Options
Judges' votes
Gill P
Posts: 21,593 Forum Member
✭✭✭
My husband thinks that the voting should loaded in favour of the judges. Say 60:40 for the judges. I agree with him.
0
Gill P
Posts: 21,593 Gill P
Posts: 21,593 Gill P
Posts: 21,593
Comments
I can't imagine that happening - the producers want the the public to have a big say.
However, the judges' scoring strategy actually makes their votes LESS significant than the public void...
As long as (most of) the judges use a limited range of scores (Darcey and Len largely gve you 6 points simply for turning up) - and in some cases seem to try to compensate for Craig - we will have the likelihood of tied places.
Given the unique(ly flawed) way ties are treated in Strictly, this gives the bottom of the leader board a boost.
If the judges don't like seeing the better dancers in the dance off, they should start using more of their paddles, and trying to avoid ties - ties devalue their scores.
Voting on DWTS has always been about voting for your favourite couple, rather than the best dancers.
Now the judges' votes from the current week are added to the public vote from the previous week. So now on DWTS you're voting before you see the dancing!
At least they are up front about it all being about voting for your favourite couple!
Dancing is one element in the judging but is the reality show concept, where you vote on the overall personality that emerges over the weeks, that will decide the winner.
Even if Julian had been the best dancer of the series, his unpleasant histrionics on the first show would have sealed his fate.
It's the total package that counts and it's right that the public has the final say.
Crumbs
The judges do get a bit more than 50%, with Len getting a little bit more than that as well :cool:
Amazingly this week, it was Bruno and Darcy who used more scores than the other judges with 6 - 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 for Bruno and 5,6,7,8,9 and 10 For Darcy. Craig used 5 - 4,6,7,8 and 9 and Len just 4 - 6,7,8 and 9.
If they mark the first dance out 34, then it only leave 6 marks to give to any better dances. Ties are a dead cert and ties leave the more forgettable dances at the top end vunerable.
It would be easy to fix by ranking the ties and spreading out the points - but the fact that there is always a leaderboard plummet round about half way through could make you think that the powers-that-be actually rather like it and don't want to change things :cool:
The public vote is fine as it is. We have this every year & it always sorts itself out
For all these reasons and more the judges must be seen as compromised...having to fulfil multiple roles on the show some of which have nothing to do with being fair to the contestants. I understand completely why this is so and accept it but I don't think we should even begin to consider increased power for them in these circumstances. Even the DO potential veto is too much for me and I would abolish it (although again I understand why they have it).
It does sound interesting, but could be a bit hard on the one who goes first and gets a 5. OK in the early weeks when there's a lot of - I'll be polite and say - 'less talented' dancers, but later in the series whoever is first will almost automatically be condemned to bottom of the leaderboard.
Not really - it just means if the first to dance are the best of the night, then it will be a night of low scoring dances.
Dave finishing 11th and last (by some way) and getting 4 points for it, you mean!
They seem pretty impervious to criticism - remember the Tom/Lisa/Rachel fiasco in 2008 when a tied leader board meant that Tom couldn't progress to the final no matter how many votes were 'phoned in? They barely fixed that fiasco and are happy to limp along with the nonsense we see before us.
minus 2 for the lift, minus 1 for losing time etc.
Then we would know what they based their scores on.
Why, though - if a dance is the best on the night and tops the leader board that's the important thing. If it does that with 20 rather than 40 what's the harm?
The Strictlyverse wouldn't vanish in a puff of smoke if no 8's or 9's were given one week, would it?
[/QUOTE]
That's right. It would mean people would have to stop comparing scores the way they do now because every week would stand alone.
Until a few series ago Len would have trotted out one of his regular catchphrases for Patrick's dance - "You could have driven a train through the gap between them!" It was a good routine but the gapping alone should have meant a lower score - and no, I'm not a dancer, I learned about gapping from listening to Len, the other judges & watching ITT for years.
My own choice of scoring system would be something like Eurovision where the couple are ranked so there are no ties.
The BBC will not change the system now though, not after all this time.
I agree with this post ( apart from the bit about Patrick being the best - I don't really rate him)
If the judges scoring is just going to be about putting the dances in order of best to worst they may as well just wait till all the dances are over, get their heads together and put them into leaderboard order.
Dances should be judged individually, as they are now, and not compared and contrasted with all the other dances. That would be grossly unfair, imo.
So true.