I both agree and disagree with you. If pairs aren't consistently landing their elements in practice sessions, they shouldn't be doing them in competition. And we fans really shouldn't expect them to perform something they don't complete that often.
On the other hand, the phrase I cited was "watered down" which means (at least to me) that those pair teams have attempted and/or achieved those elements in competitions, not just in training or practice. I compare it to when skaters water down their content in galas or exhibitions. We know darn well that Nathan can do multiple quads, but in the galas he usually would confine himself to triples only. But when he was at the Olympics or Nationals in a real competition out come those stunning quads.
At some pont, if they want to compete well skaters have to try those skills they can do most of the time in practice.
Now, whether any American pair team can consistantly complete triples or triple throws at this point in time is an entirely different question!
Yes, I zipped that remark off late at night and it was too generalized. I can only speak for pairs programs from personal experience, but there's a continuum on which there are things you just successfully achieved for the first time in practice last week, up to elements you can do in your sleep. Where you draw the boundary as to what you do in a particular competition and what gets left at home depends on your own comfort zone -- your own dare-deviliciousness, if you will -- and also on the level of competition. Is this event one on a series of steps leading to The Main Event, where it's better not to stumble, to ensure you do get to the higher level (and that also depends to some extent on which other pairs are you competing against on that particular day)? Or is this your goal event, your national championships or higher, where you're willing to go all out and take more risks? I competed in the 6.0 era, but today's competitors, or their coaches, have to strategize points the judges will/might give for simpler elements you can do well vs more difficult elements on which you very well could end up on the seat of your sequins. So you consider the judges as well.
Only the born showmen, though, the ones who love to skate primarily for the audience and are probably going to go on to professional careers in the shows, are going to tailor their programs for the fans. Pairs elements particularly are invitations to injury, possibly the life-changing kind. If you want to risk all to get the favour of the fans, you might as well time-travel and become a gladiator in a Roman circus. That was my point in my original reply, that fan-pleasing is way down on the list of Things to Consider when planning what to put into a program at a particular event. I was telling someone just a day or two ago about a long-ago competition my partner and I won, at the highest level there was for juniors in those days when no one came to watch the juniors except your own parents and there was nothing higher outside your own country. The (few) other pairs had more difficult elements included, but it was just one of those nights where everyone else crashed and burned (even pair spins were going down) and we, with our basic, probably boring program, landed everything securely on our feet as needed.
Pairs skaters have a higher tolerance for risk than singles or dancers, but even they have their personal limits, which fluctuate depending on the timing and importance of the event.
[PS: I don't follow American sports unless it's convenient on TV, so I can't answer for the strategies of US pairs or their coaches. My attitudes are coming from experience in Canada and, to a lesser extent, in the UK where I lived and skated for a few years while attending grad school there.]