Reasons NOT to have the dance off: -

No point spending money voting when your choice can be slung out by the Judges.
Nor much point voting if the judges repeatedly save unpopular celebrities.
Silly voting for the underdog will be more pronounced so the judges will have to choose between 2 good couples.
Later stages there is not much point unpopular celebrities trying too hard as they can never win, yet their professional will keep up standards regardless.
Judges bias.

Trying to liven up a show by adding a dance off when the results are the worst kept secret in show business = another fail.

Only ONE fair option for the dance off is to have the studio audience decide between the bottom two and keep the judges out of it.

No, I hate it.

As soon as the bottom two couples are announced everyone knows exactly who the judges will save (unless they were to fall over mid dance but even then the judges would probably save them due to 'potential').

What's the point in people voting, for the judges then to save the couple that everyone wanted out?

It would be better if it went to 'deadlock' if needed, instead of Len getting casting vote - at least in that situation the public would get a say. Also, scrap it when the top 6 are left.

Very unhappy with it. I thought last year was excellent - no unpopular dancer saved week after week, no crap dancer staying way too long, good popular dancers in the final... Of course BBC couldn't just let it be...

The Dance off is the judges way of manipulating the public vote, because they are all a bunch of boo hoo mardy pants who hate not to have the last word.

Don't vote and don't invest that much in who wins or loses, the hilarious forum meltdowns in the 'so and so wuz robbed' vein is the only saving grace of the dance off.

^^^ Great post!

May I gently point out that the role of the judges is not to prioritise people whom 'the public like.' It is to judge the dancing and that's why I want the dance-off.

Yes, but it MUST be scrapped when we reach the final 6.

If the public are not interested in the couple, what's the point in saving them?

They already get half the votes.

I agree up to a point. Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the judges vote count for half, then the public's the other half? So the judges have already had their say. If they then get the final veto for the bottom 2 (presumably cos viewers have liked someone and voted to keep them in and a better dancer has left), they are getting another vote on top of their 50%.

And bear in mind they are always the BOTTOM 2 anyway. If the public are not to be trusted, then don't give them a vote. Simples!

Oops, obvious flaw in that argument. The BBC wouldn't then get the phone call money!!!!!!

Somewhat of a sadistic approach. Saving the unpopular is unkind at the very least as they make all that effort for no chance of the glitter ball.

No.

There's always, of course, a balance to be found between the requirements of a dramatic RTV show and running a fair dance contest. HOWEVER, the judges already get a huge say in the outcome AND the opportunity to manipulate the result by overmarking couples they perceive as being potentially underrated by the voters. My own suspicion is that the mere presence of the dance-off actually affects the televoting and not necessarily in a good way. ⚖

In any event, the first priority for rule tweaking should have been a tie break system for the judges leader board so we don't end up with the nonsense of the bottom couple sometimes getting 4 points (potentially more) from the judges.

But it's Strictly Come Dancing not Strictly Come Popular. I always want the judges to put through the best dancers for that dance, even if I am not supporting that person.

That is only a valid point if both couples do the same dance.

As we are funding the programme, yes, it should be on popularity.

That's a dreadful thought. We fund all BBC programmes but we don't get to vote who gets killed off in Spooks or whether Eastenders will have any comedy in it. The programme is the programme and if we don't like it we can comment or do the final sanction of not watching - as I have done with Eastenders. We do not own the editorial decisions.

And... if they went your way, then fine, but make it obvious with the title that this is not about the dancing ability but on who gets the most votes for being popular. Think there is a show like that on the other side...

Last thought - who would they get to judge it? Emperor Nero?

There is at least one good reason for watching the results show - plenty of people enjoy the pro dances.

The dance off is fine - until it is abused by the judges (e.g. Lisa Snowdon).

It needs to be made clear this time whether or not the judges are choosing who to save based solely on the dance off performance or not.

But we do vote on SCD. We have half the vote. And the crux of the DO is that it can get down to the final 4 or 5, and the person at the bottom can have an off night, like maybe ok, suppose it'd been Kara doing the jive which wasn't brilliant and she has to dance it against somebody doing a great waltz? Goodbye Kara. That's the 'fairness' of the DO. Huh.

Arlene once saved Kenny Logan on the premise that he was a rugby player and another rugby player had previously done well. So I think the judges apply some bloody peculiar criteria to be blunt.

BIB - on the flip side of that though it adds to the real drama and heaps the pressure on! If the rules are known (and adhered to by the judges!) in advance - that you have to dance best in the DO to stay, then that would be brilliant drama!! The waltzing pair may not be (or been so far) so good but pull out an A-MA-ZING waltz in the DO then they'd deserve to stay!

As posted above that would be worth it for the drama on these DS boards alone!!

Sorry - i shouldn't really post in this thread because I don't actually phone up and vote I just like the entertainment and drama. Anything that cranks up the drama is great by me!

Kara never would have been sent home, let's not go mental.