It's why I'm trying to think of how to make sure the differentials in scores in 6.0 would matter along with ranking. I think every single thing about this system is susceptible to time and psychology - and I think ranking things would make it easier? But I get the feeling I'll just be describing a CoP with better judging l will have the excuse of having taken my last economics course in high school though.At the very top level a really fine performance might get 9.5, while a blah one (by a top-ranked skater) will get 8.5. This gives the first skater an 8 point advantage, which would increase to 10 with the higher factoring. So about an extra 2 points gain for the artist trying to catch the technician.
I doubt that much would change. This proposal would give the judges 20 gradations to work with instead of the current 40. The argument has been made, how can a judge possibly decide whether a performance is worth 4.75 points or only a piddling 4.5, and the same argument would question whether a judge can consistently discriminate between a performance worth 9 points out of 20 compared to one that deserves only 8 points out of 20, in musical interpretation, say. (Psychologists and learning specialists assert that 7 gradations is the most that humans are capable of handling -- that's why GOEs from -3 to +3 were so cool. A typical human mind can tell the difference between a +1 performance and a +2, on a scale from -3 t0 +3; but that same person cannot tell the difference between +2 and +3 on a scale from -5 to +5.