You werent listening quite well. I said that in skaters own range of possible PCS he/she may get, and which is around 2 points, 0.5 difference in scores is big enough. That point range can change throu the years and with changing of programmes/their own skating, but at one point of the time when skaters need to compete is more or less defined. Every skater knows (by getting feedbacks) which marks can expect in PCS, he cant get 5 in one category and 9 in another, or 5 in one competition and 9 in another, because knows skills he/she has in that programme he/she skates again and again are for example from 7,5 to lets say 9 at his/her best, but also lets say may drop to min of 6.5 is he/she skates really bad. So, in that point range where every individual skater could possible get scores, 0.5 difference between categories and between one score in category and his/her own potential max is big. That 0.4 difference is significant for that individual skater in any possible universe, including statistical one, because sample of scores for individual skater is not 10 point range, but 2 point range.
"in skaters own range of possible PCS he/she may get"
Ok, so we have 9 judges, giving a skater scores in this 2 point range. The thing is, when we do the trimmed mean, this 0.5 point difference is not really relevant, because depends on the judges behavior. Becaue with a different judges pannel, you may get the very same difference just because pannel changed.
For example, I did a simulation for a range 7 to 9 and got those 2 scores on my first 2 attempts: 7.11 and 8. There is a large difference. But it is not because anything about the skater changed.