When it’s an aesthetics thing it seems silly that the dude who clearly had the best collection of dunks on a given night doesn’t win. It’s that simple to me. With the head-to-head you could have one finalist who had five 50s through all rounds and ends up with a final 49 lose to a guy who was second beat with four 47s but had two 50s in the final round. Who had the better night? Dunking is about entertaining. Who was more entertaining?
That is basically what happened last night. Aaron Gordon had 4 50's, 2 in the 1st round and then 2 more in the 2nd. Derrick Jones Jr had 2 in the 2nd round but he scored 95 in his first round on his 2 dunks. I'm not sure what each dunk of his scored in the 1st round but Aaron Gordon had a perfect score up until the final dunk, which should have been another 50.
Maybe keep it like it is but use the cumulative score as the tie breaker. That would have given Gordon the win but he deserved it. Both competitors scored 50's on their 2 dunks in the 2nd round. So how do you break that tie? Apparently there wasn't a clear rule for that. The commentators brought up how Gordon had 4 50's at that point and shouldn't have needed to dunk again, it was is win. I agree with that logic, especially in that situation where someone has 4 "perfect" scores.