I thought that one of the big criticisms of PCS is that it is strongly linked to technical ability and execution- components go up across the board if the skater does a clean program. I do think there should be a connection between the two if it's negative- i.e., a skater shouldn't be able to get above 9 for PE and IN with a messy program no matter how good his/her flow over the ice is. I see your point about Chan's superior skating skills and maybe transitions. I think Yuzu should be tied or winning the other components even after having read the (pretty broad) criteria. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
Kudos to you for taking an objective look.:2thumbs:
As the poster about Carolina Kostner remarked, without understanding the PCS criteria, it's really difficult to understand what is supposed to be going on with the judging in this area. [Wish I could recall who it was, it was really helpful to me....]
Totally agree that not all the Program Component Scoring has reached the ideal of separating it from the TES...
I would like to note that there have been a number of GS posters raising the concern that PCS can be based on the status of champions or past performance of top ranked senior skaters rather than their actual skating on the day. So, in that sense, it risks reverting to something close to 6.0 judging in my view and that of what seems to be many others...
But there are some new rules in this area in the 2016 update, as well as an end to anonymous judging, so that there is cautious hope for better things, and some are noting improvements in PCS scoring during the JPG. ....Perhaps we'll see some inconsistency as things sort out for the seniors during GP season....
But SS and TR seem to have the most objective criteria, and therefore are most independent from TES. And some GS posters argue that they should be moved to technical scoring...but this is problematic because the TeS is done an element by element basis, while SS and TR are evaluated over the entire program like the other program components.
Patrick Chan like Carolina Kostner excels in SS and works with choreographers to ensure all the TRs are there because they have strength in those too. It's good strategy to take advantage of their strengths and build them in so that when other things don't go well, they provide a base.
In my view, this is no more or less fair than certain skaters counting on their jumps or their spins as consistent areas of performance, and then consistent scores.
It seems like we'll still have to disagree on ceilings on SS and TR when the program has technical issues...it's not artistic impression that's being measured, and how much the cumulative technical errors impact the overall program really does logically show up in performance, composition and interpretation. I agree that a "messy skate" should impact those... Last night, to be honest, I think that both programs had their deficiencies in these last 3 and it's hard to make a strong case that one was clearly better than the other....