When it comes to the winter Olympics Im a bit old school. I like events where there is a definitive winner. Start at the top, finish at the bottom and the fastest or furthest person who stays on course wins. SIMPLE. Downhill events, skier X, biathlon, ski jumping, Bobsled and even curling, which is an acquired taste.
However there are certain events Ive never managed to understand. The ones where the scoring is subjective and complicated. For example I appreciate what figure skaters do but, barring one of them landing on their arse, I couldnt tell you which one did a better routine. Even when the commentator has problem explaining why someone got a 4.5 instead of a 4.7.
The same thing could be said about some of the new events that have been added. So much so that I will come and say it slopestyle is the new figure skating of the Olympics. When I see the tricks that these people do I appreciate their skill etc but I couldnt tell you if a clean but medium difficult run would score higher than a insanely difficult run where maybe the person put a hand down on one of his landing and what makes things even more difficult because the course is spread out.
According to a slopestyle judge they use their discretion to determine the purposely vague overall impression, of the run. So unlike aerials, where all the tricks earn pre-determined points based on preset difficulty rankings.
And there is the problem when it comes to winners and losers, when you are relying on a judge to score someone 0.1 more than another, people in the audience will always ask WHY? Well overall my impression of his run was 0.1 better
And the more you have to explain the more my point is made.