Someone who is very popular, will win out over someone who is a good dancer but lacks likeability for the first few weeks. Lots of potentially good dancers have been eliminated in previous series to keep in the likes of Kate Garraway, Fiona Phillips, and a certain Mr John Sergeant!

But, invariably, eventually those really lacking in talent will be eliminated before the last few weeks.

But popularity is still important - in the last series I thought Rachel should have walked it, but she left me cold. I didn't like watching her, and would never have voted for her.

Lisa was my favourite - I found her very likeable, and her dancing, although not as flash as Rachel's, was technically far superior.

However, when they did the showdance Tom deserved to win hands down!!

It IS a dance competition...wrapped in a soap opera...inside a pantomime.

I suspect a lot of viewers are like me in this sense. I can tell attractive, elegant dancing from ugly, awkward dancing and, by making comparisons, I have reasonable awareness of when couples are being under- or over- marked / criticised. Beyond that, I don't know or care unduly about the finer subtleties of technique or difficulty. So as long as a couple reaches a decent standard relative to the others and satisfies sufficiently my bias in favour of quality dancing, my final preference I think quite naturally tends to hinge on 'personality' factors.

Austin, Tom and Rachel were all capable of being the winner on the night last year...depending on the dance. Rachel was just about the best overall for me...but too safe in all respects I think to engage an RTV audience sufficiently to get the votes required for victory.

You mean dead?

Post of the day!

I think that a lot of people think like you do - I certainly do

The public image thing needs teasing out though. Zoe, Emma and Gabby were all extremely successful in their careers - some like Zoe and Emma with multiple audiences - both of those too have been very successful with teen (and younger) TV or pop audiences and with radio audiences which probably include a majority of under 40s and females. Their public image was as very likeable people and Emma particularly had practically no negative publicity over her career. The problem isn't that they are unpopular in any sense outside the show, but that they can't get votes on SCD. They just weren't popular with SCD audiences - which I suspect on average are much older.

You have to wonder too what works on the other side of the equation - I don't see much going for Tom in terms of winning personality or humour or story or big stunning dances. Better known and at least equally charismatic actors dancing at similar levels have done less well on the show. I can't see any case that he was less desperate to win than Rachel or Lisa. Rachel and Lisa were shown to be working at least as hard and arguably had better journey stories. Austin had the traditional winning story and had done one of the few more dramatic dances of the series within anyone's short memory of the key QF votes. Why Tom then? If there is a reason, why does it vanish for the tour audience watching the same thing ? The only things I can think of are that the audience may have changed , the TV close ups and VTs are not there so the audience is looking at a different picture (literally its the dancer rather than his face in close up) and some really good male dancers for comparison purposes were there?

I agree with much of what Monkseal and Robert Romarin have said, but the post that makes the most sense to me is this one by CaroUK


I have watched SCD from the first episode and I can honestly say I want every couple to do well, so that I get the thrill of watching a good performance (goosebumps or teary eyes are my measure of success ). Even if I start to go off a celeb for some reason e.g. After watching the VT footage or when they are on ITT, I still hope they will redeem themselves in my eyes when they dance (of course, sometimes that never happens )! That's what is so special for me about SCD.

What does make my hackles rise is when I think the judges are not treating a couple fairly and that can work both ways as in being too harsh or too soft on a couple compared to the other couples. The judges can't help having favourites, but that shouldn't be expressed in terms of the marks or comments - that's what judging is all about imho. The public aren't idiots and they can tell when a couple is being favoured by one or more of the judges, so they simply need to stop making it so obvious. But as CarolUK said too often now the judges lack consistency or objectivity when it comes to their comments and marking - and this trend has grown series by series to the point where some of the audience are reacting negatively in the way they vote. In fact, I'd say when something like the JS saga happens that's actually when some viewers start watching and voting for the couple involved - it is more than a sympathy vote, it is more like a stupid game of 'let's rock the boat' or something like bear baiting.

I don't want bland comments from the judges as for me their personalities are a vital part of the show, but they have to get the balance right between saying what they think and giving constructive criticism.

I can't say how I decide between talent and personality. All I know is I would never vote for someone who simply can't dance or someone who is being blatantly favoured by the judges.