i think so because they are nearly professional dancers as they dance on stage.
Does Pixie and Frankie have an unfair advantage?
1 of 3
Well don't forget they will need to win over the public vote not just the judges and so far both of them leave me, for one, cold! They might be able to dance a bit but both came over to me as plastic with no real personality. Pop star posers.
Being kind, that could be down to nerves but given the large audiences they have performed for, probably not. Neither would get my vote so far. Contrast the joy and genuine real enjoyment in dance from Alison - and Caroline too. Much more enjoyable to watch.
Being kind, that could be down to nerves but given the large audiences they have performed for, probably not. Neither would get my vote so far. Contrast the joy and genuine real enjoyment in dance from Alison - and Caroline too. Much more enjoyable to watch.
Here we go again. They're both young, they're both attractive. Of course they have an unfair advantage.
Originally Posted by Stuart25:
“Simon must be up there, no?”
“Simon must be up there, no?”
Of course not. Only the women are vilified and called ringers on this show. Who cares if Simon has danced before too
Originally Posted by GodAtum:
“i think so because they are nearly professional dancers as they dance on stage.”
“i think so because they are nearly professional dancers as they dance on stage.”
There is a world of difference between jiggling about on a stage and performing ballroom/latin to a high standard.
Everyone will have some kind of advantage/disadvantage that is relevant in some respect to the show.
Sports people tend to have a competitive edge
Soap stars tend to have huge fan bases and a proven ability to act
Pop stars tend to have musicality
Television/radio presenters can beg for votes on their daily show
Yawn. We get this argument every year and I confidently predict yours won't be the only thread started on the subject. I'm already working on my dissertation about why being a DIRTY RINGAH! is no advantage on this show but, frankly, you could write it on the back of a matchbox:
'The winner is the celeb whose journey people most admire.'
There has been, IMO, only one exception to this rule. The ringiest ringer of them all to win is probably Jill Halfpenny, but she denied she had any dance training and maybe people believed her (fnar, fnar).
My two favourite winners also had some dance training (Alesha Dixon in series 5 and Kara Tointon in series 8) but they both had amazing relationships with their professional partners and that probably had more to do with their winning than their technical competence.
The rest of them? Natasha Kaplinsky, Darren Gough, Mark Ramprakash, Tom Chambers, Chris Hollins, Harry Judd, Louis Smith and Abby Clancy - every single one of them a 'journey' contestant.
'The winner is the celeb whose journey people most admire.'
There has been, IMO, only one exception to this rule. The ringiest ringer of them all to win is probably Jill Halfpenny, but she denied she had any dance training and maybe people believed her (fnar, fnar).
My two favourite winners also had some dance training (Alesha Dixon in series 5 and Kara Tointon in series 8) but they both had amazing relationships with their professional partners and that probably had more to do with their winning than their technical competence.
The rest of them? Natasha Kaplinsky, Darren Gough, Mark Ramprakash, Tom Chambers, Chris Hollins, Harry Judd, Louis Smith and Abby Clancy - every single one of them a 'journey' contestant.
Originally Posted by RichmondBlue:
“Here we go again. They're both young, they're both attractive. Of course they have an unfair advantage.”
“Here we go again. They're both young, they're both attractive. Of course they have an unfair advantage.”
As did the four finalists last year...even good old susanna reid had danced before on the strictly for comic relief thingy, or whatever it was.
Happens every year...some can dance, some can't....
Originally Posted by Lady Minuette:
“Well don't forget they will need to win over the public vote not just the judges and so far both of them leave me, for one, cold! They might be able to dance a bit but both came over to me as plastic with no real personality. Pop star posers.
Being kind, that could be down to nerves but given the large audiences they have performed for, probably not. Neither would get my vote so far. Contrast the joy and genuine real enjoyment in dance from Alison - and Caroline too. Much more enjoyable to watch.”
“Well don't forget they will need to win over the public vote not just the judges and so far both of them leave me, for one, cold! They might be able to dance a bit but both came over to me as plastic with no real personality. Pop star posers.
Being kind, that could be down to nerves but given the large audiences they have performed for, probably not. Neither would get my vote so far. Contrast the joy and genuine real enjoyment in dance from Alison - and Caroline too. Much more enjoyable to watch.”
Caroline and simon also have some dance training, lets be fair if we are gonna start cutting them all down in week one....
Dance training aside, they have still got to find some winning personality and character from somewhere to progress very far in this competition. Frankie has also got the advantage of Kevin who seems popular, whereas Pixie's pro seems a bit bland so far and Kristina just looks desperate to win.
I guess once ITT starts we will get a chance to see a bit more of what they are like.
I guess once ITT starts we will get a chance to see a bit more of what they are like.
Didn't Jake go to Sylvia young? I'm pretty sure he has probably had basic dance training then. People are much quicker to call out the attractive, young females!
Originally Posted by attackmusic:
“Didn't Jake go to Sylvia young? I'm pretty sure he has probably had basic dance training then. People are much quicker to call out the attractive, young females!”
“Didn't Jake go to Sylvia young? I'm pretty sure he has probably had basic dance training then. People are much quicker to call out the attractive, young females!”
Surely there is no bias against attractive young females on here. well only on days with a Y in it imo.
No celebrity taking part in strictly has had years and years of ballroom or latin dance training, so this debate every year is pointless
Originally Posted by peeve:
“Yawn. We get this argument every year and I confidently predict yours won't be the only thread started on the subject. I'm already working on my dissertation about why being a DIRTY RINGAH! is no advantage on this show but, frankly, you could write it on the back of a matchbox:
'The winner is the celeb whose journey people most admire.'
There has been, IMO, only one exception to this rule. The ringiest ringer of them all to win is probably Jill Halfpenny, but she denied she had any dance training and maybe people believed her (fnar, fnar).
My two favourite winners also had some dance training (Alesha Dixon in series 5 and Kara Tointon in series 8) but they both had amazing relationships with their professional partners and that probably had more to do with their winning than their technical competence.
The rest of them? Natasha Kaplinsky, Darren Gough, Mark Ramprakash, Tom Chambers, Chris Hollins, Harry Judd, Louis Smith and Abby Clancy - every single one of them a 'journey' contestant.”
“Yawn. We get this argument every year and I confidently predict yours won't be the only thread started on the subject. I'm already working on my dissertation about why being a DIRTY RINGAH! is no advantage on this show but, frankly, you could write it on the back of a matchbox:
'The winner is the celeb whose journey people most admire.'
There has been, IMO, only one exception to this rule. The ringiest ringer of them all to win is probably Jill Halfpenny, but she denied she had any dance training and maybe people believed her (fnar, fnar).
My two favourite winners also had some dance training (Alesha Dixon in series 5 and Kara Tointon in series 8) but they both had amazing relationships with their professional partners and that probably had more to do with their winning than their technical competence.
The rest of them? Natasha Kaplinsky, Darren Gough, Mark Ramprakash, Tom Chambers, Chris Hollins, Harry Judd, Louis Smith and Abby Clancy - every single one of them a 'journey' contestant.”
I would dispute Tom as a journey contestant. He went to NYMT and Guildford School of Acting and it's not as though Camilla taught him how to tap-dance. It's kind of ironic that the contestant out of that Final Four who was the biggest ringah (imo) somehow became the underdog because the judges were so poor at managing the public that year.
In giving the public considerable power in determining the ultimate outcome, the show provides for perceived advantages (however real or imaginary) to be counterbalanced. Now I would happily watch a properly and independently judged contest without a public vote because I don't trust voters generally to be rational or consistent enough. However that's not Strictly...it is a show with pantomime judging and often bonkers televoting but all the additional viewer appeal that comes with that.
I would have been happy for Natalie to win last year so that should give a good indication of where I tend to stand on the 'ringer' issue. I would much rather somebody won for the being the best dancer than lost on the basis of some very questionable logic about previous experience.
I would have been happy for Natalie to win last year so that should give a good indication of where I tend to stand on the 'ringer' issue. I would much rather somebody won for the being the best dancer than lost on the basis of some very questionable logic about previous experience.
No, neither has an advantage, although I did read in one tabloid that Frankies Mother is a Ballroom/Latin dance teacher,
Originally Posted by Arcana:
“In giving the public considerable power in determining the ultimate outcome, the show provides for perceived advantages (however real or imaginary) to be counterbalanced. Now I would happily watch a properly and independently judged contest without a public vote because I don't trust voters generally to be rational or consistent enough. However that's not Strictly...it is a show with pantomime judging and often bonkers televoting but all the additional viewer appeal that comes with that.
I would have been happy for Natalie to win last year so that should give a good indication of where I tend to stand on the 'ringer' issue. I would much rather somebody won for the being the best dancer than lost on the basis of some very questionable logic about previous experience.”
“In giving the public considerable power in determining the ultimate outcome, the show provides for perceived advantages (however real or imaginary) to be counterbalanced. Now I would happily watch a properly and independently judged contest without a public vote because I don't trust voters generally to be rational or consistent enough. However that's not Strictly...it is a show with pantomime judging and often bonkers televoting but all the additional viewer appeal that comes with that.
I would have been happy for Natalie to win last year so that should give a good indication of where I tend to stand on the 'ringer' issue. I would much rather somebody won for the being the best dancer than lost on the basis of some very questionable logic about previous experience.”
My heart fell when I read the first post, so thank you for this most rational and wonderful viewpoint! I loved Natalie and Artem and wished they'd won whereas a member of my family (remains anonymous!) didn't like her face so didn't want her to win! So there you have the mind of the average public voter! I don't know why people take the judges seriously - once Craig lifts his paddle you can predict the other scores straight away. And the previous dance training argument, how many more times - they all start at different levels!!!! That's the fun of the competition.
Originally Posted by Arcana:
“In giving the public considerable power in determining the ultimate outcome, the show provides for perceived advantages (however real or imaginary) to be counterbalanced. Now I would happily watch a properly and independently judged contest without a public vote because I don't trust voters generally to be rational or consistent enough. However that's not Strictly...it is a show with pantomime judging and often bonkers televoting but all the additional viewer appeal that comes with that.
I would have been happy for Natalie to win last year so that should give a good indication of where I tend to stand on the 'ringer' issue. I would much rather somebody won for the being the best dancer than lost on the basis of some very questionable logic about previous experience.”
“In giving the public considerable power in determining the ultimate outcome, the show provides for perceived advantages (however real or imaginary) to be counterbalanced. Now I would happily watch a properly and independently judged contest without a public vote because I don't trust voters generally to be rational or consistent enough. However that's not Strictly...it is a show with pantomime judging and often bonkers televoting but all the additional viewer appeal that comes with that.
I would have been happy for Natalie to win last year so that should give a good indication of where I tend to stand on the 'ringer' issue. I would much rather somebody won for the being the best dancer than lost on the basis of some very questionable logic about previous experience.”
Sadly this is not the idea behind SCD. It is not dance competition, it is entertainment. If it was a competition, there would be a proper panel of judges and the viewers would not be able to vote. In the current "entertainment" format, its not the best dancer than wins, its the most popular contestant.
After last year I realised that the powers that be put in the likes of Natalie, Frankie, Pixie and others of that ilk just to cause a bit of controversy, get the show talked about and generate votes. It happens in reverse too; remember John Sergeant
He, and by association the show, made the national news. So this year I'm going to go with the flow, not let myself be manipulated and see it as an entertainment not solely a competition
He, and by association the show, made the national news. So this year I'm going to go with the flow, not let myself be manipulated and see it as an entertainment not solely a competition
1 of 3
