I make no apology for continuing to bang on about this topic. For the average follower of SCD it isn't only about whether or not he/she likes or dislikes a particular performance. I and many others rely upon the four judges to point out deficiencies in the performance which wouldn't be obvious to the untrained eye. This insight into the quality of the performance makes a big difference to me. And as I pointed out in the 'wool over our eyes' post - if the judges have been deceiving us on the quality of the performances I believe that this should be out in the open. It will certainly cause me to view this year's competition in an entirely different light.

I've started a new thread because a number of individuals seem intent upon muddying the waters. My argument stands or falls on the quality of Harry's Charleston. I've included links to five Charlestons to that anybody interested can more-easily recognise what the judges consider to be a high quality performance.

A number of helpful individuals have suggested that I take this up directly with the BBC. I'm not hopeful that, if my assumptions are indeed correct, the BBC would simply come clean.

The following is from the excellent UltimateStrictly web site (thanks Claire) -

CHARLESTON

The Dance

Synonymous with the 1920s, the Charleston became a popular dance craze, made famous by Josephine Baker who performed it as a solo at the Folies Bergère, Paris, in 1926, and is associated with flappers - the most daring of young women who cut their hair into bobs, cut the skirts short and listened to jazz music! Horrifying the establishment with its daring move and exuberance, it was even banned in some dance halls.

The dance should be full of bounce, and expect lots of flicks, kicks and shaking of hips! It requires the dancers to show bags of character, with a rebellious nature and unexpected steps. Expect to see lots of crossing motions, scissor steps with the legs and swivels in the ankles.

The judges will be looking for good arm and leg co-ordination, great choreography, and a fun, entertaining performance.

The girls will be in 1920s inspired flapper dresses, with plenty of fringing and possibly drop waisted, while the boys will probably be wearing spats on their feet and either a sharp suit or a shirt and waistcoat.

http://www.ultimatestrictly.com/charleston/

In the 2011 semi-final the judges were due to critique two Charlestons where the professional partners had taken a huge risk in departing from the traditional format for the dance. Note Bruno's comment to Artem to the effect that it was the first time he'd ever seen a contemporary Charleston.

But arguably of far more relevance are Craig's comments, given how specific he was when he savaged Alex's performance with regard to what he expects to see. When offering his analysis of Holly's performance he likened a non-standard Charleston to Marmite - "Either you love it or you hate it".

The judges would likely have either seen, or received feedback upon, the Charlestons of both Holly and Harry from the dress rehearsal. I suspect that Craig, and probably Len, considered Harry's Charleston on a par with that of Alex - and that this is the explanation for the omission of the section where the judges would normally have delivered their analysis of Harry's performance. Had Craig savaged Harry's performance as he did that of Alex it would surely have made it difficult for the judges to award 39 for the dance.

It was the first dance of ten that evening. I saw nothing before that which could have caused them to be running late against the timed program schedule. Had they indeed been running late I suspect that the teleprompter would have been telling Bruce to leave that long-winded joke for later and to go straight to the judges' analysis. What else could account for such an unprecedented departure from the format we've come to expect?

Simple question: Would Craig have loved Harry's non-standard Charleston - or would he have hated it?

Charlestons -

Chelsee - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFQwxwPTF8E

Alex - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZZr0BG0TtA

Jason - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAP3I_7CQfU

Holly - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEn_koM3agk

Harry - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X21Ug5YVWs

p.s. Were it not for the mix-up between Chelsee and Pasha when he took her coat which threw them out of sync for a few bars I would argue that their dance would have been a strong contender for the best-ever SCD Charleston. Look at the amount of time she spends on one leg at one point, and what she does whilst on one leg. She delivered that performance as early as Week 6 - how many celebrities in the history of SCD could have handled choreography as difficult as that which Pasha routinely gave Chelsee?

Interesting to note that although Claire has updated that UltimateStrictly page to list Harry and Aliona's dance at the top of the initial section of stats, she has declined to comment upon the performance itself. Why is that ringing a bell?

Link to the 'wool over our eyes' post -

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1609242

You seriously need to get a new hobby.

Very interesting stuff about the Charleston which I enjoyed. Thank-you.

However, I do think that you are making one incredibly big assumption and that is that the viewers vote on the quality of the dance/judges critique. I don't think they do, although I wish they did. If they did Tom Chambers would never have charmed his way to the top and the appalling Chris Hollins wouldn't have been anywhere near the final.

As a matter of interest - considering penelopesimpson's observation, do you still consider Tom Chambers to be the worse winner in SCD history?

Harry's wasn't a non-standard Charleston though, so what are you getting at?
It had most of the typical Charleston moves, he just didn't gurn throughout it. Also for me the music wasn't the best choice, but about from that it was a standard Charleston.

Also Chelsee's isn't even close to the best ever SCD Charleston, it wasn't in sync throughout, she wasn't kicking her leg high enough throughout most of the performance and also the choreography both at the beginning in the car and also on the steps was pretty naff, and overall the Charleston choreograph definitely is not as difficult as you suggest.

Thanks for your input. You make Craig look like an amateur, considering his observation that the synchronicity was excellent throughout apart from the one mix-up to which I referred.

If we nominate you as Alesha's replacement would you consider taking the position?

I think three's a crowd with you two! Why don't you get a room?

Your posts are amusing. In small doses of course.

OMG, this is like groundhog day!

In case anyone is not familiar with the film, the same things happen over and over again, just like this thread........

I do not make that assumption.

The final which Tom Chambers won worked as I would expect it to. In the first part of the final Lisa Snowden was awarded a combined 80 for her two dances. Has that ever happened before or since? Not often, I suspect.

So the judges were honest in their comments and marking, putting us in the optimum position to decide which of the finalists had developed the greatest expertise over the course of the competition.

But as the final is decided by the Public, Lisa was eliminated and Tom went through.

Everything was as it should be. My personal opinion, for what it's worth, is that having made the final two Tom was a deserved winner by virtue of the excellence of his show dance.

Try comparing the amount of dancing Tom does with the amount of dancing Harry did in his. Harry seemed to spend most of his time lifting Aliona. If the lifts were clean it might have counted for something, but Craig pointed out that the transitions were flawed.

All I ask is that the judges deliver an honest analysis of the performances, and mark them accordingly. If the Public make its decision on the basis of factors other than expertise then so be it.

Yes,but Bill Murray's character eventually learnt valuable lessons and arrived at the best approach to each situation,something I do not see happening here.

Yes I think you have a point there!

apenny4them 21:43

If the Public make its decision on the basis of factors other than expertise then so be it.

Yes, we get it, Harry was crap. It's not going to change the result now, though.

Denying that anything even remotely dodgy ever goes on is I think akin to an ability to sit watching television but not noticing that a gorilla is sitting there too , munching popcorn. It makes the word 'unobservant' seem totally inadequate.

I still haven't found my shoe - you haven't passed it anywhere?

Difficult, though, as practically every dance in the last series of SCD had less dancing than its equivalent in Tom's series. The show has changed.Its impossible to mark coherently when there are now no clear rules whats meant to be there (technique or entertainment wise ) to be marked.

The other basic feature of Harry's performances was that he wasn't an actor. Tom was. Aliona used the new rules, or the lack of them to keep Harry doing what he could and not what he couldn't. - she avoided moves he couldn't do and anything that needed acting skill. Artem and Pasha had actors, and tried to work with them in something more like the old rules - but both arguably did less well at shielding their celeb and making sure they could perform what they had been given well.

The judges are understandably confused what they are marking. They criticise some people's technique and acting, but don't consistently penalise others for successfully avoiding either. Harry benefits in the last stages, as he is judged to be entertaining, while Chelsee and Holly often get fewer marks because they struggle doing more steps. By the end, you have a whole set of odd marks being given. Holly gets great comments from Craig that he loved what she did - followed by an 8 or a 9 when everyone else is marking higher. Jason has marks thrown at him when he's in danger of not reaching the final, and to acknnowledge that relatively he probably does best in the final.. Harry gets 10s galore when it looks like he is going to win. By the end, Craig's marking has also stopped following his comments or his earlier analysis on what was missing with some people. The result is you can speculate about why anything is - it could be the needs of the tour, or going with, and justifying, the vote or anything, or nothing.

On the other hand, there's not that much to explain in the result. The biggest fanbase won. The weakest fanbase couldn't move Jason up the order to match his final performance. And the challenger, Chelsee, had too much to do to do it well enough, and needed to do much better than Harry to stand a chance of beating him.

the network babe,

Couldn't agree more about the way the professional partners choreograph the various dances so that the weaknesses of their celebs are disguised. A perfect example of this was surely Harry's Argentine Tango. When it was first performed Len didn't allow Aliona to get away with it - he actually insulted Craig for saying that there was any fire and passion in the dance, and awarded it an 8.

Then Jason (albeit in a technically-weak AT) showed us what fire and passion actually looks like.

But when Harry delivered virtually a carbon copy AT in the final Len awarded it a 10 - as he did Harry's AS despite the woeful armography which Len himself had pointed out and penalized in two of Harry's earlier dances.

There seems little doubt to me that Harry was singled out for special treatment in the latter stages of the competition - when Aliona couldn't protect him the judges did.

From the community guidelines:

perdiedumpling, re your

(Quote) Before creating a new thread please carry out a brief search to see if your contribution could be made to an existing thread. (Unquote)

Kind of you to point that out. I did indeed do the searches before creating this thread. However, the essence of my contribution here is in making readily-available the links for those five Charlestons so that others can decide for themselves the merits of my case.

Had I buried those links in another thread it would have nullified the value of posting them at all.

Be assured that I am ever mindful of delivering via my posts the optimum amount of value to you and others who use this forum.

And be sure to give my regards to the folks in the Harry and Aliona appreciation forum.

perdiedumpling,

(Quote) ... even though it wasn't enough to surpass Harry who was an ideal contender for this show, having an existing fanbase and being a pretty good dancer and crucially live performer ... (Unquote)

Having just come across the example above I'm thinking of awarding a prize to the individual here who has demonstrated the greatest capacity for being blinkered as to Harry's deficiencies as a dancer.

Good idea? I'm kicking around the idea of some sort of wooden statue.

The point is that you have already made your case in other threads which you have started. Starting so many threads on the same topic is spamming.

Oh, and I suggest you have a look through my posting history. You'll look an awfully long time trying to find any post from me in the Harry & Aliona appreciation forum. Go on, I'd love to know when I posted there. It's also pretty clear who I supported, if you read back far enough.

Also, you can click "reply" on posts you wish to reply to, and that will put the said quote in the appropriate tags. If you prefer to do them manually, use square tags and QUOTE /QUOTE.

Simple answer: he gave it a 9.

Oh, I do apologise. You already know how to look through someone's posting history. The post you tried to quote is this:


I'm confused. How does one line about Harry, in a post full of praise for Chelsee indicate that I am blinkered to his abilities? Especially when said line is that he was an ideal contender for SCD and merely says that he was a "pretty good dancer".

I did look through your posting history. Specifically I was looking for assurance that you hadn't singled me out for special treatment.

Given the number of different threads which have sprung up on the subject of Alesha's departure and replacement I had a really good idea of the number of posts I'd find from you offering the same advice to those other posters.

I found exactly the number I expected to find.