very good range of interesting
movements/gestures
- excellent ability to relate as one to
reflect music/theme
- excellent and understandable
expression of the music’s style and
character
- timing: 100% correct as above
- music selection: 100% as above
So the only place to ding a couple about their holds is in performance. And the measure of closeness that is objectionable is not particularly strictly spelled out either. As the current communications are written close skating and different holds are not adequately rewarded.
That's the fault of the ISU, not D&W. And it's been true, as I said before since Grishuk and Platov won their first OGM.
1. doris, thanks for your insightful post. I have one question, though.
Where would it be graded? As a fourth lift, it's not a GOE element but considered a transition. Do they mark it there, or just overall in the PCS? .
If it's the fourth lift, it would show up in parts of the PCS-transitions, choreo, etc. If it's one of the 3 lifts it would be graded the same as if the guy lifted the girl. So the better choice is to make it a fourth lift.
.
Thank you!
) Can't wait for the GPF; that will be one exciting showdown! 
