50 shades of crap huh?

by the way,I'm sure its been said somewhere else but Karen was mortified that Rachel was in the bottom two...and sort of knew she was going (next to abbey) and practicaly said goodbye before the dance off even started...

Good post and true. I wish Len would take your advice.

That dance could have been a significant turning-point for Rachel.

Kind of agree and yet there's always that little maybe imaginary hope that this could have been a turnaround for her (as peterard says)... There was a definite shift in Rachel's ability to inhabit the dance, which could have made a big difference to her ability to learn.

I would have liked to see if she could improve. Have there been any previous contestants who have been bad then something clicked at around this point and they started getting rather good even if never got to the final?

Hmm. One thing that struck me was Rachel said she was able to be more loose in the dance-off because she was free of worry then. It sounds as though the live shows were very nerve-wracking for her. I don't think she was a natural dancer, but it is possible that she would have been able to perform more easily if she had survived a dance-off having been less worried then and being able to transfer that feeling across to another dance. Maybe.

I kind of skimmed over her to begin with, but she seemed quite likeable near the end. Getting positive feedback really seemed to make her happy. Being a cynical viewer I tend not to really think of how some contestants actually do pay a lot of notice to the comments and take them to heart. I think she did, anyway.

Matt Dawson - I remember his turning point was a ballroom dance which he performed really well. Prior to that he'd done some either lacklustre, self conscious or poor performances - he was popular enough to be allowed to progress and he got to the finals - I think he became a really good ballroom dancer, his Latin improved but it wasn't as good as his ballroom and I don't think he was ever fully able to let go in Latin. He did have an excellent teacher in Lilia who was always a great motivator.

I think if Rachel had had enough time to train she could have become a good ballroom dancer - not sure about Latin but I think even though she's not a natural she could have improved in that area with time and effort too.

How can you be sure of that? Not that I can prove otherwise, but I'm curious to know.

I am very sorry Rachel was voted out on Saturday - I don't think she could have won but she was improving unlike some other contestants who are still in - she was close to tears on ITT tonight - it is a shame because she loved dancing with Pasha and I think she had a lot more to give - but hey ho - Dave might surprise us all yet.

Matt Dawson is a good example. He managed to get to the final, over better dancers, because he developed into a decent ballroom dancer. Its not necessary to be good at everything to progress in the show, and achieve a good personal result.

Indeed, this year there doesn't look to be anyone who combines charisma, technique, acting ability, musicality and ability to perform both classes of dance well. Losing anyone who could do some of those things, and who might get an improvement story going, is a big negative for the show. You could make the same arguments about Deborah too - she also added more story than several people who are still not doing much worthwhile.

Michael Vaughn and Gethin Jones. Two of my favourite past contestants.

I loved the beat of the song they danced to. I said it would be ironic if she was in the bottom two after giving a better dance but that's the way it goes unfortunately.

She didn't deserve to be in the bottom two this week, but she certainly deserved to be there last week so I can't say I'm sad she is gone.

That's unfair even had Dave been a lady and several pounds lighter (I'm overweight myself and I proud Mark supporter before I get accused of weightism) he would never have been able to be lifted like that and the steps she was doing in between the lifts were not too shaby either. That said I don't think her latin is much better than Mark's and it's considerable worse than Sophie (last night's jive expected but then again Kara did a rubbish jive so everyone's allowed one bad dance).

Watching the clip of Fiona's charleston you can see her swivels were quite good even isome other bits of the routine were not so good.

Dave should have gone but I'm not finding him that annoying - maybe he just pales in comparision with Widdy or maybe I've been watching this too long to be bothered with getting annoyed at a non-hoper 'comedy' contestant lingering. He is dancing better too although it was wasn't apparently from the dance what dance it was supposed to be - which is not a good sign - Fiona's rhumba was like that too.

That said she went out on a high (and like Spirited Away I think she deserved to go last week although I'm glad she didn't) and has probably done her career no harm at all - a lovely lady who tried hard.

I thought Louis Smith improved massively during the series - obviously he could move a lot better than Rachel could at the start, but he always looked rather awkward and embarrassed until the Charleston which seemed to free him up.

Everyone has their own scale of learning.

Rachel started off with no dance ability and no acting ability. She was also working 2 jobs in cities in different parts of the country.

She was doing the right things. Working hard, doing what Pasha told her, improved from the acting lesson.

Her scale of improvement was small compared to someone who starts off with natural abilities which make learning to dance easier, but she was dancing full routines with less training hours than others who only danced part dances at times.

It would have taken her longer and a lot more work than others but she was improving and would have kept improving if she kept on training the way she had done.

Given she was not born with the dance gene, she should be happy with how hard she worked, how much she learned and the standard she reached. Its better to be your own judge than go by other's judgement of you.

Rachel certainly didn't deserve to be in the bottom 2. No, she's certainly nowhere near the best dancer, but she was still pretty good considering she never went to stage school but was getting a proper education instead. Take out all the stage schoolers and she compared very favourably with the rest.

She's improved, but among the women celebs there are a few more way better than her. It's the nature of the show. I'm glad she went out on a high.

The way she danced the dance off, when she knew she would lose to Abbey, shows just how nerves effected her during the series.

She deserved at least 2 more weeks, and if she could have relaxed and continued improving who knows how far she could have gone.

The way she spoke both at the end of the results show and ITT was just lovely. She is one classy lady

She did seem a pleasant girl.

Mind you, I saw her on the Gadget Show last night and she can't present for toffee. I don't like the bloke who does it either though.

I don't mind that she's gone. She wasn't funny and Pasha is a bit love-sick-puppy-drippy with his partners. I think he should get a much feistier, older partner.

Hope he gets a Fiona type celeb next year.

She isn't that good but I think Fiona should have gone before

I have been surprised that no mention of SCD has been made on Countdown - or perhaps it has and I've just missed it as I don't watch every day. Or maybe Countdown is recorded so far in advance that comment was impossible.

Countdown is notorious for being recorded many months before transmission, and is also one of the worst offenders for trying to pretend it's live, even to the extend of pretending it's a presenter's/guest's birthday many months in advance in order to tie in with their actual birthday on transmission date. They even invent fictitious presents they've received etc.

I think this current batch was recorded back in about March. Arlene Philips was also the dictionary corner guest the other week.

Don't think the pre-recording is anywhere near as far behind as you suggest - more like a month or two at most (Rachel sometimes tweets about the celebrity guests on the day of recording), but I agree that the 'live' pretence is mildly annoying.

Why can't they just be honest with us? They record 5 shows in a day, e.g. "For you it's Wednesday, here in TV land we've just had lunch..."