Originally Posted by swnymor1963:
“Just about sums it up really.....I really do wonder what all the fuss is about....For example how many times has the best dancer actually won Strictly.
Series 1...Natasha yes
Series 2...Jill yes
Series 3...Darren...no
Series 4... Mark ?? Was he technically better than Emma Bunton..umm...Possibly not
Series 5...Alesha yes..but only by a whisker...I personally thought Matt was better than Alesha in the final...but she was more consistent over the series
Series 6...Tom..No...Rachel was technically better...and many would argue that Austin was better than Tom as well
Series 7...???It ain`t over until the fat lady sings.”
Im not a Chris hater whatsoever (he's been my desired runner up since Jade left) but I have to say, he would easily be the weakest winner if and when he wins. I think what has people so riled about it is, even in the past when the better dancers havent won, the winner has always been strong anyway.
Darren was easily the weakest in the final 3, but certainly was one of the top 3 that year.
I personally think Mark was only slightly worse than Emma, as much as I wanted her to win. He was second best that year imo.
Tom wasnt as good as Rachel, but again deserved to be in the final. I personally prefered him dancing than Austin, so i'd call him the second best dancer.
Chris on the other hand is probably the fifth best celeb this year behind Ali, Ricky W, Jade and Zoe. Potentially even Laila if she had gotten a different pro, but from what she got, id say Chris is better than her.
Im not a Chris hater, dont let me stress that enough. I like a bit of Cola