Now we can get into more specifics, these should be great case studies since I disagree with all of them except Mirai's layback in the SP. Very strongly disagree in some cases. I've provided video links for all of these elements.
Thank you for cuing up the videos.
Tursynbaeva - Short Program Step Sequence - Very fast movement, very fluid and good edges too. However, the movement essentially skates through the music. Yes, it is very cheery and relatively fast music, and that is the feeling she presents, but the movement doesn't match the exact pacing and phrasing of the music. When you are doing a step sequence in isolation of an exact timing, it makes it easier. Thus, there is no way this sequence can be given a +3, because an essential component for perfection is missing.
+3 does not necessarily require perfection. You seem to be starting with a platonic ideal element in mind and only giving +3 to elements that meet that ideal. That would be one way for elements to deserve +3, but that is not how the ISU is asking judges to award + GOEs.
"It is at the discretion of each Judge to decide on the number of bullets for any upgrade, but general recommendations are as follows:
FOR +1: 2 bullets FOR +2: 4 bullets FOR +3: 6 or more bullets"
The positive GOE bullet points for step sequences are
1) good energy and execution
2) good speed or acceleration during sequence
3) use of various steps during the sequence
4) deep clean edges (including entry and exit of all turns)
5) good control and commitment of the whole body maintaining accuracy of steps
6) creativity and originality
7) effortless throughout
8) element enhances the musical structure
I would give Tursynbaeva all of those bullet points except 4) and possible 5). So that's at least six of the bullet points by my evaluation, easily meeting the recommendations for +3 GOE.
I was especially impressed that several of the quick steps occurred precisely in time with quick musical beats, and some lifting movements in her body occurred in time with lifting gestures in the music. If you didn't see/hear that, well, that's a difference in perception. That's why there's a whole panel of judges and not just one person.
Elizabet Tursynbaeva - Short Program Layback Spin - Certainly a very good spin, but the extension on the sideways position AND the haircutter position are not ideal. Very good speed but faster is possible. The spin is not used in a particularly precise manner with the music. Too many qualities of perfection are missing for this to be considered a +3 element.
Again, your personal standard as a very strict/picky judge is that you personally would only award +3 for what you consider perfection, but that is not the ISU's standard.
The bullet points for spins are
1) good speed or acceleration during spin
2) ability to center a spin quickly
3) balanced rotations in all positions
4) clearly more than required number of revolutions
5) good, strong position(s) (including height and air/landing positions in flying spins)
6 creativity and originality
7) good control throughout all phases
8) element matched to the musical structure
I would say this spin easily meets bullet points 1), 2) , 4), and 7), so it easily deserves +2. I went up to +3 because I felt that it far exceeded the threshold for 2) and 4) -- not only was it quickly centered, but throughout this fast sustained spin, she barely moved from that center; and I counted 21 revolutions -- the requirement is 8. Although the positions were not the most beautiful I've ever seen, I thought they were very well controlled with good flexibility; and the way she accelerated in the haircutter position as the singer sang "(breath) more" enhanced the musical structure for that moment. So those little extras bumped up my +2 to +3.
Mirai Nagasu - Short Program Combination Spin - The thing to consider here is the speed, especially on the last position. It's a great spin but could possibly be considerably faster, so I don't see how a +3 can be justified. More difficult positions would be necessary with that level of speed to consider a +3.
OK, on rewatch I would probably stick with only +2 for this one. I could give 5 bullet points, numbers 2), 3), 4), 5), and 7). I did think the centering was exceptionally strong.
Ashley Wagner - Short Program Step Sequence - It's such a fun and engaging sequence but we have to pay attention to depth of edge. She just doesn't get deep edges most of the time. The sequence slows down considerably at the end too when she is doing the loop turns (she lost the level 4 because that last loop wasn't completed properly).
See step sequence bullet points above. I could easily award points 1), 3), 6), 7), and 8). Five bullets falls between the recommendations for +2 and +3; I thought 8 (element enhances the musical structure) was exceptional, so I rounded up. And in fact I could also award point 5) although as you point out there was a moment of inaccuracy in the last loop -- but the "commitment of the whole body" part was very strong.
Gracie Gold - Short Program Layback Spin - The sideways position here doesn't have as much bend as it could ideally have and the haircutter position has some distance between the blade and the head (and this is the position she choose to hold for the 8 revolutions feature). If this was one of the fastest spins ever,
ala Natalie Krieg, we could overlook those imperfections, but it isn't.
See spin bullet points above. I would award 1), 2), 3), 4), 5), and 7). Maintained centering very well.
Evgenia Medvedeva - Long Program 3Flip+3Toe - Not particularly big jumps, especially on the second one, where the rotation is also not totally perfect. Not especially excellent flow out. No especially difficult entrance. This doesn't even fully deserve a +2 for me because of those most important fundamentals of a JUMP that are lacking here. Don't let a hand over the head fool you.
The golden standard for a 3Flip+3Toe is Yu-Na Kim at 2007 Worlds - when you look at how this FLIES across the ice and how the rotation is completed entirely in the air, it's on whole different planet compared to Medvedeva's jumping.
Bullet points for jump elements:
1) unexpected / creative / difficult entry
2) clear recognizable steps/free skating movements immediately preceding element
3) varied position in the air / delay in rotaiton
4) good height and distance
5) good extension on landing / creative exit
6) good flow from entry to exit including jump combinations / sequences
7) effortless throughout
8) element matched to the musical structure
I'd give this points 3), 4), 5), 6), and 7), so borderline between +2 and +3. The height and distance on the first jump were quite good; less so on the second but still above average for the second jump of a combo. I originally gave the element +2, looking down to note my score when I saw she had good extension on the second landing. I bumped it up to +3 after the replay when I saw that she had actually held that landing edge longer, done an edge pull to gain speed into an edge change and loop still on the same foot, so she also had a creative exit, awarding point 5) was my tiebreaker.
Evgenia Medvedeva - Long Program 3Salchow+3Toe - Again this isn't even fully deserving of +2 to me. Neither jump is huge, there's no difficult entrance, and the toeloop technique is not ideal - she draws around on the ice instead of going straight back and up after landing the first jump. How could this even possibly be considered for a +3?
Again I gave her extra credit for the rocker-rocker added to the landing edge. But this combo didn't have the same size on the first jump as the flip combo, nor the varied air position, so I probably should have stuck with +2 here.
Satako Miyahara - Long Program Layback Spin - The key thing holding this back is her very weak free leg position.
Spin bullets 1), 2) (and good centering maintained throughout), 4), 5), 7), and to a lesser degree 8) (the position changes do occur with subtle changes in the music; matching spins to music at all is rare).
I don't find the free leg position "very weak" -- she chose to use a straight-leg position in the first variation to allow her to achieve a deeper back arch. While it's not the strongest straight-leg layback position I've ever seen, I think it qualifies as "good" because once the leg reaches the low extended position it is turned out and she holds it still and controlled in exactly the same spot for many revolutions while the back position is very good.
Bullet points 4) ("best ever" height and distance are not required -- this easily qualifies as "good"), 5), 6), 7), and 8). Five bullets = borderline between +2 and +3. I felt that the really solid landing edge corresponding exactly with the music was strong enough to round upward.
Ashley Wagner - Long Program Choreographic Sequence - Of everything you listed, this one shocks me the most. It's barely above average. She does a couple back steps (if we can even count that as where the sequence starts, since she takes 3 crossovers afterward), a very brief and shallow spread eagle, and then a back spiral. The spiral is nice but hardly has amazing extension and isn't held that long; there's even a little bobble in the position while she is doing it. After the spiral she does a couple simple steps without much speed and then a thrusting upward arm movement. Compare this to even
her own Choreographic Sequence at 2014 Worlds, which was similar but had much more content and stability to it, and you can see how what she does in 2016 is very inferior.
Choreographic Sequence bullet points:
1) good flow, energy and execution
2) good speed or acceleration during sequence
3) good clarity and precision
4) good control and commitment of whole body
5) creativity and originality
6) effortless throughout
7) reflecting concept/character of the program
8) element enhances the musical structure
OK, I'll agree with you that technically this sequence is nothing special and will only give it bullet points 4), 6), 7), and 8). I did think it did an especially good job of 7) and 8), but I'll revise my score to +2.
please 
