I think that highlights yet another problem with the IJS.
Patrick got full base value of 11.00 for his unsuccessful attempt at a 3F+1Lo+3S combination. He lost only 1.30 in GOE for a whopping 9.70 points net. (I know, I know -- he got in the rotations).
He got base value of 6.60 for an under-rotated triple Axel with a fall, and he got a base value of 6.00 for a fall on a triple Lutz. Even after UR penalty, maximum negative GOE, and fall penalties, he still netted 5.50 points for the two. (I know, I know -- he rotated the Lutz before falling and he got at least most of the way around on the Axel before falling.)
That is a lot of points for failed tricks that did nothing but mar the program. (But according the IJS, they didn't mar the program much -- just a couple of points in overall PCS.)
(Again, I am not faulting Patrick -- he didn't fall on purpose, and he didn't design the CoP.)
Can you explain this:
Ten's SP:
SS range 7.50 - 8.75 average SS=8.07
Ten's LP:
SS range 8.25 - 9.50 average SS=8.54
Will he improve that much in SS in two days?
In fact, every single category in Ten's PCS "has improved" in two days. TR from SP 7.89 to LP 8.43. PE from SP 8.39 to LP 8.89. CH from SP 8.11 to LP 8.86. IN from SP 8.29 to LP 8.86.
On the contrary, Chan's every single category in PCS was lowered from SP to LP (rightfully, of course). However, if you see the rising in PCS from SP to LP is normal, as in Ten's case, Chan's abnormal lowered PCS from SP to LP has already factored in the mistakes he had in his LP.
There was only one judge who gave Chan 9.5 for SS. Why don't you say that there was another judge who gave him 8.75 for SS?
Will Ten's 9.50 and 9.00 in SS in LP be totally off the wall too?
ETA:
There was NO 9.5 in PE in Chan's LP. The highest he got in PE was from only one judge. That judge gave him 9.25. The lowest PE he got was from one judge who gave him 8.00.
They're just subjective numbers for GOE and PCS like 5.1 or 5.5 or 6.0 was a number in the old system. :yes: