I know a lot of people have said that they were fond of the honest judging last night, but I couldn't help but think it was quite unfair.

I'm gonna take Victoria and Nicky, for example. I did think they were the two weakest last night, but when you look at it:

- Nicky's Waltz on scoring was as good as Ann Widdecombe and Jimmy Tarbuck's Waltzes
- Victoria Pendleton now holds the record for lowest scoring female Cha-Cha-Cha, beating Edwina and Lulu

Is this fair? No, they weren't the best, but surely before they'd have scored higher - Nicky would have been in the 20s for sure, maybe Victoria would just reach it.

It's harder to compare them to those in previous series' because of the new scoring. It makes them all look dreadful!

Yes, it's not easy to compare when they are being harsher with their scores.

However, I prefer them to start low and build up to reward improvement, rather than dishing out 8 and above from day one.

Actually the lowest scoring cha-cha was by Quentin something back in series two, he only had 8/40

Well, the judge's scoring has always caused debate on here, and from my experience of watching the show, sometimes I agree with the scores, sometimes I don't. But 99% of the time, the scoreboard is usually in the right order, so I tend not to worry about it too much.

It's a healthy debate, and one that is hotly debated almost every Strictly weekend in my house! I pay attention more to the judge's comments on ITT more, as usually by that time they are more relaxed and can point out to the viewers exactly where celebs went wrong (Craig is infintely more likeable on ITT than the main show, Bruno less manic also).

So IMO, no, the scores are not always fair, some celebs are overmarked, some are undermarked, but normally the leaderboard ends up in the right order.

Had it been a year ago, they probably could all have scored at least 3 points more (with at least one extra point from Len, Alesha and Bruno). I don't know what it is that's made the judges that little bit harsher with the scoring (maybe it's the format of the current DWTS series and the .5 inclusion that's got Bruno & Len rethinking their scoring), but I like it.

5's really aren't all that bad.... it's kind of like the judges saying the dance was halfway to perfect, which isn't at all bad, and far more enjoyable than seeing 8's in week 1 and wondering if, should they improve just a little, they'll be getting 10's by week 2/3.

Ann Widdecombe was present in a series where scoring was rather generous and, apart from Craig, the judges very, very rarely strayed below 5's. I'm glad they've decided to do that.

Yep, I put female

No, the marks tonight were much higher, and better than even the two top marks from last night. Craig was marking ridiculously low last night, yet gave some crazy high scores tonight, and all the judges marks were higher.

Definitely not fair on those who danced yesterday!

I think they've been told to change the way they mark this year. I don't like it, as it makes it impossible to compare between years.

Those who danced tonight were generally better though. There was some overmarking, but the standard was generally a bit better. Last night the dances were rubbish (Denise and Colin were the only ones who were ok), and the marks were quite fair I thought, apart from Victoria.

Tonight Lisa was severely overmarked, and Jerry got more than she should have, but the rest were marked quite fairly I thought.

Tonight was way better, a lot of decent dances and performances.

Victoria was terrible, and the score was right, however I blame Brendan, it was far too much for her, but that's Brendan for you.

I agree that the average standard was better tonight, just not THAT much better as to justify the over-marking.

That is unkind to Brendan, in my opinion; she did well in training.

I agree. A lot of that looked like Brendan making it up on the spot, using a lot of repeated steps, when Victoria forgot it.

huh?

All i saw was her writhing around on the floor saying she couldn't do it.

It was clear she wasn't ready for such an up tempo performance, and that is the first thing a pro dancer should be looking out for. How many times have we seen Brendan drag people around who clearly can't keep up.

Judging wasn't consistent over the two nights so it wasn't fair. Last night saw much harsher scores, mainly because Craig was in a worse mood. Darcy annoyed me a bit giving Louis an 8 because she fancied him too, he was good, but none of the dancers deserved an 8. I don't really think any of the dances should have scored more than 7 and then there should have only been a few of them. I preferred last nights harsher judging, but it needed to be consistent as it puts 6couples at a disadvantage.

Well it's all relative. I thought tonight that Kimberley, who delivered a distinctly sub-par cha cha, was severely overscored. But that was the only instance where I thought someone was out of place on the leaderboard. As for the actual scores, I don't think anyone tonight deserved 7s nevermind 8s, but what can you do.

I think that some, were ovemarked tonight especially the 8 for Louis from Darcy. It looked a bit pre planned..the reaction she supposedly had.

Lisa was terrific but the reaction from the judges seemed a bit OTT.

Kimberly was good but not, great ..fair enough it's the first dance but no need to go into raptures, judges !

I think some of it is , pre planned beforehand.

Serverely overmarked? really? i think she deserved at least a 7.

In general I think the scoring is always pretty fair.

Craig and Arlene were always the harsh judges and Len and bruno mroe lenient. Mainyl ebcause thye judged different aspects. So it evened itself out.

Then Arlene left and Alesha came along, and she was a fairly easy going judge, and again generally, it was evened out because the other judges marked a bit differently than normal, (Craig and Bruno got a bit tougher, and Len would vary depending on how he felt Craig would judges).

But you have to take it season by season. generally the standard has improved as the series have went on.

Last year we were seeing lots of 7s and 8s in the first few shows, and then it was basically 7, 8, 9 from Len, Bruno, Alesha every week as they had nowehre to go with the scoring as the 10s were still seen as special (perhaps not always by Alesha).

This year theyve started a bit lower, but i feel its being fair.

I do beleive Lisa was the ebst of the two nights, but I also think an 8 was too high. but the judges ahve to abse it on whats come before. They felt she was better than folk they gave a 7 to, so it had to be an eight. Similarly some maybe shouldnt have gotten 2s, 3s or 4s but because it was deemed by that particular judge as worse than another score, it had to be. So in essence it was fair in that respect.

I'd have given her 6s across the board, there was a lot of random stuff in sync rather than more variety of cha steps.

Victoria's cha cha was terrible though. She forgot her routeen half way through.

Lisa did just as much cha cha content as the rest with the exception of Kimberley who I feel did a little more.

Lisa did the basic cha cha step sequence, she did american spins, new yorkers, chasse sequences, cha cha walks, cuban breaks. And she did them all correctly and in time, footwork wise. Her arms let her down for me. Plus she had well executed extra stuff like the synchronised dance sequences (which werent really that basic as they often involved her arms and legs doing different movements, which isnt an easy task).

But she had the best performance, the best entertainment and captured the essence of the dance best. So she deserved to be above the others.

In terms of the *s. I kind of do feel an 8 was a bit high, but it had to be based on the previous scores. The judges who gave her 8s felt she was better than the others who they gave 7s, so they had to give 8s., Thats how it works. perhaps it says something about how others scored. but judges only go by whats come before.

Yes, and Kimberley got 7 and her performance was by no means bad - in fact it was better in my opinion because it wasn't half as camp as Lisa & Robin's.

I think Kimberley deserved the score she got, but she deserved to be above Lisa, hence me giving Lisa a 6.

I think Kimberley has ended up in the most advantageous position, though - the first person to top the leaderboard has never won (with the exception of Mark, who was in a three-way tie and wasn't top position in the first week where all couples danced). She's avoided being the judges' obvious favourite from the start.

Kimberleys 7 was pretty much mostly for technical ability though. She has some character and personality, but didnt have as much as Lisas. Dance isnt purely about technical ability. But of course that is probably the msot major factor. Pulling out the real essence of the dance is another thing they have to do. its all well and good being foot/arm perfect but if you are giving off no spark then it just falls flat. (Again im not saying Kimberley was flat, Lisa was jsut better in some of the other areas).

For example If we had to loosley cut down each score I would say it went

Technique: Kimberley 5.5 Lisa 4
Personality/Performance: Kimberly 1.5 Lisa 2
Capturing the essence of the cha cha: 1 Lisa 2