Chuckm, I think we have had a conversation last year when I said to you, if you want to look at data for analysis, let's look at ALL data. Taking one american judge scores for bell comparing to a canadian judges for daleman means NOTHING. Was the Canadian judge always out of line? Was she only for Daleman? Was the american judge always so much closer to average??? etc... and on top of that, as they do indeed remove the highest and lowest scores, the average is affected so it would require in depth analysis here...If I understand correctly, it's not a full set of scores by a judge that is removed but each component sees its lowest and highest score removed.
Let me give you an example. If two judges marked down Gabby in performance because she did sit down on her lutz, only one of those scores is removed.... making the Canadian judge's high score stand out compared to the lower average. She could easily argue why she thought the Rippon lutz fall didn't affect in her opinion the performance level.
So, in light of that, if you wish to discuss scoring, please do not bring partial data and give it whatever meaning you wish for. I can do the same you know... We can all make statistics say whatever we want using them that way.
i am actually way too busy this week for this 
