I'm going to have to disagree.
There have been competitions that I thought were unfairly scored, and I got angry about it.
But this is simply not one of them.
I've rewatched both programs several times now. I really don't think there is any argument for saying Chan got too much GoE. If you disagree, I'd be interested to know what GoE bullet points you don't think he was hitting, for which elements... such that he didn't deserve the +2's he got for most things. (See ISU communication 1944, p12 for the bullet points. Only 4 bullet points out of 8 is recommended, to give +2 GoE)
PCS is more subjective, but even there I personally wouldn't say he was overscored vs Yuzuru. I could go into great detail on exactly why I think that... but that would be lengthy, it's not appropriate here, and anyway - I think your mind is made up, and nothing is going to change it.
I am no fan of Patrick Chan by the way. Not by any means. And there have been other times I did think he was overscored. But on this occasion I do not feel the urge to pick up my pitchfork and burning torch. (Where I will cry foul, is if I see someone else skate that well, but not get the same rewards).
I'm really not bothered anyway: Chan "only" finished with 271 total, less than 12 points ahead of Yuzuru. Where can he go from there? When his PCS is already pretty much maxed, he only has one kind of quad jump, and a 3A that often lets him down. He doesn't have much room/potential to earn more points.
Yuzuru on the other hand, has a LOT of room to grow, at this point. Once he gets comfortable with his FS, polishes it, adds his passion and expression, and skates it clean or nearly... his GoE points and PCS will skyrocket, and he can score over 200. His SP can also score over 100. If he can skate anywhere near clean, he will become unbeatable. (And then it will be him receiving the cries of "inflation" and "overscoring"! LOL!)
I did watch the performances of both. I’m not an expert of skating. I’m mainly seeing this from the perspective of mechanism design, so that the rules/judging can be fair and at the same time encourage technical progression. I don’t expect everyone to agree with me. Here is my reasoning.
It’s always more difficult to skate cleanly when someone does a very difficult program. So if judges don’t take into consideration the difficulty of the performance when they judge, then an easy program will likely score higher than a more difficult program because it’s always easier to skate an easy program well than a difficult program. So an easy program will most likely score higher than a much more difficult program even when the skater who attempts the more difficult program skates well, although not perfect. So that would encourage technical regression. Not every athlete is like Yuzuru, who will push himself even without explicit incentives from the rules/judging.
Therefore, I always take consideration the difficulty of the elements/programs when I judge. IMO, difficulty should be rewarded in addition to quality.
The GOE bullet points are a guideline. I don’t value all bullet points with equal weight. I don’t think every judge values each bullet point with equal weight either.
For me, jumps with standard set up but landed with no good flow/height will get 0 GOE. Jumps with standard set up, decent height/ice coverage/flow only get +1. A perfect standard jump with excellent flow, height etc, but without additional difficulty like difficulty entries/steps before jumps, will get +2. The perfect jump doesn’t happen very often (I’m quite harsh). The highest GOE for a jump without difficult entries/steps will only get +2 max. Basically difficult entries/steps will get the jump another +1 GOE. Jumps with difficult entries executed with ok height/ice coverage/flow will get +1. Jumps with difficult entries executed with decent height/ice coverage/flow will get +2. Only jumps with very difficult entry executed perfectly will get +3. E.g. Yuzuru’s 3A in the SP. Again, this doesn’t happen very often. Jumps with long setup will only get +1 GOE max when it’s perfect, otherwise it only gets 0 GOE when it’s landed. I am a bit more lenient on quads since they are more difficult than triples. Very well executed quads even without very difficult entries/steps may get +3. So I would only give +1 to most of Patrick’s triples (occasional 0 or +2), +2 to the quads, definitely not +2 or +3 to his 3A. His 3A will get +1 GOE at most.
Similarly for spins, only very well executed difficult spins may get +3. (The levels don’t really indicate the difficulty of the spins, so the difficulty will be rewarded in the GOE.) Standard spins with decent speed and centering will only get +1. Standards spin with fast speed and centering may get +2. No spins with basic positions will ever get +3 from me. Basically difficult spin positions will get extra +1 GOE. Difficult spins with ok speed and centering get +1. Difficult spins with decent speed and centering will get +2. Difficult spins with fast speed and centering get +3. All of Patrick’s spins would get +1 at most (maybe even 0) because he is only doing basic spins, not difficult spins.
So based on the way I judge, the GOE margins among top skaters and middle-ranked skaters are not big. So Patrick will get higher GOE overall, but not 11 point margin, more like 3-5 point margin.
As for the PCS, there are bullet points for that too. But judges have to set a threshold for each skater. Not every skater starts with the same threshold. I use difficulty as the base value of the PCS. Patrick’s program only has 1 quad and 1 axel and much easier transitions than Yuzuru. So the BV of the PCS is in the low 8s. But he skated well, so I will give him high 8’s. I definitely won’t give him over 9’s for components. So I will give Patrick around 88 PCS. Yuzuru does a much more difficult program, 3 quads, 2 axels and lots of difficult transitions. So his base value will be around 9. He didn’t give the best performance, so I will give him low 9’s. I will give him 91-92 PCS.
So overall, I will give Patrick around 178 for his LP, which is about the same score he got at Japan Open last year and I will give Yuzuru around 190 for his LP.
What I disagree with is that in this particular competition, difficulty was not taken into consideration in the judging. Yuzuru’s score is too low given the high level of difficulty he executed and Patrick’s score is too high given the low level of difficulty he executed. IMO, difficulty must be rewarded in addition to quality if the judging is fair.
To me, a GOE margin of 10+ points and PCS margin of 5+ that are justified only with quality, but not with difficulty will very likely lead to controversial placements.
It’s ok to not reply to my post and discuss the scores anymore.
---------------
ETA: Most skaters receive a mix of +1's and +2's for their jumps. It's quite rare to have all judges giving a skater +2's. The question is how many judges give a skater +1's and how many judges give a skater +2's. If we look at all the skaters who are competing at Skate Canada (other than Patrick), only 2-4 judges would give +2's to these skaters, and the rest of 5-7 judges would give +1's (some even 0’s). But if you look at Patrick's score sheet, most judges, maybe 6-7 judges would give him +2's, and only 2-3 judges would give him +1's. The difference in the number of +1's and +2's would make quite a difference in the overall average GOE for each jump. So if Patrick receives 0.4-0.5 points more GOE in each jump, that would still make quite a big difference since there are 8 jumps.
Similarly, if he also receives 0.4-0.5 extra GOE in spins and steps, then the overall GOE can be quite inflated. Overall if there are 3-4 judges who favor one skater specifically, that makes quite a significant difference in the overall average GOE and PCS, although on the score sheet, people don't see anything unusual since judges only give mostly +1's and +2's and very few +3's.