I agree with you dazie but I think the argument some are putting across is - if the public aren't voting for Kim and Nicky then they should go (nooooo not Kim! )

I am in two minds about the dance off personally, on one hand its great because you can get rid of the 'duds' with it (think there will possibly be a few more DO's with Kim soon - at least she will see off some of the crud for us lol) but then you could have two belters up against each other so the competition loses a talent

Well yes and no some people might find themselves in the dance-off by mistake in that people might not vote for them because they imagine they're safe etc. Ali was once in a dance-off but then survived the public vote for six more weeks until the semi's (finals it would be now) so it was only for that one week she didn't get the votes. If they're constantly in the bottom two then yes, I guess they may as well go. I think Colin committed a sort of dance suicide - he knew he didn't have public support and in his second dance-off he deliberately muffed it. That's quite honourable in a way, it must be difficult to be there if you're thinking people want you out. At least the audience don't chant like the BB crowd

Dazie, I could just kiss your mind

Absolutely, and that does happen

Didn't know this (oooh!)

Yep it must make you feel pretty crap, esp if the judges keep saving you

Somebody posted a list of bogus voting figures supposedly from one mobile network. Don't worry about it.

I think if it was me, as much as I wouldnt want to be eliminated, if i kept ending up in the bottom 2 id rather go otherwise the public end up hating you because they cant get rid of u lol

The other thing is I suspect the Dance Off skews why people vote. In as much as some will vote to keep someone out of the judges clutches. Yet the self same voters then wail and gnash their teeth when their true favourite loses out to another couple in the dance off.

Yes this is what happened to Lisa Snowdon.

Increasingly the public votes reflect the judge's scores. I think a lot of that's to do with people taking Strictly more seriously as a dance competition and being more inclined to vote based on dance merit rather than comedy/pity/whatever other factor you can think of.

In series 8 and 9 I thought the public were just behaving themselves when it came to voting out of fear of a Nancy Dell'Olio final or something but the trend seems to have continued into this series even with the return of the Dance Off. With the odd anomaly like Kimberley being in the Bottom Two and Victoria being repeatedly saved by the public vote, of course.


I liked Lisa Snowdon... Just me?

Think you're in a minority here. I didn't mind her and I did think she was a lovely ballroom dancer (though her Latin wasn't great). I do think at the end of the day though she shouldn't really have got to the final that year. If the public aren't voting for you then I don't think it's right. It's why I'm hoping that they scrap the dance off come the semi final & just let the most popular dancers through.

I can definitely see the benefits of having the dance-off. It's so easy for one of the better dancers to end up at the bottom early on just because people assume they're safe so don't bother voting until later in the competition, so in that kind of situation the whole "if the public aren't voting for them they deserve to go" thing doesn't ring true. The dance-off does act as a bit of a buffer there.

I do wish they would be more consistent with whether they judge it based on the whole competition/who has more potential etc. or whether they are just judging the dance-off performance in isolation. And paying attention to things like repeat appearance in the bottom two. If someone like Kim or Rachel or Ali is in the bottom two once then that's unlucky. Twice and you've got to question whether the public want them. More than that and it's clear that the public don't want them.

Finally, I think the dance-off should be dropped one or two of shows before the final, otherwise the judges basically get to choose their finalists. By that stage the public has seen enough of the dancing and become invested enough that people are much more likely to be picking up the phone and voting, so the result it likely going to be more reflective of public opinion than in the first half of the competition, where you may be torn between several couples and not want to spend too much voting for them every week. It's not right that the judges should get to overturn that when they've already had their say marking the dances in the first place.

I think whether you like DO or not depends whether you view SCD as a dancing competition or entertainment programme. I don't mind the DO in the initial stages as it makes the show more entertaining and does stop the better dancers being eliminated but think it should go soon. I agree with whoever says that in the event of a judge tie the public vote should then count. Don't see why Len should essentially have three votes when the GBP just gets one

One thing about the dance off that discumflunkerates me this year is the notion of "dance content." It has been quoted as the reason to save couples by at least one or two judges in several dance offs. But sometimes they have been faced with a more content-laden dance done not so well and a simpler routine done more competently and saved the latter couple. I know they have to choose based on who and what dances are there, but it just seems that there is a danger (fairly or not) of judges being labelled as inconsistent.

Off the back of this I was wondering whether there should be mandatory steps/moves in all dances that judges should look for and mark on their execution so that it maybe makes the process of marking and maybe elimination a bit more equitable even when dances are very different?

All the above suggested from the perspective of a non dancer of course.

I think the judges talk about dance content when it suits them to save their favourite couple. I'm sure last week if Richard had had more dance content then they would have saved NIcky on the grounds of giving a more competent performance

Exactly. The judges have made up their minds the second the two names for the dance off are announced. The actual dance on the night has nothing to do with who is saved. They were never going to send Nicky packing on Saturday

Because sometimes it's oversight - you can vote for someone lower down to save them but it's not obvious someone in the middle of the leaderboard needs saving - I think this is what happened to Zoe Lucker, Jimi Mistry, Spoony and people like that. A dance off might have saved Jimi and Spoony to fight another day.

The trouble is that there is no control - we don't know who might have been saved by a DO in the absense of one or who well might have lost of was good in the absense of one or who would have gone without a DO when there is one (except that Lisa would not have stayed at Austin's expense in the series six semi final - that is blindly obvious).

We do know that people are eliminated too early both with and without DOs and some dancers over-stay their welcome with the judges (and with members of the public who care about dancing) both with and without a DO.

I think most times they know who they want to save. I wonder what they would do if the person they wanted had a disarrster in the dance off though and the other one did much much better, i.e. better than the other couple and better than they themselves did last time.

This D/O wouldn't ever happen but, say like if Nicky absolutely nailed his dance, was technically perfect and improved his original performance 100% but then Denise tripped over her own feet, got tangled in her dress and James dropped her during a lift
I would really love to see that just for the entertainment value alone. Judges would have to come up with some seriously good excuses to keep her if that happened