I like Chris very much - I think what we see is genuine and he's quick-witted and charm personified (less sure about Ola but the professional never influences my vote - they're doing their day job).

But what does concern me fundamentally about the whole scenario of a Chris win is that his vote does not appear to be affected at all by how he dances. He could be absolutely rubbish on any given night but people will still vote for him regardless because of personality.

People trot out the criticism of Ricky that he started off brilliantly and has made no progress &, appropriately, last week when he was off the boil, he ended up in the DO.

Equally, Chris started off really well (was it the Rumba?) and got worse(!) as the weeks passed (apart from a reasonable Foxtrot) and the Charleston last week (the choreography of which suited him down to the ground but it's been acknowledged there wasn't a high level of technique) and yet the criticism of no "journey" is never levelled at him.

I believe the judges will vote on Saturday on what they see: irrespective of conspiracy theories if Ricky does terrible routines he will be marked down (maybe not as far down as some would like but I guess his innate comfort with dance will always give him a respectable score) and, likewise, if Chris storms the dancefloor with stacks of Samba bounce, he'll be marked up.

Chris's fanbase though will, I suspect, support him whatever the level of performance because they like him.

People say why continue with the concept of the show if the best dancer from week 1 makes no progress and wins?
Equally, why continue with the concept of the show if one of the poorer dancers makes very little progress and yet the way he dances is irrelevant to the result?

That's democracy folks and, admittedly as a Tom fan, it worked for him last year. I'm banging a different drum this year


BTW this is not a Chris bashing - let me re-emphasise I really like him it's more just some so not-at-all amusing musings (forgive me the god that is JfW) on the point of the programme.

Agree with everything you said Apricot, very well put!

Forgive me for editing for very reasonably worded post but I wanted to highlight this section.

Now Jade has gone, I am supporting Chris and Ola. I don't agree that they have made very little progress. He began promisingly then rather lost the plot before getting his mojo back in Blackpool; then took a step back before his 'WOW' dance last Saturday. That is, admittedly, a rather circuitous journey - but it is still more of a journey than Ali or Brian. And I would argue that he is the only remaining contestant who has succeeded in bringing his personality onto the dancefloor.

I would be the first to say that Chris needs to improve his technique. I get the impression he is very aware of that and I'm sure Ola will be too. I think it would be in the interest of the entire competition (and this series) if he could raise his game and Laila could conquer her Latin demons.

I would also say that the public voting may be rather more complex than Chris' fans' blind loyalty. From what I have read and from talking to people who watch the show, there is a real resentment towards the judges obvious bias towards Ali and Ricky. Yes, when they're on form, they're technically good, but the VW debacle in which Ali and Brian careered into two couples yet got scored a ten speaks volumes. The public don't like being told who they 'should' be voting for and who is 'best'. They want to make their own minds up - and you, as a Tom supporter from last year, should appreciate that!

As I said in a post yesterday, the root of this situation goes back - yet again - to the producers' ineptitude. It is their job to ensure that the celeb 'cast' have distinctive personalities the public can engage with. Ricky and Ali may fit the younger demographic the BBC is desperate to target - but if they don't have identifiable characters that translate well to screen, are they right for the show?

Strictly has always been about hitting the right balance between successfully learning to dance and engaging viewers so that they invest in the contestants and care about them. This is why Tom won - ditto Alesha, Mark, etc. Just as Chris and Laila have technique issues to overcome, Ali and Ricky have a long way to go to win over the audience. After all, who wants to watch a final between two contestants with less public support?

It's not the casting - it's the writing, especially how they write women. Lisa Snowdon is the host of a very popular radio show, as is Zoe Ball. Emma Bunton was probably the most loved member of one of the best loved bands of the last decade. All 3 became exceptionally unpopular pariahs the second the Strictly storyboarders got their hands on them. In the case of Ricky I'd check out Hollyoaks backstage videos, in which he has a really strong, almost overbearing, and spontaneous personality, and compare that with this show, where all he does is give rote answers to leading questions.

In this case I think there's an argument that Chris & Ola have been so succesful because they've siezed control of their own storylining, rather than behaving more naturally and allowing the VT editors to make storylines for them. They've come up with catchphrases, they have a team name, they clown around and pratfall, and are to a certain extent putting on a performance at all times, on and off the floor.

To this extent, they've beat the curse of storyliners who just jam people into the same boxes year after year, to the extent that they can win over the public despite being obviously mediocre technically. Phil could have managed it but didn't, because they succesfully stuffed him into "cheeky pupil-exhasperated trainer". Same with Ricky G, but he eventually succumbed to "I'm having the time of my life, I don't want to go home, I love Erin wah wah wah" syndrome.

Who's doing Chris's PR? He's a sports journalist - whenceforth has come this genius ability to market the Team Cola brand that steamrollers all before it?

Bright bloke though - maybe just very media savvy.

I do think you're onto something here.

I've found it difficult to get 100% behind any of the contestants this year. Of the four now left, Chris feels (for me) to be the one who's putting most of himself out there, and so he'll probably be the one getting my vote. I'd probably LIKE to vote for Ali, as I think she's a gorgeous dancer, but I just don't get that sense from her.

Very astute Monkseal. I had never thought about how the celebs can box themselves into a hole.Has me wondering now how Rachel could have been molded by the BBC machine and if it had been a better one .

I really like Ali's dancing in the formal ballroom but her latin is ruined by her shy English rose persona. Ricky is being played as bland too. What would you say regarding Laila? Cant give a sh1t syndrome? Laila could have been really good.

I think you make some very interesting points - but I would say that Strictly's editorial team will have to deal with what they are given. I can't comment on the Ricky W footage you refer to - although if that is the case, I don't understand why he would be so shy and retiring. Ironically, the real drama he's been involved in has barely been mentioned. I'm sure he's perfectly likeable - but I see so little of who he is on screen that there's very little to engage with beyond his technical excellence.

As for Lisa Snowdon: her radio show may be be popular in London but she means very little to the rest of the country. She didn't help herself by crying on cue at every opportunity and I would argue that many viewers took against her when it became obvious that the judges, post-Sergeant-gate, would gladly sacrifice the public's favourites to keep her in. If the producers hadn't tried so hard to force her down the nation's throats, she might have fared better.

I'd also dispute Emma Bunton's popularity: yes, she was popular briefly, but the Spice Girls were ridiculed just as much as they were adored, and her solo career has hardly been a roaring success. It may be hard to credit given how OTT Spice-mania was - but, despite their best efforts, interest in who they are now is pretty thin on the ground ... so Bunton's fate may have less to do with Strictly's editorial team than you suggest.

I agree that Emma Bunton is a less clear indicator, because she's not really ever had to sell herself purely on the strength of her own personality (although I'm not saying she's liked just because she was a Spice Girl, obviously Geri and Victoria prove otherwise), but both Lisa Snowdon and Zoe Ball are skilled communicators who are capable of engaging an audience and making them feel warmly towards them and that never came across for even one second on the show. Lisa Snowdon never really had a particularly visible fanbase even before "Operation Make Lisa Happen"

True there have been people with that skill set before who have come on the show (Carol Vorderman, Dominic Littlewood) and become unpopular because they acted like royal fannies (and there was an element of that with Lisa towards the end) but it does rather suggest that it's something in the show that's hampering them.

I think an obvious example how is Tess' questions. Not to bash Tess too much, but they're very banal and repetitive and not terribly interesting. It's either "you did well/badly, how do you feel about that?" or "Bruno said this, how do you feel about that?". The contestants who seem to do badly with the public (Ricky W, early Jade) act as though these are questions they're actually supposed to answer, and they do, and they sound dull and like something we've heard a billion times before. The better contestants at presenting themselves ignore them completely or answer them in 2 seconds and then move on to pushing the "key values of their brand" or what have you - Christine Bleakley was very good at doing this last year, and Chris is doing very well at it this year.

Emma struggled with a storyline that saw her being 'The Face' of Children in Need that year ... when Strictly was still a money raiser for CiN. She had the CiN single and there was a perception that she had to stay in Strictly until the single was released/number 1/CiN was over.

Any bias towards Natalie C on ITT that people may have picked up on really is nothing compared to how much coverage went Emma's way that year.

She also was the winner of the 'previous dance experience' tag that year too - which never helps.

I think that because the celebs are more than aware that places like this and similar exist, then they are wound tight about not saying anything that may incriminate them Claudia may take great delight in reading out sanatised forum comments ... but they know there is a yang to the ying.

Answer the Tess question about 'how you feel about what Bruno said' incorporating how you really feel and you would probably be out on your ear within an hour - or top the public vote for the next 6 weeks' - but thems the risks!. (I think Laila has headed off in that direction a couple of times but she had Anton to pull her back onto the 'jokey' safe ground)

Instead, they go the safe route of banal platitudes and saying the totally expected... which in turn gives them the appearance of actually being banal and a bit ernest.

Maybe because their skill as communicators is aural rather than visual - many performers are not necessarily suited to both media, are they? It's a thought.

Ever considered a career in PR, monkseal? You'd be ace!

I agree that the responses are becoming more anodyne by the hour and I am suffering from a little bit of zankoku's "ennui" with ITT.

But as a WWW, after the choreography problem last Saturday and Ricky's subsequent blog where he told it as it was, I was on the edge of my seat last night on ITT when they showed the post dance VT. I could see he & Natalie were mightily cheesed off but the thought running through my head was "don't say too much - you'll alienate people if you look like sore losers".

Well, somebody had to ask: what is WWW?

I like Chris but so many of his dances were a disappointment. Last week's Charleston was excellent. However his performances overall aren't really good enough to merit his winning the title this year.

Could this perhaps be the reason that people are talking him down. They are concerned that someone who hasn't shone in the competition as a whole may just win it?

Something that was coined a while back but had to go and check in the appreciation thread:

"Wicky Whittle's Whittlettes or Wicky Whittle Watchers! I can't remember which, it was concocted after a long hard slog defending our guy in the ITT thread."

Feel a bit sheepish now and my embarrassed smiley doesn't work.

Looking at the starting list of celebs, and drawing a veil over the Jade forced exit () I'd see this final 4 as there or thereabouts as the right 4 given the fact there is always without fail a 'shock' early departer.

The problems start when people start the number crunching and permutation tinkering. Regardless of how good they are, the final would be a poorer place without the up-to-then public favourite (and I speak as someone who still has an Aled wuz robbed t-shirt).

Again, only personally but I've found everyone of the final 4 to be patchy performance-wise. For every thumbs up, there has been a thumbs down.

I'm sure that some posters are envious of Chris' apparent popularity and have stooped to bitterness and personal insults to make their feelings known. :yawn:

However, I think it is a little premature to dismiss him because "his performances overall aren't really good enough to merit his winning the title this year".

He isn't even past the QFs yet - and may not make it beyond that. In any case, it must be very obvious to him and Ola that he needs to raise his game technically if he's going to stand a chance of competing with the judges' favourites.

So who knows what Saturday will bring ...

I'm with Servalan in that any judgement of somebody before ALL the dancing is over is null and void, especially after series 3 and 6, where the series was basically won in the last five minutes.

I was rooting for Tom all the way from about 6 couples to the final, but I spoke to a number of people who said they'd rung up for Tom in excess of 20 times following his showdance. And I won't even bring up the P-word, but we all know why Colin ended up losing out to Darren.

However, I can see the battle of the showdances going to Ali and Brian, who will almost certainly make the final and will be able to pull off something technically insane. Brian's already pushed Ali to the limits and I bet he's ready to do it again with that kind of platform for their skills.

Chris and Ola, likeable and lovely as they are, haven't got the technical fortitude to pull off a classically entertaining showdance. So unless they get VERY clever (which I think is beyond Ola's choreographic skills), or somebody else throws it away Colin and Erin-style, it's still somebody else's to lose rather than Chris's to win.

I agree with your last point. Despite the judges' determination to make us agree with them, their favourites are not as good as the scores they've been given, and both have weaknesses.

Although I suspect that the judges will doggedly ignore those weaknesses ...

I wouldn't rule this out. I completely agree that Chris has got to surprise the judges in a major way on Saturday (in a good way, that is! ) - but as far as showdances go, I would argue that Tom's raised the bar last year, not least because it drew massively on his own character. The Charleston showed off Chris' strengths when he can inject some personality into his routine, so I don't think this is inconceivable ... although I agree it's a big challenge for him to get that far in the first place (not least because it would mean the judges' favourites' clique being bust apart).

For me, the big questions for the QF are:
- will Chris be able to demonstrate technical improvement?
- will Laila be able to deliver a decent Latin routine?
- and will Ali and Ricky be able to demonstrate their personalities, both on and off the dancefloor?

I dont think that Ali and Brian will pull off an amazing showdance myself, it might be technically good at whatever they do but until the charleston she hasnt shown much ability to put on a performance and a beautiful ballroom dance isnt going to cut it as a showdance.

I was not a Tom fan but I agree that his showdance was pretty much perfect for him and his dancing style but it was very different from many of the other show dances that have been produced over the years which have relied on spectacular lifts and tricks rather than out and out performance. Therefore of the people left I think the one MOST likely to produce a 'performance' in their show dance is Chris and Ola providing Ola gets the routine right. If you want lifts and tricks it will probably be Ricky and Natalie that would produce the goods. I fear that Ali and Laila would struggle to shine.

I agree. If the others were better I'd happily see Chris and Ola dance their hearts out on Saturday, get a standing ovation at the end and wave them off, happy that they'd both done themselves proud this year. As it is, though, I find the others (all very nice people) so dull and/or messy in their dancing I don't personally see this huge gap of ability between C&O and the others that other posters seem to see.

All the remaining four couples are capable of doing a great dance. All the four remaining couples are capable of staggering through a messy routine looking like they only learnt it half an hour ago. I think it's anyone's to win - with the public, and good luck to all of them. With the judges, they've already handed out the trophy and they're not even watching the dancing any more.

I think this is so true....they think Ali or Ricky should win and they are just not working on any other outcome.

I think Bruno telling the papers that the judges had a shock to see Ricky in the dance off shows that.