|
||||||||
Are further marks needed to separate the couples? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Out on a limb
Posts: 3,090
|
Are further marks needed to separate the couples?
With so many couples and scores bunched together wouldn't it be better to add .5 to the scoring arsenal. When I score them at home I often think a little better but not a whole mark. Using an extra .5 last night my personal preference dished out the scores like this.
Ali & Brian - 8.5 Chris & Ola - 8 Ricky G & Erin - 7.5 Jade & Ian 7 Ricky W. & Natalie 6.5 Natalie & Vincent 6 Zoe & James 5.5 Phil & Katya 5 Laila & Anton 4.5 Jo & Brendan 4 Craig & Flavia 3.5 I shake my head at the judges sometimes, I know they have their favourite couples bunched always at the top, but how can they possibly look at Laila & Anton and mark them the same as Chris & Ola. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 90,778
|
There were 3 2-couple ties in the scores this week, which is worrying.
It also means that the change in the scoring system is having a larger effect than anyone may have expected. (When there's a 2-couple tie, for example, the next couple down gets the next lower number of points, where before there'd have been a gap, and the next couple down would have gotten 2 fewer points. So every tie gives an extra point to every couple lower on the leaderboard, compared to other years. That may be one reason we've seen Zoe and Jade in the dance-off.) |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,828
|
I agree with whoever mentioned that the judges should give 2 marks - one for technicality & one for artistic merit. That should then ensure that there are hardly any ties.
I think that if the voting system had to be changed, it should have been changed so that if 2 couples tied, then they should take the marks that they would have been awarded for the judges section (e.g. 6 & 7) and divide them between them - so that each have 6.5. The couple below them would have 5, so would have 1.5 marks to climb - which, for me, is preferrable to the 2 from the old system or the 1 from the new system. However, OP, I do agree that too many couples are tying when, if you look back at the dance, one was clearly better than the other. Possibly, in the event of a tie, the judges should say which gets the higher mark & which the lower. I think that there were better ways to address it than the current way - however it does make it more exciting, but also does highlght how often couples tie, when really there should have been a difference in marks. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Somewhere in the UK
Posts: 6,493
|
I've always said I'd prefer marks out of 20 or even 25.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Out on a limb
Posts: 3,090
|
In an earlier thread on marks I mentioned it might be good to separate artistic merit from the technical side, but, on reflection, I wondered if that would just make things more complicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 90,778
|
I think that having separate artistic and technical makes would create endless controversy, as it often did in figure skating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Wales, Oxford, and Germany
Posts: 974
|
Quote:
I think that having separate artistic and technical makes would create endless controversy, as it often did in figure skating.
The .5 system might be an improvement at least as far as being able to give 9.5 not 10s, and to give the judges some flexibility if they score an early dance highly only to find a later one is better. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 11,836
|
Of course the current scoring system could be improved. It's not an exercise in subtlety and there's an element of 'entertainment judging' about it.
My personal taste is for separate 'technique' and 'performance' marks but that's as much to do with giving the judges less leeway for BS as anything. On the down side, it would probably increase controversy which in turn may lead to more anti-judge voting...and I'm not convinced it would make enough difference to justify it. Although it's easy to quibble with individual marks, ultimately the scoring system does tend to put the couples in a reasonably sensible order....which arguably is all it needs to do. That written, the new way of dealing with ties is patently absurd and if it's contributing to the likes of Zoe and Jade ending up in the dance-off, the method should be ditched. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,269
|
Quote:
There were 3 2-couple ties in the scores this week, which is worrying.
It also means that the change in the scoring system is having a larger effect than anyone may have expected. (When there's a 2-couple tie, for example, the next couple down gets the next lower number of points, where before there'd have been a gap, and the next couple down would have gotten 2 fewer points. So every tie gives an extra point to every couple lower on the leaderboard, compared to other years. That may be one reason we've seen Zoe and Jade in the dance-off.) |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,836
|
The judges should split any ties by deciding which couple ranks in what position like they do in the Eurovision Dance Contest
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the dance floor
Posts: 1,796
|
Quote:
There were 3 2-couple ties in the scores this week, which is worrying.
It also means that the change in the scoring system is having a larger effect than anyone may have expected. (When there's a 2-couple tie, for example, the next couple down gets the next lower number of points, where before there'd have been a gap, and the next couple down would have gotten 2 fewer points. So every tie gives an extra point to every couple lower on the leaderboard, compared to other years. That may be one reason we've seen Zoe and Jade in the dance-off.) I'd love to see the figures though! The judges should use paddles 4-1 to spread out the scores. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,161
|
Of course. It wouldn't take Einstein to come up with a system that made it impossible to have equal positions, either by having a tie-breaker or by half points. They were quick enough to bring in Lens votes as a tiebreaker for the Xmas special a week after the semi debacle last year, so why not this series?, makes no sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,922
|
Although I am not 100% happy with it and think the judges should be able to award point five points to have less ties, I would like to point out that the rules have been changed to basically do what the 'public' wanted last year which is to have more power in the result. The BBC have done this so that we can literally turn the judges table upside down and not have people so far apart in points that they were literally 'safe' or literally 'unable to be saved'
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: DOTS are evil!
Posts: 32,338
|
Quote:
I've always said I'd prefer marks out of 20 or even 25.
And I think Len would mark even more narrowly then, he'd only use 15-20. I'd love to see Craig giving a 3 out of 20! ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: England
Posts: 5,457
|
no i think that in the case of a tie in the score's like laila and chris they should choose which one was better and place them on top
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,143
|
Quote:
There were 3 2-couple ties in the scores this week, which is worrying.
It also means that the change in the scoring system is having a larger effect than anyone may have expected. (When there's a 2-couple tie, for example, the next couple down gets the next lower number of points, where before there'd have been a gap, and the next couple down would have gotten 2 fewer points. So every tie gives an extra point to every couple lower on the leaderboard, compared to other years. That may be one reason we've seen Zoe and Jade in the dance-off.) |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,143
|
Quote:
no i think that in the case of a tie in the score's like laila and chris they should choose which one was better and place them on top
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,603
|
I really don't see the point of giving them a 20 point scale when (apart from Craig) they rarely use more than 5 of their available scores. They could differentiate using their existing paddles if they chose to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Out on a limb
Posts: 3,090
|
Quote:
I really don't see the point of giving them a 20 point scale when (apart from Craig) they rarely use more than 5 of their available scores. They could differentiate using their existing paddles if they chose to.
Maybe we are just being too reasonable about the whole thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,377
|
I don't think they need to introduce a different scoring system, they just need to make full use of all the paddles available. They started off this series with some pretty high scores which inevitably meant that, as couples improved, we were always going to end up with lot's of couples receiving 7s and 8s.
If they worked on the theory that average = 5 instead of the 7 points that they seem to award they would have more room to manouvre. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Quote:
I agree with whoever mentioned that the judges should give 2 marks - one for technicality & one for artistic merit. That should then ensure that there are hardly any ties.
I think that if the voting system had to be changed, it should have been changed so that if 2 couples tied, then they should take the marks that they would have been awarded for the judges section (e.g. 6 & 7) and divide them between them - so that each have 6.5. The couple below them would have 5, so would have 1.5 marks to climb - which, for me, is preferrable to the 2 from the old system or the 1 from the new system. However, OP, I do agree that too many couples are tying when, if you look back at the dance, one was clearly better than the other. Possibly, in the event of a tie, the judges should say which gets the higher mark & which the lower. I think that there were better ways to address it than the current way - however it does make it more exciting, but also does highlght how often couples tie, when really there should have been a difference in marks. I don't have any great problem with deciding that the celebs come in groups and parking several on one mark. I would have more problem with the OP arguing that Chris and Ola were in the same league as Ali or Ricky W or even Zoe. If Len didn't make things worse by chucking higher marks out to the undeserving there would be fewer ties anyway as Bruno and Craig do make distinctions that Len sometimes blurs. The main problem with the ties is that the new counting system makes the points difference between the good and the dire less - but they could easily fix that by only bringing in the system to stop a SF tie causing problems when it could pose a problem and thats probably not before the SF. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Out on a limb
Posts: 3,090
|
Quote:
Two marks would mean people getting very low marks and very high votes for it - real technical difficulty is confined to 2 or 3 people and if you marked that relative to them others would start at half marks before getting anything wrong. It would also just raise the question how to mark something difficult that went wrong as a third issue. Gymnastics and diving gives a difficulty tariff but their scores are totally incomprehensible to most viewers. Some people would score almost nothing for performance either - and probably win on all the low marks. The current system at least allows you to give 5s and 6s for turning up wheras being more specific would probably end up in your marks looking indefensible or in pitiful but realistic marks .
I don't have any great problem with deciding that the celebs come in groups and parking several on one mark. I would have more problem with the OP arguing that Chris and Ola were in the same league as Ali or Ricky W or even Zoe. If Len didn't make things worse by chucking higher marks out to the undeserving there would be fewer ties anyway as Bruno and Craig do make distinctions that Len sometimes blurs. The main problem with the ties is that the new counting system makes the points difference between the good and the dire less - but they could easily fix that by only bringing in the system to stop a SF tie causing problems when it could pose a problem and thats probably not before the SF. But it's all personal opinion and you are right it might have been better to keep the old system until the semi-final.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9,286
|
I like the way it is this year as the old nugget "no one is safe" has never been truer.
As long as I have read these boards, a large portion of the memberbase has suggested the judge's leaderboard should be done away with altogether and/or the dance off should be removed (lowest public vote goes). The system this year is a nice compromise and compliments the fact that dancing technique alone is not a priority with the general audience. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,002
|
Quote:
I really don't see the point of giving them a 20 point scale when (apart from Craig) they rarely use more than 5 of their available scores. They could differentiate using their existing paddles if they chose to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 175
|
Quote:
I really don't see the point of giving them a 20 point scale when (apart from Craig) they rarely use more than 5 of their available scores. They could differentiate using their existing paddles if they chose to.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:01.




Maybe we are just being too reasonable about the whole thing.