- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Which is why when fans occasionally suggest that there should be only one or two program components instead of five, I always ask what the factors should be. If you keep the increments available to the individual judges at 0.25 but multiply the total by a three- or five-times larger factor, then the difference between the two closest but nonidentical scores will be much larger...
I don't understand this part. If you went to just one PCS (the second mark) and weighted it with the aim of making it half of the total score, how would that be different from having five program components which together add up to half of the total score. A 0.25 difference (8.50 instead of 8.25) increase in the one big whopper would be exactly the same as five 0.25 differences in each of five little ones.
In any case the proposal is to just raise the women's PCS by 25% across the board. If skater A beat skater B by 0.25 points in PCS, with 80% factoring skater A benefits by 0.20 points. Under the new proposal skaterA would benefit by the full 0.25. It is hard to see anything wrong with that.
The implication might be that women's skating should be scored more on subjective qualities -- in the worst interpretation, on the "looking pretty" qualities.
I think that is the most valid point. However, I think that the current rule sends that message, too. The message that the current rule supports is, men are higher, faster, stronger than women. So it wouldn't be fair to score men and women the same on choreography, musical interpretation, etc. (???).This seems like pretty weird mind-twisting and still says "women are pretty" but adds injury to insult by adding "so we have to hold them down, score-wise."
Last edited: