Jorgie and Matthew tied at 21.5; three others tied at 18.0. A coincidence ? It was like the scores had been added up beforehand.

I doubt it's contrived. With 13 skaters and judges using a smaller range of scores in the early weeks plus only 3 judges it's inevitable there will be a few ties. Having more than usual was just a coincidence.

There wasn't much logic to a lot of the marking and the comments seemed to follow variable logic too, and see the same things differently. When it came to the totals though. I think they decided not to call Jorgie and Matt this early, and Robin's inflated mark for Matt was the way to get him to equal marks. Same with the race for third. After runaway winners in the recent series, I think they cast for a real competition, and will maintain there is one even if it looks like a two horse race, or one horse takes a lead.

I think if they were fixing scores the marks would appear more logical. The difference in individual judges scores for Matt and Jorgie was too pronounced for a fix. If they were pre-planned, they'd probably have had Louie mark Matt 0.5 down vs Jorgie, and Robin 0.5 up.

Isn't it the other way around? If they're fixing scores, then they won't be logical, because they were contrived to get a pre-conceived result.

The really push the idea of the Jorgie-Matthew rivalry, and it seems Matthew's scores are made up to justify that idea.