What went wrong with the 2015 Worlds and its judging?
It's time to talk about TES and PCS in the COP, I think. In order to judge fairly and correctly, you need to understand the principle behind the two categories.
This time, let us approach more practically so that our quest may produce more clear outline of current COP system and understand how the judges and ISU are steering the ship in order to only satisfy their political agenda rather than serving the sport as they should.
People used to think that TES and PCS represent technical components and artistic components of skating. Due to its conventional appeal, it's widely accepted and currently used for standard approach to the the two divisions, but that couldn't be more wrong and misleading.
In figure skating, there isn't any technicality without aesthetics while there isn't any aesthetics without technicality. When I said that all points must be converted into PCS, that means that numeric merits of figure skating is eventually in the form of aesthetics.
The ultimate goal of figure skating judging is to judge such aesthetics manifested in the form of technicality or vice versa. However, this would be meaningless unless we know how to apply these principles to the system or judging practices.
Now, let us delve into the real judging.
Ashley Wagner in 2015 - 8.0 PCS skating
When we talk about TES, we are not dealing with technicality as a whole. Both TES and PCS in fact deals with both technicality and aesthetics. Only when you deal with TES, you are to extract from each element merits in technical terms, especially as of independent element. That is, you are less conscious of its relation to other elements.
That does not mean that you don't care about its transitional connectivity, flow, and how it is related to the before-and-after motion. You do care. You do judge based on these merits above. However, you focuses on each element by itself.
For example, when you judge a triple lutz, you must judge carefully how skaters approach before takeoff, how they make preparation posture without any aesthetic impediment including whether it's visually laborious or not, how they form airpostition, including rotation axis and whether it suffers torque, how cleanly they land with adequate flow and speed and power. All of them must be checked.
But each examination is done as an independent test regardless of its functional merits to the entire program. This is what TES is doing. Each element will be measured by itself.
Now you understand TES may be proportionately less important than PCS, because the time allocated for those elements, jump, spin, spiral, step sequences may not cover the entire time spent in performance.
Aside from those designated elements, there are more moves skaters do in a program. In between elements, skaters do many moves. As a matter of fact, the time for those section may be longer than the time for designated elements. Then you may ask a question. So, is PCS covering the time except the time TES covers?
No. Absolutely not. In fact, PCS covers from start to finish. TES only focuses on the merits of each element, but PCS focuses on evaluating the merits on a larger scale, that is, as a whole. In other words, the PCS scores include how to incorporate those each independent merits or default into the entirety of the program, how proficient skaters' general moves are in terms of balance, stability, power and speed, how skaters evoke musicality, and all aesthetic merits conceivable.
Especially, in PCS nothing is more important than level of bodily freedom on ice. The bodily freedom can be assessed by various components such as skater's balance, stability, power, speed, and physiological integration to moves. PCS by nature doesn't change significantly in time, because it represents a skater's general skating asset.
More importantly, a skater is more likely to earn lower PCS than his or her average PCS. For example, Gracie Gold is a skater with 7.5 or 7.25 PCS average. Then Gold is more likely earn 7.0 in real competition while she is very unlikely to earn 8.0 PCS. Likewise Liza Tuktamysheva is a skater with 6.5 PCS average, and she is unlikely to earn 7.0 while she is more likely to earn 6.0.
Ashley Wagner is a skater with 8.0 PCS average. That means she is likely to earn 7.5 PCS average in real competition while is unlikely to earn 8.5 PCS.
So how can you interpret the past records? If you see 8.75 PCS in Wagner's game, you may say either Wagner did a fantastic job or the score is a bit too generous. Likewise if you see 6.75 in Liza's game, you may tell, Liza did a great job than she normally did.
But in no circumstances, skaters will earn more than 1.0 PCS average hike from their average. That means only two things: either the skater is one of a kind skater like Yuna Kim or the score is the evidence of foul play.
Liza Tuktamysheva in 2015 - 6.5 PCS skating
You can tell why Liza as a skater is inferior to Gracie if you look at their gala. Look at how Liza moves on ice. Is that a champion's skating?
That's not even good enough for qualified senior skater. And now the ISU and its judges are selling skating of that level for World champion price with a phony tag of fabricated technicality.
This is a joke! Are you buying that?
After watching Yuna Kim's skating below, is it even plausible for you to imagine Gold or Liza imitating those moves Kim demonstrated?
Remember Kim's gala has no jump. In other words, their challenge is to do some moves without jump. How easy it sounds! Try. Then you will know how inconceivable it is for skaters with 6.0 - 7.0 PCs average to grow to next level.
It's a lying institution and a panel of leprous consciousness.