I know that she's the joke contestant this year, but I really thought that giving ann a "7" was a bit of a slap in the face to the other contestants. I didn't even find it entertaining, and I think it's unfair that Ann received such a vote-winning gimmick in the first place.

On DWTS, Len only gave Jennifer Grey an eight for this great jive: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1AAazEeFfY. In what way did Ann deserve a seven for being lifted in on a harness? The actual dancing was not good and it certainly wasn't fun to watch - the novelty value has well and truly worn off.

Len giving Ann that 7 soured the show for me. It was an insult to any of the other couples who got a 7 or less (except for Peter).

Who knows what effect that 7 had on the final scoreboard and the bottom two this week?

That 7 was one of Len's worst moments.

PS Sorry to sound so serious!

Len knows that the judges marks, at this stage, are irrelevant to Ann's success. Ann's public vote share is likely to be more than enough to sail her through, no matter what score she gets.

Yeh Jimi, Tina and Michelle also got a 7 from Len this week.

If he's putting Ann in the same league as any of them he should be ashamed.

Perhaps, but I still think that the judges should mark fairly. It's up to the public to keep the poor dancers in if they want to; the judges shouldn't be fixing the scores like that. I know that it didn't really change the leaderboard on Saturday, but the mark still annoyed me.

Len's idea is to mark relative to age and ability. He is also, this season, rewarding entertainment value. Didn't he mention entertainment value before scoring Ann?

so he weights his scores so that the older and more crap you are, the more generous he is

very fair that

True.

Life is unfair.

They are not irrelevant if he fuels the fire the way Arlene did with JS. Plus he's the head judge, so he should lead by example.

PS I can't seem to stop sounding serious. I better take the dog for a walk.

I don't think that he does that in general. Ann didn't deserve a 7, even taking any so-called entertainment into account. The mark was patently unfair. Pamela, Felicity and Ann are all very different and his marks usually reflect that - Pamela is good, Felicity is average and Ann is terrible.

Len's marking can be erratic, although he usually gives bonus points to "macho" men if they have any ability whatsoever.

Well, me too.

But Len hasn't marked fairly in the past 7 seasons, what makes you think he'll start now?

See, there's a whole school of thought which says that the GBP votes to keep a contestant in if that contestant scores too low.

Now the suggestion is that the GBP votes to keep a contestant in if that contestant scores too high.

I can't help thinking that the GBP votes to keep a contestant in if they simply like that contestant.

I don't think the judges' scores affect the public vote much, if at all.


Yeah, you're scaring me now.

Who wants to bet on Len completely and stubbornly defending his 7 to Ann on ITT later

But surely as it is a dancing show excellent dancing is far more entertaining .

Are you the same j4Rose who has posted that Gavin isnt a bad dancer

I think you are absolutely right to point out how Len's 7 to Ann may have skewed the results. Remember how tight things must be with the voting in this early stage, a 7 for Ann effectively gave a bad dancer an artifical head start.

Len's 7 made absolutely no difference to the results at all. Any score between a 5 and a 9 would have resulted in Ann being in exactly the same place on the leaderboard. Len doesn't give out 4s...ever, and he certainly wouldn't have given out the first 10 of the series to that.

Now that Ann is miles behind everyone else in the competition, one judge being comparatively over-generous isn't going to make a jot of difference as long as the other 3 keep her behind everybody else. It also might lessen the tedious whinging about how the judges are all against the poor woobie contestants who can't dance as well.

No individual mark can give someone an artifical head start its their overall score that then gives them their place on the leader board and its their place on the leaderboard that is the only significant thing here. ......she was second to last and to be frank I think that was where she deserved to be because Peter was absolutely dreadful on Saturday so Len's score made absolutely no difference whatsoever. She got more public vote than Michelle who was 2 places above her on the leaderboard the 7 made no difference what so ever.

I may not agree with the 7 but it certainly had no bearing on the result this week.

Snap Monkseal

That's not the point though. It was still an anomaly and it was very unfair. I know it's primarily a light entertainment show, but scores like that make a total mockery of the whole thing.

No they dont because it made absolutely no difference.......if the mark had put her above someone else on the leaderboard then maybe but it didnt so it makes absolutely no difference to the final outcome.

Again, I view things in broader terms - it simply wasn't a fair mark to give.

I thought an 8 for that was fair enough, it didn't have enough bounce and all she seemed to do was shake her dress.

But the 7, now that was a total insult to everyone else in the competition. Maybe the producers think that's the way to get all the viewers to stop voting for her.

They've tried low-marking rubbish contestants before and everyone gives them the sympathy vote, but 7? Dear God!