Worst for me was Chris Hollins.

I didn't mind Tom winning though he wasn't my favourite. He could dance a variety of dances well and did improve through the show. I wasn't an Austin fan so maybe that helps

It depends if you consider worst winner in terms of who you think should have won that year, or by comparison to the winners of the other years. For instance, I would rate Chris as second worst winner ever, but I think he was the right person to win that year. On the other side of the coin, I thought Rachel should have won instead of Tom, but I think he's the best male winner across the seven series.

You cannot separate the celeb from partner, nor the victory from the circumstances. Below is the Strictly Virtual Championship, a rematch across space and time. You can nominate any dance you like, but all 7 have to do the same dance. Then give your marks and nationwide phone vote -- and reasons why regardless of Strictly rules your nomination deserves to be Champion of Champions. And who is the worst

Natasha & Brendan -
Jill & Darren Bennett -
Darren Gough & Lilia -
Mark Ramprakash & Karen -
Alesha & Matthew Cutler -
Tom Chambers & Camilla -
Chris Hollins & Ola -

Worst ever.


We have had quite a few no hopers, but imho never one as bombastic and useless as Nellie.

Sorry, I did misunderstand the question, so my answer is Darren Gough.

Chris Hollins. I still have to pinch myself sometimes and remind my brain that he actually won this dancing competition. It's crazy but it happened. He was never more than average. He was this year's Patsy and Gavin combined and yet somehow, he won it. Even just on entertainment and personality (of which he had none in my view) I don't understand it but there you go.

Tom Chambers.

He got MARRIED, after all!

Soulmate - what is the significance of the names in Italics? Are they your overall winners or less favoured?

Really? I wouldn't have guessed that from the way they played it down during the series

Tom Chambers definitely

No reason.
With 7 parallel lines I thought italics would give some separation for readability. I shall try to edit out the italics if still in time.

I can hardly remember Natasha and never saw Jill so cannot nominate the winner.

One dance which still rankles with me is Mark's quickstep. He evidently could not dance on tiptoe to save his life. Just to get past the round world-class Karen allowed Mark to dance his own invention of quickstep which was basically tanks on manoevres, with his feet sliding on the floor, never losing contact with the floor. Whatever else he did, I nominate the quickstep as Championship Decider.

Marks gets a disqualification. The winner of the quickstep? Probably Jill or Alesha.

For me the Gough, no question

Ah thanks I was looking for some reasoning that wasn't there in terms of champions of champions

I wouldn't have said Darren Gough.. he was a good dancer, and it wasn't a complete travesty when he won. Natasha Kaplinsky wasn't great by more recent standards, but she just about deserved to win in that first year of Strictly.
I thought Tom Chambers did deserve to win on ability..but I'm probably in the minority on here with that view. So, I think Chris Hollins was the least deserving. He didn't win on any sort of dancing merit (which I'm guessing this thread is all about ?)..he just won the popularity contest.

Hmmm...I'd say Colin or Tom With a very honourable mention to Denise

Tom Chambers

His smug vicar look & always banging on about his boring wedding drove me nuts.
Also he should never have been in the final.

The couple won the popularity contest. The public adored Ola and the chemistry between the two, adopting the couple.

Lilia with Chris would not have won in that way, although have to remember the fantastic samba Lilia did with Matt Dawson, going native with a red headress.

no that you're bias or rigging this is any way

I agree. She wuz robbed!

Didn't much like Darren Gough either.

I don't think any of the winners have been undeserving.

I disagree. Tom and Camilla managed to produce a couple of outstanding routines..so he had more in his "locker" when it came to the final. Rachel was very good, better than Tom if you take all the dances into consideration, but her best performances didn't have the "wow factor".
Lisa Snowden was vastly over-rated in my opinion, Austin Healey should have been the third contestant in the final.

Same here. Awful bunch! *shudders*

[quote=RichmondBlue;46123906]I wouldn't have said Darren Gough.. he was a good dancer, and it wasn't a complete travesty when he won. Natasha Kaplinsky wasn't great by more recent standards, but she just about deserved to win in that first year of Strictly.
I thought Tom Chambers did deserve to win on ability..but I'm probably in the minority on here with that view. So, I think Chris Hollins was the least deserving. He didn't win on any sort of dancing merit (which I'm guessing this thread is all about ?)..he just won the popularity contest.[/QUOTE]

Everyone wins on popularity! Even the best dancer in the world won't win if they are not popular.

Tom Chambers was dull ?..he was in the same series as Rachel Stevens. A very pretty girl, but totally devoid of any personality whatsoever !

It has to be Chris Hollins. I liked him, and his partnership with Ola, but they were the first winners that for me, were just not good enough to get the glitter-ball. Tom and Darren both won over stronger dancers, but on the whole were still perfectly acceptable as winners. Chris I just found slightly above your average celebrity, albeit with a great partnership and fun personality.

I think Darren, Mark and Natasha. I think now neither of them would go far in the competition.

Alesha was overated. Not sure how people think she was that good! Kara is better.

The best dancer was Jill - a complete natural.