The scoring discrepancies are just too vast.

It's confusing for the viewer and the contestants. I'm finding it hard to be engaged too see a relatively good skate end up with similar marks to a poor skate.

Has it always been like this? It seems really inconsistent.

Its really easy to become unconfused - ignore anything that Jason and Ashley do as they don't know the first thing about skating.

If you only pay attention to Robin and Karen you will find that their scores generally very clearly indicate the order of merit from best to worst

I agree the discrepancy between the performance/dance judges and the skating judges has never been this much. It started to an extent with Louie last year but it's even wider now & enhanced by the fact there are 2 performance judges.

Given that Jason's return has failed to halt the ratings decline perhaps they should see sense & have skating judges only should DOI be back again next year.

The vast gaps between performance and skating are really noticable. I tend to ignore Jason's marks totally as he is so harsh in his scores, especially at this early stage. The performance will come to them in time once they are more confident on the ice.
There really doesn't need to be two performance judges imo. I know they emphasise the dance element but I'd personally rather know if they technically knew how to skate than if they got their hands in the right position when doing their dance moves.
I did notice Ashley's marks slowly creeping up tonight after the 1st couple of performances.

It seems that Jason is marking solely on performance. Surely you can't divorce the ice skills from performance. At this early stage in the competition a lot of them are just worried about staying upright and are going to look wooden so is it really fair to base a score on performance alone? Also someone with an easier routine who has performance skills is going to have a higher mark than someone who has a technically more difficult routine but leaves out the light and shade etc!

The placings were spot on though IMO. I suspect the judges divvy up the scores between them to reflect both an overall placing and their individual views.

I kinda think that first and foremost, credit for the actual ice skating should be possibly at the forefront of the judges scores. Of course performance is enormously important, but really-Joe Pasquale getting higher marks off Ashley then Gareth..?

Reeeeeally?

Jason and Ashley are getting on my nerves with their 3/4/5's - its out of 10 for gods sake, and they have .5's as well, the top performers should be hitting at least 6/7's in week 1 and 2

I am not sure the performance judges have much of an impact on the leaderboard though. Last week Jason gave 4 out of 6 the same score of 3.5 - it was Robin and Karen's scores that determined leaderboard position and they were both very clear: Matt Lipinskas 1st, Beth 2nd, Pamela 3rd, Samia 4th and Shane/Keith joint last.

She gave Joe Pasquale the same score that she gave to Matt Lapinskas last week which means that Ashley thinks that Joe Pasqale is (jointly) the best skater of the whole lot of them

On that basis, if I give Ashley a score out of 10 for competence as a judge then I would have to go with a 0.0

That's maybe it though, if the other two had marked other than they did it might have had more impact on placing. Hence my suggestion about divvying up the marks.