I totally agree. One of the reasons I can't warm to Ricky and Natalie's dancing is that it seems jagged (?) I watch it half tense as it is so agrressive. If he could be less brutal and more flowing I would enjoy it more.

How was it being tee'd up for 10s? It was Zoe's dance that had Craig saying "This is the makings of a 10" on ITT, and I don't think anything gave us a more positive impression of Ali's prospects this week than others.


Yes, but I don't think Brian switched to playing it safe. The choreography was difficult enough before that he could ease off a little while still keeping it interesting.


Again I don't think "safe" is the only alternative.

For this viewer, it was the only dance - apart from the professionals' jive - wholly worth watching last night - in a class of its own.

I don't know why anyone would expect an uproar because it got a top mark.

It was more deserving than Ricky's 10 but still think on a whole it was a bit early and a bit "simple" a routine for a 10.

I know it's never going to happen, but I would like to 10 to regain its "specialness". In series 1-3 both of those routines would have gotten 8/9s. Granted Alesha wasn't there then so her scores can't be compared, but Bruno didn't give out a 10 until the Series 2 final! Now he's giving them out to anything credible past week 5 (with the expection of Kelly which is a whole other story).

At least Len's seeing sense still and keeping his 10 under raps. Craig's 10s. As hidden as Craig K's dance ability, hopefully...

What nasty stuff?

Alesha's scoring was criticised, just as all the judges have been at some point in Strictly history.

Remember the outrage at Bruno's 10 for Kelly's AS?

The problem last week was that fairly minor, but clear, technical issues were spotted in Ricky's VW.

I didn't see any obvious flaws in Ali's performance last night and the judges didn't mention any.

Therefore, a 10 was justified because there were no real technical errors (which can be judged objectively) and if the dance evoked a sufficient emotional reaction (which is a subjective issue).

Alesha claimed Ali's AS was superior to Zoe's (who had received 9 points). So why not a 10 for Ali? It didn't make sense.


It's a bit in your face isn't it?

I prefer Ali's more understated approach. It's what I liked about Rachel Stevens too.

If Kerplunk's Samba can get a 10, there's no particular hallmark of specialness about it, because it was crap.

Series 2 saw the problem of Jill's jive getting 8s/9s the first time out when it deserved 10s. Then in the final when it was less sharp and worse, it got 10s. I always thought that was as much of a farce as the over-generosity with 10s is now.

okay Series 1 on a whole was "crap", that 10 was probably just part of the script. I probably should have stuck with Series 2-3 .

Jill's Jive was one of those dances that I thought didn't improve the second time around, but nevertheless still deserved 40, and believe such a routine in week 3 nowerdays would get 40. Still proves that 10s have become less of a reward, and that VT the other week about how special the 10 was, for Lisa in particular, was just a joke.

But then wouldn't you prefer the voting system now, where Jill's Jive deserves a 40 and gets it, compared to the system in series 2, when it deserved it and didn't?

(I do think that VT was a tad agrevating, although anything reminding me of Lisa Snowdon's 40/40s will do that)

Have to agree with you there everyone has made up their mind not to like Ricky W so there will be an uproar whenever he gets a ten!! Agree Alesha is a judge and is there to do a job and she thought it was good enough thats good enough for me.

Also quite happy with Ally and Brian's ten they are my second favourites.

I think that's untrue.

I'd hope most people are objective enough to acknowledge an excellent performance when they see one.

To say I wasn't keen on Lisa Snowdon last year is an understatment, but that doesn't mean I begrudged her some of her high scores. She deserved them.

It might be true for you Sid but Im afraid there are plenty of people on here who judged Ricky Whittle by his beautiful cover and immediately were against him for reasons they cannot explain with conviction.

I too, was not keen on Lisa or Rachel last year, but I still count a lot of Rachel's performances as some of the best ones on SCD - particularly her AT and Rumba.

I just wish people would give him a chance.

I have seen no dances this year deserving a 10, 9 yes, but for a 10 it has to be perfection.

I agree completely.

[quote=thepainter;36253613]I have seen no dances this year deserving a 10, 9 yes, but for a 10 it has to be perfection.[/QUOTE]

Ohh is this a new ruling this year

I liked Zoe's AS more thatn Ali's

I was just clarifying what I thought was the reason the OP had started this thread. I didn't say I agreed with the reason.


I agree and have said something very similar on another thread.

10 doesn't mean 100% (it means somewhere in the 90s to 100%) and one 10 makes the mark 37 not 40. If no judge used 10 before they all did, we would have no marks between 36 and 40. One 10 effectively makes the mark 9.25 on average - which seems about right. The alternative is you can have 9 average or 10 and nothing in between.

Looked at the other way - they are throwing 8s away like confetti because Len has devalued sEven and only Craig is using 1-4 . The result of that is that 9s are also devalued as they mean better than my eights were and 9s will soon replace those 8s as the dancers get better. As that happens, you simply have to give something thats better than your 9s a 10. If someone doesn't throw out the odd ten to split the pack we will soon have 4 people always tied on 36 and another bunch on 32.

I agree mark inflation ends with people getting 39s and 40s that are questionable (Lisa anyone) as the numbers run out but thats where we end up when the voters vote for anyone who gets below 5 and sympathise with anyone who gets below 8.

Literally no one is ever perfect so it can't equal perfection. The question is usually does it have some of the qualities of a 10 and enough of those qualities and more than you normally reward with a 9.

When you don't have the luxury of having a decimal point or percentage out of 100 to give, the question is which is it nearer to and are you happy its near enough to it. As you would start thinking about giving a 9 somewhere in the 8s and you might give it if something was particularly impressive in a whole which was nearer to 8, the same thing will happen in the 9s.

Thanks to everyone who has responded, seriously I wasn't expecting such a great response. I particularly like the posts which have taken the debate further to as to why a 10 isn't a 10, and the over inflation of the marks over the past few series.

I tend to side with those who believe there was always going to be a problem on this forum if Ricky got the first 10. The pros don't seem to have a problem with him; Matt, Brendan, James and Vincent have all been quoted as offering him tips and advice. It would seem that they are happy to encourage his natural talent, yet on here we just want to knock him every chance we get.