These were from Ultimate Strictly:

* James Jordan is on the same level as Ian Waite - they've both taken part in 6 series, they've danced the same amount of dances (46), and scored the same amount of points (1450) so both have the same average (31.52).

* Out of the current pros, only Anton, Katya and Robin have never got a 10 for any dance

* Out of the ones who have done the full 9 series, Brendan has done the best - he has an average of 28.57, compared to Erin's 27.83 and Anton's 23.32

* This is comparing pros who have done the same amount of series (based on average score):

1 series - Pasha has done best, Hazel Newberry worst
2 series - Artem has done best, Paul Killick worst
3 series - Aliona has done best, Nicole Cutler worst (there's a mistake on the site as it says that Aliona has done 4 series when she's only done 3)
4 series - Karen Hardy has done best, Kristina worst
5 series - Matthew Cutler is the only one who's done 5 series
6 series - James/Ian Waite have done best, Ola worst
* No-one has done 7 or 8 series *
9 series - Brendan has done best, Anton worst

* The pros with the most perfect scores are James and Brendan with 3 each

* The pro with the most 10s is Natalie, followed by Aliona and then Vincent

* Of the current pros who have achieved a 10, only Artem and Erin have never had a perfect 40.

* Ola has done 2 more dances than James (48 to 46), but has a much lower average (26.85 compared to 31.52) - this is also true of Vincent (49 dances, average of 30.78)


With all the current speculation about James and Ola potentially being axed next year - based on this, they'd be mad to lose James (of the current pros only Katya and Anton are below Ola in terms of average).

interesting. however, although all of these statistics are true, it all depends on the celebrity.

True, but everything averages out in the end - that's why I did the comparison based on how many series they'd done, so we can see who has had good/not so good celebs.

Aliona and Natalie have had around the same calibre of celeb, as have Flavia and Ola.

I have to say, although James and Vincent aren't my favourite pros, they're doing pretty well to average above 30 considering they've done 6 series.

If you look at it like this (categories of excellent, good, average and poor; excellent being top 3, good extending to top 7, average to top 10, and poor to top 14 based on a 14 person series so earlier series with less people are on a different scale, but purely based on where the celeb finished):

Artem - 1 excellent (Kara) 1 good (Holly)
Aliona - 2 excellent (Harry, Matt) 1 poor (Rav)
Brendan - 2 excellent (Natasha, Lisa), 2 good (Claire, Kelly) 5 average (Sarah, Fiona, Jo, Michelle, Lulu)
Anton - 1 excellent (Laila), 2 good (Ann, Patsy), 3 average (Kate, Jan, Esther), 2 poor (Nancy, Gillian)
Erin - 3 excellent (Austin, Colin, Julian), 2 good (Ricky, Peter Schmeichel), 3 poor (Rory, Peter Shilton, Willie)
Flavia - 1 excellent (Matt), 3 average (Russell, Jimi, Craig), 2 poor (Phil, Jimmy)
James - 1 excellent (Pamela), 2 good (Alex, Cherie), 2 average (Zoe, Georgina), 1 poor (Gabby)
Katya - 2 good (Gavin, Phil),1 poor (Dan)
Kristina - 1 excellent (Jason), 1 good (John) 1 average (Joe), 1 poor (Goldie)
Natalie - 1 excellent (Ricky), 1 good (Scott), 1 average (Audley)
Ola - 1 excellent (Chris), 2 good (Robbie, Kenny), 1 average (Andrew), 2 poor (Paul, Spoony)
Pasha - 1 excellent (Chelsee)
Robin - 2 good (Anita, Patsy)
Vincent - 1 excellent (Rachel) 2 good (Natalie, Louisa), 1 average (Felicity) 2 poor (Edwina, Stephanie)

Obv some of them should be higher/lower.

But then you have to take into context the celebrities relevant talent. While he finished in an excellent position; Chris was not an excellent dancer. To be honest, Ola has been given a bunch of average dancers at best (though Kenny and Paul were poor while Andrew didn't suit her at all due to height differences) so it's no wonder her averages look low in comparison to others.

That's just an example; other professionals have this issue as well. It's not just down to pure stats; they'd be mad to lose James for his high scores, but they'd be mad to lose Ola as she has an ability of getting contestants to gel with the public (bar her first series) - even Andrew Castle managed to at least as far he could; he was clearly the worst dancer by quite a way come his exit.

Sorry, I know this is kind of obvious.

Out of interest (bearing in mind this can also skew results because age isn't the only factor), the average age (to compare with those statistics above) is:

(From highest to lowest)

Robin 52
Anton 48.5
Kristina 47.5
Flavia 45.3
Erin 44.5
Ola 43.8
Vincent 43.7
James 41.5
Brendan 39.8
Katya 36.7
Natalie 35.7
Aliona 30
Artem 28
Pasha 23

This doesn't really show much except that to compare Erin, Anton and Brendan may be a little unfair as Brendan's average age of celeb is much younger. However, I'd also take exception to the method (i.e. finishing position) of classifying celeb. James (just to take one example ) has had two fairly young, fit celebs with a bit of ability to say the least (Gabby Logan and Zoe Lucker) and they've both gone out significantly sooner than they should have done. So to classify Kelly Brook as merely "good" for Brendan but Julian as excellent for Erin does a miscarriage of justice to Erin because no way should Julian be classed as excellent. Likewise, although Brendan may have had Kelly "underrated", to rate Jo Wood as "average" when Gabby Logan rates "poor" for James is also cuckoo.

Young celebs can be quite rubbish (Georgina Bouzova, Chris Parker) and older ones pretty decent (Pamela Stephenson, Cherie Lunghi). Those that one would think (from their background) would be okay can underperform (Michelle Williams, Gabby Logan). Others that really should be out very early can get public support (John Sergeant, Ann Widdecombe). There's no scientific formula that can work things out here.

Spoony deserves to be in the at least average section. He got 27 for the two dances he did. 3 sevens is hardly poor...

But you can't use this to compare the professionals, because a lot of "where they finished" is down to the popularity of the celeb as well. For example Chris Hollins was definitely not in the top 3 dancers in his series. Had it not been for his Charleston and Jade's injury, I don't even think he would've made it to the final.

You forgot Lesley (I think it was Lesley) from Series 1. She finished 3rd so Anton has 2 excellent

The statistics are interesting, but kind of meaningless.

I did think it was unfair that Artem got Holly this year and Aliona got Harry - it was as though the producers were trying to replicate the year before, as they were the best 2 celebs on paper. I hope they both get duds next year. Katya and other pros have had to put up with enough crap partners.

For stats to identify a reliable stable trend rather than a blip, large numbers are required.
Has anyone added up average mark through the competition by gender?

for... male celebs (i.e. for female pro dancers) ?
for female celebs (i.e.....for male pro dancers) ?

Traditionally men start off lower, then catch up.
Week 1 marks really separated women and men champions:

27 - Natasha
27- Jill
31 - Alesha
30 - Kara

19 - Darren Gough
27 - Mark Ramprakash
28 - Tom Chambers
26 - Chris Hollins
28 - Harry Judd

Source - http://www.ultimatestrictly.com/

No doubt A & A got good celebs again. But for the first 3 weeks I had Jason down as the best celeb by far.

The irony of those statistics is that some of the most successful dancers in the competitive arena, Hazel Newberry, Paul Killick and Nicole Cutler have not done so well on Strictly So possibly a lot of it is all down to the luck of the draw, but it also seems that you don't have to be at the top of your career and a brilliant dancer to do well on the show.

To all those who quoted my second post:

I did say it was "purely based on where the celeb finished" and that obviously some of them should be higher/lower (for example Gabby and Zoe, I don't agree that they were "poor" dancers, but rather that they finished in a "poor" position).

If you think of the categories as relating to positions, then it might seem a bit better, plus I did have to reset the boundaries for whenever we didn't have a 14-couple series (of which there were a few).

What it does say though is that Katya and Robin are the only professionals who haven't managed to get a celeb to the top 3 - this might be because they were unlucky with their celebs, although seeing as they've finished well in 2 series each (I'd say Katya did well to get Gavin and Phil so far, and the same goes for Robin with Patsy, and Anita to a lesser extent).

Using that for James and Ola, they've both had a mix of results. They've both had a few shock exits, although I'd say James has had a higher calibre of celeb which is why his average is much higher than Ola's. They both seem to get something out of every celeb, but I think James' choreography is better.

I'd say for the next series (if they're all still there):
Artem and Aliona need "average" or "poor" contestants
Brendan needs a "good" celeb
Anton - whatever, but a "good"ish celeb might be interesting
Erin - an "average", she's had a fair few good ones
Flavia - a "good" celeb
James - either extreme
Katya - an "excellent"
Kristina - "good" or "average"
Natalie - "good" or "average"
Ola - "average" or "poor"
Pasha - "average" or "poor"
Robin - an "excellent"
Vincent - "good" or "average"

Either way, Robin and Katya need potential finalists, whilst Aliona, Artem and Pasha all need duds or average celebs. Anton it doesn't matter. Brendan needs a good one, Erin an average/good, as does Kristina. Flavia needs a good one, as does Vincent. James needs an average one, as does Natalie, and Ola needs a good one.

I think that Katya, Robin, Vincent and Flavia need to have potential finalists dancers.Pasha needs to have an "average" or" ok" dancer(and Im sure he will get that dancer very far in the comp)
I think its bit unfair that Aliona and Artem got 2 good dancers in a row.They both deserve duds for the years to come.
Anton cant win this show especially when his Latin is so dire so maybe he can only get "joke" contestants.
What I find interesting is how the Jordans manage to get their celebs very far in the competition especially when those celebs are "ok" or "average dancer.IMO, they are the pros who do very well with "average" dancers.

Both Jordans do not showcase themselves overshadowing their celebs. Assigned choreography within their ability, their celebs relaxed, endearing themselves to the public.

This was the case with Kenny Logan partnering Ola. Gabby Logan, partnering James Jordan, was the one in the partnership who pushed too hard, provoking disapproval from some viewers. This season the Jordans did it again, with Robbie and Alex finishing 6th and 5th. If the Jordans are ditched, the record suggests Strictly will be poorer.

For me:

I really think Ola deserves a potential winner as the only one she had (Spoony) left too early which wasn't really her fault. James could do with a poor celebrity just to see if he's matured after his professional relationship with Georgina.

Artem and Aliona need average or poor celebrities to see how they can cope (Artem especially would be interesting considering his attitude towards Holly).

Vincent and Flavia (especially) deserve decent celebrities to showcase their talents again after a quiet period with poorer dances.

Anton deserves a good celebrity but will his latin stand up to it? Erin also deserves a decent dancer; she hasn't really had one since Austin.

Katya and Robin should get the top celebs if possible as they've not been dealt a kind card so far.

Pasha should get a poor celeb to test him totally while Kristina probably deserves an average dancer at least - yes, she got third place this year but think about what came before!

Brendan should be given a good dancer considering who he's had in the past few years (though maybe Michelle was more talented than her final position). Natalie should probably get an average dancer after two good dancers and one poor dancer (though Audley's ballroom especially was reasonable).

Ola won. But do you mean Ola deserves a contender rather than managing to get someone average (Chris Hollins) to win?

I also think Holly was average, rather than good, and Artem did an amazing job getting her as far as he did.

Finally, these stats are a bit skewed because the judges scores are skewed. Lots of the 40s weren't anywhere near deserved (Pamela, Lisa and Jason for me), whereas others never received them and should have.

It was also so much easier to get a 10 this series than it was in series 1 or 2. The scoring has got higher year on year even with this relatively poor bunch just so judges and producers can convince us that the current series was the "best ever"

Well, in the first 3 weeks, Jason averaged 33.7, while Harry was 29.3 and Chelsee was 28.7. There were 12 dances up to and including the semi-final, which can be divided into 4 groups of 3 dances, and the full picture is as follows:

Harry and Aliona: 29.3 34 36.7 38

Chelsee and Pasha: 28.7 34.7 35 38.3

Jason and Kristina: 33.7 30.7 35.3 37

Jason's fall from grace in the second quarter was down to poor Paso and Rumba performances.

Those stats are interesting, enjoyed reading that

It's nice to say "this pro should get a good celeb and that pro should get the joke one", but what's not to say the celeb who on paper should be one of the best dancers turns out to be completely hopeless and goes out in the first few weeks?

Saying that, I think Artem should get the "crap/joke" one next year just to see how he copes, even though I like him.

Personally I think Ola should get a chance to show what she can do with someone who's got natural rhythm. It doesn't necessarily have to be a standout likely winner such as Harry, but maybe someone of Holly's calibre who can dance but isn't necessarily the most popular talented contestant in the series...

Assuming the pro lineup stays the same next year, I'd give the 'contenders' to Katya, Flavia and Ola (in that order, so Katya getting the Harry-type best male), the mid-range of ability to Kristina and Natalie and the duds to Erin and Aliona.

On the male side, contenders to Brendan, Robin and Vincent, mid-range to Pasha and James, duds to Artem and Anton.

Yes, they all may look good on paper, but turn out to be useless and unable to improve. I'd be pleased if they were in with a chance by being under 30, as I'm not a fan of the 60 + celebs I'm afraid. If Artem and Aliona don't get the oldies next year I'll be furious.

It would be interesting to discount the highest scoring celeb and the lowest scoring celeb from each of the pros who have done more than 2 series. This would, for example, take the real duffer of Fiona Phillips and the overmarked Lisa Snowdon out of the equation for Brendan; Georgina & Pamela for James. It might help eliminate some of the more extreme cases of overmarking/exceptionally talented/untalented etc that skew the results.

Indeed Ola hasn't had anyone very good and has more than her share of weak people since she managed to win with someone good. James tends to get good or middle of the people while Vincent has been lumbered with weak dancers after a couple of successes but no wins. Thats all reflected in their stats and its based on who they got.Ola is good at what most of this years semifinalists were not - developing a style and humour- and she's at least as good at developing vote winning TV friendly routines - we need to see what she could do with someone who could actually dance well too.

I can see that in principle this might go some way to making the statistics fairer but it really doesn't. It might only do so for those pros who have done at least 6 series. For Aliona and Natalie for instance, it simply removes Rav and Audley and leaves them with two gooduns (particularly in Aliona's case). Likewise, removing Ann for Anton isn't particularly an advantage when you consider he still has to count Esther Rantzen, Jan Ravens, Kate Garraway and Nancy. Even with those who have done 6 series it isn't that fair - with James for example, you leave him with Alex, Zoe, Cherie and Gabby (where in at least 2 cases he should have done better although his average score is still good), Flavia meanwhile might get rid of Jimmy Tarbuck but she keeps Phil Daniels and Craig Kelly, while the only real scorer she has is Matt di Angelo who goes, leaving her with very little.

Basically the statistics show that some pros have had a much better deal than others. The recent ones have had a better deal (at least in terms of scores) than the earlier ones (who have had a rough deal in later series when the scoring has been generally higher). James has had a string of possible contenders while his wife has had naff all yet overall she's probably done at least as well as he has in terms of overall position.

You need to look at the celeb and the pro and consider - should the celeb have gone out earlier or got further and then consider if that result was down (at least in part possibly) to the pro dancer. And even then you get results skewed by the dance off series - Lisa's great scores may not even have happened had there not been a dance off.

It's pretty obvious that the age old saying isn't too far off the mark here - "there are lies, damned lies and statistics".