Program Component Score, How Does It Work
I’ve got quite a few questions on this and thought it’d be interesting to discuss everything together in a post.
So, let’s talk about program component scores (PCS), what they entail, what the criteria of evaluation are, and how you can figure them out in real time as you watch your favorite skaters :)
Before we start, I’d like to clear up the common misconception that PCS is all about the subjective side of figure skating scoring. It is not, in the same way that technical element score (TES), though so-called, is not purely technical. PCS has a lot of objective criteria and guideline attached to it, just as TES allows for a measure of subjective judgment. That is the reason why ISU competitions need a panel of 9 judges and employ the trimmed mean method to come up with the final score for GOE and PCS both.
Another misconception, though not as seriously wrong, is that PCS is awarded according to the baseline ability of a skater. It is not. PCS is, or should be, awarded based on a specific performance of a program. You can use PCS criteria to evaluate a skater’s general quality, however, most of the time when you talk about PCS as a score, you would want to reference the full context of the program: what, precisely, did the skater deliver in that one performance at that one competition? A skater should never by default receive a 9 because they are known to possess superior skating skills. If they want a 9 they need to show up and deliver those great skating skills, to that high level, in that competition. The prevalent practice of reputational scoring, where judges are predisposed to give a skater certain PCS because they have been historically scored in that range, is very troubling. If you wish to really understand PCS, I’d strongly advise watching out for such anchoring bias, both from the judges and from yourself.
PCS is assessed on 5 areas: Skating Skills (SS), Transitions (TR), Performance (PE), Composition (CO), and Interpretation of the Music (IN). Raw PCS is awarded on a scale of 0 to 10, in increments of 0.25, which corresponds to:
5 - 6: average to above average
3 - 4: weak to below average
0 - 2: extremely poor to poor
This raw PCS is then multiplied by a scaling factor to arrive at the program’s final PCS. The factor is 1.0 for the men’s SP and 2.0 for their FS. 0.8 for the ladies’ SP and 1.6 for their FS.
Skating Skills cover the overall skating quality: speed, acceleration, depth of edges, flow, glide, ease of movements. In order to assess a skater on SS, you’d want to ask:
How fast is the skater moving on the ice? How easy do they gain acceleration? Do they achieve maximum speed within two to three strokes or does it take them a series of steps to get from one end of the rink to another?
How deep are their edges? Do they skate mostly on clear, pronounced curves or on straight lines?
How frequent do they change direction, backward to forward, clockwise to counterclockwise?
How much time do they spend skating on one foot?
How confident and effortless does the skater look? How sure are their steps and turns? Do they maintain the same speed or slow down significantly when they execute a change of direction?
If you are familiar with the mechanics of turns and steps, how easy is it for you to recognize which moves the skater is performing?
Transitions are about the linkage: the variety, complexity, and quality of everything performed outside of those technical elements which have a set base value. These are the points you want to watch out for:
How are the skater’s jump and spin entries? Do they have connecting steps leading up to them? In other words, how easily can you tell when a jump or a spin is coming in the program? How are the exits? How much time does it take for the skater to transition out of jump/spin and back to the program? Do their technical elements blend in with the choreography?
If they have connecting steps / free skating movements into their elements, how difficult are those moves, and what level of quality are they performed with? Same with skating skills, check if those moves are conducted on deep edges, clean curves, and one foot more frequently than two.
A handy shortcut to evaluate both SS and TR is to count the number of crossovers in a program. Obviously, the lower, the better.
Performance is, needless to say, all about how a skater performs their program: the commitment to the delivery and the emotional involvement they have in the choreography. This, in my opinion, is the most subjective PCS area, since it depends largely on how you, as the audience, feel about the program:
Does the skater have a distinctive style? Do you find their skate memorable?
Does the skater vary their tempo and rhythm of skating throughout the program?
Do you find their line, carriage, posture to be aesthetically pleasing?
If the skater is trying to tell a story with their skate, do you get the idea and the character they are portraying?
Do you feel connected to the program? Does it excite you? Move you? Does the skater manage to hold your interest and keep you following their every move?
Basically, for PE, after the skater takes their bow, close your eyes and see if you can recall anything about that program outside of the technical. Ask yourself also if you’d want to watch that program again.
Composition is about how well everything in a program fits together. Do note that composition is different from transitions. TR is about the technical linkage, while CO is about the harmony between the program’s technical content and the music. A skater can have all the most difficult transitions in the world in their program, they can have uninterrupted flow into and out of every element, but that does not automatically mean a good composition. Think about this way: a skate is like a TV series, each episode on its own can be awesome, but if there is no overarching story line behind to bring everything together, you surely would not recommend it as a series to your friends and family. You can urge them to check out the episodes you enjoy, but you’ll not tell them to invest their time in the whole thing. So, same goes for a program, do you watch a skater for their jumps / spins only or do you enjoy their performance as a cohesive unit?
Some additional questions you can ask:
Does the program demonstrate a clear concept? How original, how creative is the design?
Does the choreography complement the music?
How well does the skater utilize the space they have? Do they make use of the entire ice surface? How efficiently do they “fill” the rink with their upper body movements? Are they mindful of the need to effect body alignment that is attractive when viewed from all angles?
How well does the skater utilize the time they have? How is their layout constructed? Do they have a balanced distribution of technical elements throughout the program’s duration?
Interpretation of the Music is an area that usually gets misunderstood. You’d want to keep in mind that IN is not about how the skater interprets the story or the choreography (those would fall under PE and CO, respectively) but rather about how they interpret the music, i.e. whether or not the skater utilizes their movement to reflect the nuances and characters of the melody playing in the background, their musicality, so to speak. For this area, you’d want to ask:
Does the skater match their moves to the music? While entering and exiting jumps/spins? While performing step/choreographic sequence? While transitioning?
How well do they use their entire body to express the music? For this purpose, do they effectively alternate between and combine movements of their lower body, upper body, facial expression?
Do their movements look rigidly choreographed or does the skater look like they allow their body to move along naturally and instinctively to the music?
A handy shortcut for IN is to imagine, if you were to watch a program without sound and with the skater in practice clothes instead of the usual costume, would you be able to tell what kind of music they’re skating to? Would you be able to, at a glance, distinguish which program it is among the skater’s portfolio?
Yuzuru (in recycled gifs) for illustration, as usual. All arbitrary choices by me though, because, as said, PCS needs to be assessed based on the entire program, not a couple of seconds. And do remember, Yuzuru Hanyu’s PCS, too, needs to be evaluated performance by performance :) Don’t go around giving him free 9+ just because he’s the reigning Olympic and World champ, y’all. I daresay he himself wouldn’t be happy with that, either :)