I agree bring it back at least it gives the better of the bottom 2 the ability to surrvive
Bring Back the Dance Off
2 of 3
The dance-off was a good bit of drama in the spirit of giving couples a second chance. What I don't like is the silly fag-end results show on a Sunday which loses the momentum in order to "compete" against some irrelevant pleb programme I would never watch on The Other Side.
If the judges are tied, I'd prefer the viewers vote was used to decide, because the judges are saying they are both equal as dancers.
Leave the dance off in the bin (where it belongs) and have a very short results show later on on Saturday night.
Originally Posted by fatskia:
“If the judges are tied, I'd prefer the viewers vote was used to decide, because the judges are saying they are both equal as dancers.”
“If the judges are tied, I'd prefer the viewers vote was used to decide, because the judges are saying they are both equal as dancers.”
I bet we would have got many many 2-2 votes from the judges though, the last one not wanting to be the one to ditch the losing couple!
I disagree really because the viewers are voting for the ones they want to watch. If more paying viewers wanted to watch better dancers then the better dancers would stay in. The people who pay to pick up their phones to vote deserve to have the power to decide who stays in imo.
I never phone in to vote so I can't moan one way or the other
I never wanted to get rid of the dance off. Last weeks results show proved that it was a mistake not to have it. It was 30 minutes of my life I will never get back and I won't be making that mistake again.
Originally Posted by Lorelei Lee:
“Yes to the second bit, but no to the first - a crappy salsa and reliance on his 'guns' cost Austin his place in the final”
“Yes to the second bit, but no to the first - a crappy salsa and reliance on his 'guns' cost Austin his place in the final
”
Hey you
The Salsa wasn't that bad! And Lisa's Jive that week wasn't great.
Overall, Austin was the better dancer and if it had come down to viewer votes alone, I think he'd have advanced.
Instead, Lisa & Brendan got to play their trump card by dancing the Waltz. It's was all a bit a of a lottery with the dance off at times. I might have been more in favour of the dance off if couples were forced to dance their weaker dance again the later stages to see who could improve the most.
Originally Posted by SG-1:
“Except that means moronic contestants like AW or Paul Daniels stay at the cost of those that do have an ability to improve all thanks to the barmy army of voters who want to keep Ann and Paul in for so called entertainment.
The biggest flaw with the dance off was that Len had too much power if the vote was split,there should be no such thing as a leading judge.”
“Except that means moronic contestants like AW or Paul Daniels stay at the cost of those that do have an ability to improve all thanks to the barmy army of voters who want to keep Ann and Paul in for so called entertainment.
The biggest flaw with the dance off was that Len had too much power if the vote was split,there should be no such thing as a leading judge.”
Well Strictly is an entertainment show, so if people want to see more of Anne and Paul then that's up to them. Nothing 'barmy' about it.
See how it goes this year and if there is a farce with Anne W. or similar getting too far in the competition bring it back next year. Of course there is no guarantee that two of the better contestants won't end up facing each other in it (viz. Gabby/Penny and Ali/Zoe) but at least there is a chance for the judges to preserve better dancers so that we can enjoy them. I mean, are John Sergeant and Anne Widdicombe really so entertaining that we want to go on watching them - I think not !
Also, apart from anything else The DO makes the results show more exciting.
Also, apart from anything else The DO makes the results show more exciting.
What happened with Austin is the reason why I'm glad the dance-off is gone. I feel sorry for Goldie, but thems-the-rules.
Originally Posted by Richwood:
“See how it goes this year and if there is a farce with Anne W. or similar getting too far in the competition bring it back next year. Of course there is no guarantee that two of the better contestants won't end up facing each other in it (viz. Gabby/Penny and Ali/Zoe) but at least there is a chance for the judges to preserve better dancers so that we can enjoy them. I mean, are John Sergeant and Anne Widdicombe really so entertaining that we want to go on watching them - I think not !
Also, apart from anything else The DO makes the results show more exciting.”
“See how it goes this year and if there is a farce with Anne W. or similar getting too far in the competition bring it back next year. Of course there is no guarantee that two of the better contestants won't end up facing each other in it (viz. Gabby/Penny and Ali/Zoe) but at least there is a chance for the judges to preserve better dancers so that we can enjoy them. I mean, are John Sergeant and Anne Widdicombe really so entertaining that we want to go on watching them - I think not !
Also, apart from anything else The DO makes the results show more exciting.”
Ahhh but this is the problem. What if Ann goes a long way into the competition but before she does get knocked out she's never in the bottom two? That way the dance off still wouldn't have helped as Ann would never have been in the dance off anyway.
Yes it might have helped Goldie this week as he was the better dancer, but it doesn't mean the bad dancer will ever be knocked into the bottom two until the voting public who like them either decide its time to let them go or just get bored of them. The dance off never actually prevented any of the weaker dancers from advancing as the reason they advanced was they had enough votes from the public to stay away from the dance off. Yes it stopped one or two going through but someone like Ann would carry on happily for a while with or without a dance off.
Ohhh all right then Sid, it wasn't *that* bad, but it wasn't good. I always thought that Erin's Latin ability was what held Austin back from competition with Tom and Rachel anyway, but I've been shouted down on this before 
I would also like to point out that the week Austin was up against Lisa in the dance off that Brendan deliberately concentrated on the Ballroom dance at the expense of their Latin so that he had a really good dance incase they were in the dance off and he said he was doing this on ITT .Austin unfortunately underwhelmed in his American Smooth and had to rely on his Salsa.....in otherwords he had one bad week and was gone even though I am pretty darn sure that under the current system it would have been Lisa gone.
Originally Posted by Jan2555*GG*:
“I would also like to point out that the week Austin was up against Lisa in the dance off that Brendan deliberately concentrated on the Ballroom dance at the expense of their Latin so that he had a really good dance incase they were in the dance off and he said he was doing this on ITT .Austin unfortunately underwhelmed in his American Smooth and had to rely on his Salsa.....in otherwords he had one bad week and was gone even though I am pretty darn sure that under the current system it would have been Lisa gone.”
“I would also like to point out that the week Austin was up against Lisa in the dance off that Brendan deliberately concentrated on the Ballroom dance at the expense of their Latin so that he had a really good dance incase they were in the dance off and he said he was doing this on ITT .Austin unfortunately underwhelmed in his American Smooth and had to rely on his Salsa.....in otherwords he had one bad week and was gone even though I am pretty darn sure that under the current system it would have been Lisa gone.”
Absolutely. I always thought they should have to do their weaker dance in the dance off to stop couples concentrating on one dance more than the other in the two dance stage.
I really believe the dance off makes sense in the early weeks, maybe up to the start of the two dance stage, so that
1. The judges do get the chance to veto any seriously daft results whereby we lose people with real potential such as Goldie, Gabby and Spoony right at the start just because they haven't got an automatic backing from a typical Strictly voting audience so they don't get any calls. What you could call voter apathy. Whereas, they have serious potential so if they can survive a few early weeks the audience can get to know them a bit any may well start to support them as a result of the talent they have actually shown - and
2. The results show actually has some substance
However, the old arrangement definitely gave Len too much say. In the case of a tie within the judges it should go back to the public vote result.
Also it can't go on too far into the show otherwise the judges start to get to veto actual public preference for one dancer over another which is completely not on.
Oooer - just realised, according to my theory there's not much point in sigining up for the show if your name rhymes with the title, or maybe more realistically, if you make your career as a DJ or mainly on the radio!!!
1. The judges do get the chance to veto any seriously daft results whereby we lose people with real potential such as Goldie, Gabby and Spoony right at the start just because they haven't got an automatic backing from a typical Strictly voting audience so they don't get any calls. What you could call voter apathy. Whereas, they have serious potential so if they can survive a few early weeks the audience can get to know them a bit any may well start to support them as a result of the talent they have actually shown - and
2. The results show actually has some substance
However, the old arrangement definitely gave Len too much say. In the case of a tie within the judges it should go back to the public vote result.
Also it can't go on too far into the show otherwise the judges start to get to veto actual public preference for one dancer over another which is completely not on.
Oooer - just realised, according to my theory there's not much point in sigining up for the show if your name rhymes with the title, or maybe more realistically, if you make your career as a DJ or mainly on the radio!!!
Originally Posted by milmol:
“I disagree really because the viewers are voting for the ones they want to watch. If more paying viewers wanted to watch better dancers then the better dancers would stay in. The people who pay to pick up their phones to vote deserve to have the power to decide who stays in imo.
I never phone in to vote so I can't moan one way or the other”
“I disagree really because the viewers are voting for the ones they want to watch. If more paying viewers wanted to watch better dancers then the better dancers would stay in. The people who pay to pick up their phones to vote deserve to have the power to decide who stays in imo.
I never phone in to vote so I can't moan one way or the other
”
Totally agree with you milmol.
I rarely get to watch it live (usually working) so I don't vote.
The 'judges' have had their say, so I think the public should decide who stays by voting for them.
I think the dance-off should be brought back.Goldie woud have been saved over Peter & we'll probably have that happening for a few weeks with the better dancer going.
Originally Posted by welsh ex pat:
“I really believe the dance off makes sense in the early weeks, maybe up to the start of the two dance stage, so that
1. The judges do get the chance to veto any seriously daft results whereby we lose people with real potential such as Goldie, Gabby and Spoony right at the start just because they haven't got an automatic backing from a typical Strictly voting audience”
“I really believe the dance off makes sense in the early weeks, maybe up to the start of the two dance stage, so that
1. The judges do get the chance to veto any seriously daft results whereby we lose people with real potential such as Goldie, Gabby and Spoony right at the start just because they haven't got an automatic backing from a typical Strictly voting audience”
Gabby was in series 5 and was eliminated in a dance off against Penny Lancaster who went also in a dance off quite soon after......under the current system Gabby might have been safe as she may have got more votes that Penny but we have no idea.
Originally Posted by welsh ex pat:
“I really believe the dance off makes sense in the early weeks, maybe up to the start of the two dance stage, so that
1. The judges do get the chance to veto any seriously daft results whereby we lose people with real potential such as Goldie, Gabby and Spoony right at the start just because they haven't got an automatic backing from a typical Strictly voting audience so they don't get any calls. What you could call voter apathy. Whereas, they have serious potential so if they can survive a few early weeks the audience can get to know them a bit any may well start to support them as a result of the talent they have actually shown”
“I really believe the dance off makes sense in the early weeks, maybe up to the start of the two dance stage, so that
1. The judges do get the chance to veto any seriously daft results whereby we lose people with real potential such as Goldie, Gabby and Spoony right at the start just because they haven't got an automatic backing from a typical Strictly voting audience so they don't get any calls. What you could call voter apathy. Whereas, they have serious potential so if they can survive a few early weeks the audience can get to know them a bit any may well start to support them as a result of the talent they have actually shown”
Gabby left after a dance off though.
People were power voting Kate/Anton and Kenny/Ola out of the bottom 2 leaving the mid-tablers even more vunerable.
I don't miss it yet, but as soon as a great dancer goes out over a really bad one then i'll be calling for it to be reinstated aswell!
If the dance off actually got rid of the worst dancers rather than making the judges choose between better dancers it might be worth keeping. However it has never managed it yet. The voting public choose for entertainment. The judges choose for dancing. Sometimes these are one and the same. However it is very rare the judges favourite wins in either selection process.
Originally Posted by petertard:
“I miss it.”
“I miss it.”
Really, no, please don't! Best change the show made! Now we need to plead with them to reinstate the last eliminee if Tina drops out, so we still have a three couple final.
Originally Posted by Scattyjan:
“Really, no, please don't! Best change the show made! Now we need to plead with them to reinstate the last eliminee if Tina drops out, so we still have a three couple final.”
“Really, no, please don't! Best change the show made! Now we need to plead with them to reinstate the last eliminee if Tina drops out, so we still have a three couple final.”
We will anyway, unless Ann drops out as well and, according to reports she's not going to. Or unless someone else comes down with chicken pox, too. Wasn't the plan for a double-elimination in the semi-final unless someone drops out?
Originally Posted by memmh:
“We will anyway, unless Ann drops out as well and, according to reports she's not going to. Or unless someone else comes down with chicken pox, too. Wasn't the plan for a double-elimination in the semi-final unless someone drops out?”
“We will anyway, unless Ann drops out as well and, according to reports she's not going to. Or unless someone else comes down with chicken pox, too. Wasn't the plan for a double-elimination in the semi-final unless someone drops out?”
They actually planned that far ahead?! Excellent news! Whoop whoop!!
2 of 3
