What with the Arlene/Alesha debate going on at the moment, I was just wondering what people see as Strictly's strength as a programme. If you had to choose whether it should become more dance-focused or more entertainment-focused, which would you pick?

1) Strictly as a light entertainment show only.
Dance is what the competition happens to be- but what is important about the routines is whether they entertain. Drop the pretence that the audience cares about bent knees or heel leads, and just judge on what the audience enjoys. The judges can be anyone who can offer a sensible opinion on what they like, and there isn't any value in having world class professionals instead of attractive snowboarders who have danced a bit in the past. The music should be modern and classic pop rather than authentic dance music which the audience won't relate to.

2) Strictly as a dance show
With the understanding that there is a limit to what a beginner can achieve in a week (and a corresponding understanding of what a ten should be awarded to- no illusion that perfect scores should be reserved for professional standard routines, but no giving them out like candy), Strictly should try to keep to rules to make it a dance competition. The judges should be qualified to judge ballroom and latin, rather than chosen on personality. They should mark on technical aspects as well as performance, choreography and entertainment. The professional dancers should be given more respect (and better pay), and the BBC should appreciate the value of having some of the best dancers in the world on the show. The music and the camera work should complement the dances, rather than trying to jazz them up and modernise them.

3) A mix of the two
There should be some compromise between entertainment and dance. Professionals and judges should be chosen for ability, but with an eye to how their personalities will interact and entertain the audience. Scoring should be generally based on all aspects of the dance including technique, but not get too caught up in very technical details that the audience won't understand. Where modern pop works for certain dances it should be used to give the audience more chance of relating to the dances.

Definitely 3 - a mix of the two

Strictly's main problem is that it's never seemed to know what it is. It started off as a frothy, light entertainment show to raise a bit of cash for Children In Need and simply took off in a way the BBC never anticipated, largely due to the sheer effort that was put in by the Pros and Celebs the following year. And every year that level seemed to crank up. I felt series 3 and in particular 4 had the tone of the show just about spot on.

I personally would go for option 3, as it does need to be a bit of both, whilst respecting the dedication and drive of the Pro dancers and celebs...they do want to win it, there's no point in if they didn't! So in that respect Strictly is more dance contest than the Generation Game hybrid it started off as. And yes, the Pro dancers need a significant hike in wages. I really don't understand why they are getting (comparatively) little compared to the judges, Tess and Bruce especially when they are now as every bit as famous as the celebs they get as partners!

I would go for Option 3 and without the Sunday results show.

Probably more so in many cases!

Option 3 for me.

Definately option 3 - you need to compromise between making it too technical to be boring and too entertainment based that it doesn't matter if the dancing is any good or not. Some people watch for the dancing, some for sheer entertainment value and both need to be catered for. The dancers should definitely get more pay though and I can't understand why Alesha hasn't replaced Tess as a presenter instead of Arlene.

My natural choice would be Number 2, because I love the whole aspect of learning to dance ....but I respect that for the majority of the country, this would be a little "dry", so consequently will opt for Number 3.

Gill P referred to the Sunday show above - I was originally against it for the reason that I am impatient and can never wait for the results on Sunday and have to find out beforehand thanks to the lovely people on here! but I have changed my mind and would still like the Sunday show, only because we get to see more pro dances - and as a beginner who has fallen in love with dance so completely, I watch Strictly for the pros and all the tips they give, as well as enjoying being in awe of their talent when they execute the pro dances. I do respect though that perhaps a greater number might like to watch more for the celebs and how they work out.

I wish, as many of you have said, that the pro dancers could get the respect AND WAGES they deserve - they work so hard and it is they who provide the core of the show from which the entertainment via the celebs (through the work the pros have done with them) can spring.

Can I just say though as well that although I really like the look of the new lady who is coming in, there is a huge part of me which would dearly love to see a pro from the UK being brought in - we have so many amazing dancers here, I'd like to see them being given a chance to shine on the SCD stage - this time, it would have been lovely to help promote the UK in world dance through making the new pro dancer a British one, to add to the already lovely mix of pros on there. I enjoy all the pros - but would love to see more British promotion.

Number 3, though, therefore, for me.

I'd say Option 3, but as long as you have the public vote it will always be more like Option 1 imo.
Now I'm not saying that as some dance expert looking down on the voting public, because I don't have a flipping clue, just personally I've never voted because of technique, just how much I enjoy the dance.

I thought when I started writing the post that I wanted it to be three... but actually I'd want it to be option two! I would never have watched it if it had started out like that, but having watched six series I'd like it to become more dance-oriented.

I accept that is never going to happen, but it would be nice if the producers considered option three rather than dumbing down to option one

Broadly speaking I think the show itself as broadcast should be between 2 and 3, knowing that public vote will naturally pull it back to 3, which is where I'd prefer it to be.

Certain things do need tightening up to give the show a bit of its fake credibility back. Fewer 10s, greater respect and pay for the pros in return for a push on the pros to actually know what they're talking about in certain dances (salsa, Argentine Tango), judges who aren't jobbing pop stars (sorry Alesha), and less Sugababes guest performances.

Not pop music in general, just the Sugababes. They suck.

Can I also put in a plea for less Westlife? And no more Cliff, ever!

I would go for Option 3 for a mix of both entertainment and dance.

The show is about more than dancing for me and I like a partnership that works well together, who will provide fun and entertainment when watching them in training, and also good to watch on ITT etc...but I also want to see a good dance from them on the Saturday.

Although I dont want the judges to score and critisiize the celebs as though they are judging a real dance competition, I actually like them to go into the technicalities a bit, as it gives me a bit of guidance of what to look for...otherwise I wouldnt have a clue.

Instead of bringing in Alesha to replace Arlene, i would have preferred the eliminated pro from the week before to be brought onto the judging panel....they are in a better position than anyone to comment on both the technicalities of footwork and posture etc, but can also look at it from a performance point of view better than anyone else.

Option 3, definitely.

Each year there are contestants with a mixed ability and a mixed potential. Therefore, I watch the early part of the show for the entertainment value but once we get to approximately the halfway mark, at that point I want to see only the best contestants remain in the competition. When we get to the last three weeks or so, and in particular the final, I want to be wowed by the dancing and the performances. John Sergeant, for example, was endearing the first two or three weeks - and not the worst contestant at the start - but he didn't have the wow factor and I didn't want to see him make it to the end.

A mix of the two - but the entertainment side comes from the glitz, seeing the dancers train, being interviewed but NOT by having 'judges' who know next to nothing about dancing.

A mix of the two, but leaning more towards the dance side. I don't mind a few entertaining crap dancers in the first few weeks but want to see the best dancers at the end. And when I say best dancers, I mean best dancers, not who the current judges think they should over-mark because they're not popular. I don't mind if there's a few dancers relatively close in ability at the end of the show and one wins over the other based on their personality, or relationship with their pro, that will happen and as long as they have still reached a good standard of dance, that doesn't make a mockery of the show.

I would prefer to see more ballroom/latin judges on the panel, as Len is currently the only one and has lost a lot of credibility with his inability to mark lower than a 7. They really need to look at the marking this year, if it continues the way it has been we'll have 40s in week 3.

Finally, the pros. I thought Hayley was an unmitigated disaster last year, made worse by the fact that she replaced Nicole, one of the best dancers on the show. Hayley was undoubtedly pretty and seemed inoffensive. I didn't warm to her personality, as it didn't really show much. Her dancing though, was not of a particularly high standard, her choreography wasn't great either. When you compare with Nicole it just highlighted that the show appears to be going further and further away from dancing and more towards entertainment.

Option 3 and I agree with tangoqueen...

SCD should give British upcomming pro's (or even amatures) a change to shine on tv. There are so many out there and it would be a loss not to use them.

It already is a mix of the two. It's entertainment because of the celeb (so-called!) element, and dance because of the pro-dancers, and it should stay that way.

Howevr, I would like to see more respect paid to the dance element generally. There is a right way to dance and wrong way - the first should be praised BY ALL THE JUDGES, and the wrong should be pointed out and marked down. This of course means having judges who actually know what they are/should be looking for.

That doesn't mean the viewers have to agree, they are at liberty to vote for the worst dancer if they so please (as they have frequently done in the past!!!!)

Ive voted for 2... but with the knowledge that probably most of the rest of DS will vote for number 3. I really like the dance element of this show - and its why I don't watch certain other shows like X Factor or Britain's Got Talent because I really dont like the "light entertainment" of the latter shows.

I think Ive made my feelings plain on a number of other threads about how I feel about this dumb down of the judging panel (and the whole Arl-esha-gate issue).... I love the pro dances and the entertainment as well as teaching skills that the pros convey when training their celebs. Agree with most of what has been said above - and although I never thought I would ever find myself agreeing with this.... I do actually agree with TQ and quite like the results show on a Sunday (although I cant stand not reading the spoiler thread)... coz I think its probably the only way we get a full programme including many pro dances, performances and demos etc where the pro dancers can showcase their huge talent.

Oh yes... I also hate the "judges favourite overmarking" policy just because they see someone who isnt particularly popular with the public. And its just this sort of rigged marking that makes me want to vote (markedly) for someone else, irrelevant of whether they deserve it or not.

But agree, as long as the 4 best pairs are in the last 4 or 5, I dont mind if at that point someone with a little bit more personality wins over someone else. Its personality, dance ability and general "journey between pro and celeb" that attracts me to the show.

If there is going to any a judging panel at all, I think the judges should judge on technique - the public judge on entertainment value (or we would do if the judges didnt have to overmark and make us mad! )

That's how I see it. It is a mix of the two, but it is moving further in the direction of light entertainment, whereas I'd like to see it move closer to a dance element. I accept that making it a proper dance competition would never work as a Saturday night prime time show, but I think there is room for positive changes in that direction without making it unappealing to viewers.

Replacing Nicole with Hayley, and adding Alesha to the judging panel, are two changes that move it closer towards option one, and that's what I dislike.

Agree I would like a 3 but more emphasis on the dance element. You cannot get rid of the light entertainment on a Saturday. I don't mind having a Sunday show even though we know the results already it is lovely to watch the pro's perform.

I actually love the Sunday show. The dance-off is rubbish, but all the dancing is amazing!

Very good point, we are all 'entertainment' judges!

I am another one who wants option 3, but weighted towards a dance competition. I have felt that the main show has gradually been dumbed down over the series with any talk of serious technique relegated to ITT.

I also enjoy the Sunday show, purely because I get to see more dancing by the pros.

Option 3 for me too.

And I agree with Tangos about the Sunday show - I re-watched F & V's milonga this morning and it still takes my breath away. We wouldn't have seen that without the Sunday show.

Option 3 for me too...

Personally, I'd like wholesale changes for next year regardless of how Alesha performs as a judge. I'd drop Brucie, Tess, Len and Bruno, move Alesha over into a presenting role alongside Gethin Jones, and have a new judges panel under the leadership of CRH...

Thanks Katie for made this thread.
I love the dancing part of the show with the technical sides, but I also like the entertaining part.
so for me muber 3.

When I started to watched SCD was series 2 and I was furious because the public keep voting for Julian and Erin even though Julian wasn't good dancing, and I stopped watching SCD, and started watching it again in the middle of of series 3.
But then I realised that the public at home needs to connect with the couple and need something entertaining if they are not into the dances as I was.
And although I would prefer Collin and Erin, or even Ian and Zoe to win that series, I was happy for Darren and Lilia because they connection betwen them was beautiful and you kind indentify with Darren.
I understand also is very difficult to a professional to teach most of the basics and thecnicalities of the dances and choreography wise in so limited period, especially if the person doesn't have any clue of dancing.
So I think the scores have to consider this factors so 10 and 9 even 8 are unrealistic at least not until the two last week of the series but also 1 is too harsh for a person who really isn't natural, or never have any experience of dancing before. And for the public at home they sympathize with the celebrity who get that kind of score at least for a little while.
And the others have said, will be nice to see more British professionals in the show.
I know must of the people here follow the Blackpool tower competion, and we know they are great British dancers
For me they don't have to be the number one in the world but with good standars have to be good teachers as well and need to be patience.
I read a while ago in a teachers dancing forum, a Woman was talking about her teacher, He told her that she was approached by SCD but he said no, because he didn't want to compromise his effort in teaching some celebrities, who are there just to be famous and not really to learn to dance.