Thanks! Got to admit I look at those scores and think- but how did the top eight or so teams all get level fours on their step sequences! And why can't they all get them now? i wasn't in to the sport that analytically at the time; and one of things when researching information for a current understanding is that changes in rules are very difficult to pinpoint (like I can't out when the ladies were able to start doing solo 3a in the sp). And with the rules of ice dance being so intricate, even tiny changes can produce significant result differences. I wish the protocols were even more analytic than those provided- like they listed how levels are achieved on lifts; and also what features were with step sequences. But I guess that then the arguments that are currently limited to rotation and edge calls on jumps and a few other bits would become interminable. But it's good to have an eye-witness account that those scores were noteworthy at the time!
I suppose that when it comes to ice dance, and especially the step sequences, it's about how the technical panel interprets the elements and the execution of the turns more than anything. I can't claim to be particularly well-versed in the technicalities of ice dance, and just like you I wish it was more transparent (e.g. if there is a mistake in the stsq, I'd love to see a slo-mo replay of it, to really understand the subsequent score). However, I do believe that the step sequences in particular are a bit of a gray area, and they do depend on the tech panel's often subjective understanding of current rules.

We can feel that the OG are in a month now