Better.
Although a bigger question: why do so many people always assume that a technically excelling skater isn't putting their best effort into improving their artistry?
It's not like an artistic skater like Brown is being told he needs to work a LOT on his quad, as though he isn't trying hard enough.
Brown's artistry is enough for now and his quad will come with time. So why can't technical prodigies get the vice versa treatment? :disapp:
I think they do, moreso than Brown and other skaters without the 'big' jumps and good presentation. But they are each missing a certain part of their scoring potential to some degree.
I'm perfectly willing to wait for Brown to get his quad, but in the mean time, as we saw at Skate America, he'll get around 5-3rd place at the big competitions most of the time. Brown cannot get the TES points for the 4T without actually landing it in competition.
By the same token, Boyang should not be able to get high PCS without actually showing good SS, TR, CH/IN etc. in competition.
However, judges have been willing to push a talented jumpers' PCS up if they prove to be consistent in competition. For example, Kovtun, Vornov, Max Aaron. Are they trying to improve their PCS, absolutely, yes. But is it showing in their program? That is what is debatable.
I enjoy watching the strong jumpers very much, but they are rewarded by monstrous TES, as they should be. PCS should be for the components they relate to, which is not always dependent on what kind of jumps you have done.
That's why I think Boyang is a medal contender, because he has shown the ability to land his very difficult jumps in competition more than once. I also think the judges are going to give him extra points on PCS if he is consistent. Perhaps ISU should include consistency as an official PCS category, since it seems to something they all have in mind when scoring.