In case you hadn't noticed Louis was mentioned in the OP - so I think the OP doesn't mind if past winners or past series are mentioned as a point of comparison with this series. I knew as soon as luigy mentioned Abbey's win last series that he'd come in for flak from some of her overdefensive supporters. I personally wouldn't start a thread about her - to me her win is irrelevant, but I will mention it on a thread if it's been discussed and I think it's relevant to the thread.

Threads are not the property of the people who start them.

I'm really looking forward to seeing how Jake handles the paso this evening, I think it will provide a clearer indication of his chances of lifting the glitter ball.

I must say the clips shown on ITT have made me slightly fear the worst but I'm hoping that they are not representative of the final performance on the night.

No they're not but so far a DS moderator hasn't objected and as I point pointed out I don't think discussing past winners and series is irrelevant to this thread about potential winners for the current series as a point of comparison.

BIB - Nor are they your property

If Topaz, or anyone else, wants to discuss Abbey/her win, they are free to do so.

Fair enough - as is expressing exasperation at people digging up the dancing corpses of yesteryear!

So what was the point you were making about Jake?

Indeed and others are free to respond accordingly.


Any thoughts about Jake winning or not?

The same is happening to Natalie on a Pixie thread as well, though - and Denise.

Strictly is a show that lives on comparisons. People will compare. It is what is is.

Comparisons are interesting. Conspiracy theories less so but I guess it takes all sorts

Thanks but I just think some people around here are determined to lay down the law as they see it, and try and undermine and ridicule posters they disagree with...... it takes all sorts I guess

To get strictly back on topic I still think Jake is in with a good chance of winning - that is if he continues to perform well and the producers don't resort to their nefarious shennanigans, he's got tough competition but I think he has 'everyman' appeal. I think more people can relate to him than perhaps the likes of Mark. I'm still supporting him for the win even though I like all the female frontrunners.

I have to agree with your point about the producers's manipulations.

Are there any posters on this forum that truly believe that this a clean and fair show where the production team just counts votes on Saturday night? how naive and childish.

Jake should have a chance at winning, again, he was not the chosen one at the beginning of the show, he just got in their way and because of what big of a surprise he has been so far, now they don't know what to do with him. I'm just saying Mark may start getting over marked and Jake under-marked. let's hope I'm wrong and the producers stop manipulating the whole thing.

Did you know that the judges see all the dances on Friday during dressed rehearsals and have their notes ready for Saturday? all they do on Saturday is adjust their observations based on any mistakes or improvements on that day.

Nope. Nothing is certain on Strictly. He could get injured or ill. He could get a bad dance. Janette could choregraph a poor show dance that no-one liked enough to vote for,....... etc,. ANYTHING could happen. Including that one of the other dancers could begin to outshine him. Jake has an actors ability to get into the performance zone and that gives him a performance advantage but the could still have a bad dance

Completely agree. Also, people may get complacent and stop voting and end up in bottom two with Pixie, and then what?


BII, I dont think stricly has a chosen one as much as X Factor has one or two, as in the X Factor a lot of money for producers is in the after TV program life.
I think Strictly producers are more interested in the ratings rather than having a chosen one winning. Ultimately though, that interest in ratings will make them take decisions that will damage/help certain contestants in strictly. Of course, this will help/damage other contestants and then accusations of chosen ones will arise.

My ony query regarding chosen ones is the running order, as I do wonder some years that there are some that seem to be more towards the end continuously. However, unlike the X factor I am not sure if running order is that important in Stricly.

I really don't think who wins matters that much to them. It's not like any of the winning celebs have gone on to much more than they had before BBC work wise.

In terms of who got more out of last year job wise, I'd say it was Susannah? Certainly haven't seen Abbey cropping up in much more than would have been normal for her?

Jake is looking less like a shoe-in winner after tonight's performance. He has been out-danced by Mark for the last two weeks

Looks like he has competition from Mark for best male ... Caroline, Pixie and Frankie are all better dancers than him. he hit the heights in week 2 and has been on the slippery slope since

Allow me to quote myself.

QUOTE >I'm just saying Mark may start getting over marked and Jake under-marked. let's hope I'm wrong and the producers stop manipulating the whole thing. .[/quote]

I think Frankie or Caroline could win.

Mark has done well but I have never liked the guy, arrogant and always treated women terribly. He has danced better than Jake these last two weeks but I would rather Jake was the top man. Or Steve for that matter. I think currently Frankie, Pixie and Caroline are the best dancers, but I don't think they will win. Certainly not Pixie anyway.

The gossip mags would lap up a Mark win as good as he was tonight, I thought he was over scored and has been quite a few times.

Then why did they devote a whole series last year where they didn't cast any serious male contenders - no males under 30 and made it blindingly obvious they wanted a female winner at the start with the skewed line up with a predominance of young attractive women in the female cast and then when the series began they sign posted who they wanted that female winner to be.

It wasn't in their interests to have Susannah as their winner despite how bewilderingly popular she proved to be - she was a mediocre dancer/marmite personality and employed by the BBC so I doubt they'd have a wanted a female Chris Hollins to win and have to face accusations of bias towards their own. They must have been cockahoop that she didn't win as expected and their chosen one won instead..........especially as Susannah defected to ITV shortly afterwards.


[/quote]


It looks like the overmarking and special treatment of Mark has continued this week. The producers are so pathetic and predictable! I had to laugh when Mark moaned about being busy at his 'day job' - he only pushes buttons part time on Heart! And Tess calling him a 'novice' <groan>.......so it looks like the predictions were right of him getting the Abbey type storyline!

I don't agree that Mark has out-danced Jake tonight or last week, and I like both. Jake for me is always exciting to watch and I think even in a 'bad' week he is better to watch than almost anyone else on the show.

I seriously fear for him this week though - if he doesn't have a lot of support from the public I'm worried he could be in big trouble.

Is Jake winning inevitable?

In my opinion Jake won't win, he isn't improving week on week, he may have peaked too early.

This is a long show, if nothing "out of the ordinary" happens he will get back in a hurry, I don't think you can peak on week two on a show that lasts close to three months.

I don't think having a few weeks where it looks like he hasn't improved means Jake isn't going to win..... I actually enjoyed his and Janette's routine tonight and felt they were under marked.....as Tejas pointed out even when he has a not so brilliant week they're still more interesting and exciting than most to watch. I think most past winners have had some weeks where they haven't been on top form....Mark Ramprakash and Louis Smith spring to mind.....but producers should play fair...they're deliberately over marking some contestants to make it seem like they're better than they are and I hope Jake and Janette don't have to pay the price for this!

Jake may be a good dancer but there's just something missing from his performances.

Im not sure how to put it into words exactly, but it's like painting by numbers... Great outcome but no soul and warmth.

I know exactly what it is..... you don't like his dancing