Their own opinion is fair enough but that doesn't mean that the judges opinions are wrong. Just because the judges haven't given their favourite a score of 40 doesn't mean he has been undermarked.

This may be an inexact memory, but the judges seemed to turn on Patrick, whom I loved, a few series back, for little reason.

I'm vaguely worried that they may have been, for one reason or another, a little harsh on Jay compared with some others, and that this is now being treated as some 'truth' about his dancing, rather than the 'equalising' stuff I think it was meant as.

The truth for me is, that he's the best dancer by at least a hundred yards, miles is too strong - Giorgia and Kellie are also very good. Anita is a very attractive contestant for a plethora of reasons, and Katie is a darling.

The marks should reflect the ranking of the couples. If Jay dances 1st and gets 9 and someone else dances later and they are better then they should get 10 whether their performance has errors or not. 10 doesn't mean perfect, it just means better than the person who got a 9 from that judge.

For you he is. For the judges he wasn't. That doesn't mean they are wrong, just that their opinion of him is different to yours.

I definitely agree with you about Natalie and Rachel though.

No, in my opinion it makes them either 'playing some game' or 'wrong'.

And their obvious awkwardness with the comments, and the oddities of the marking and the reasons for them IN COMPARISON with the others, strongly suggests to me that they are 'playing some game'.

Which may backfire.

I do not recall saying he should have got 40 In my opinion Jay is the best dancer and imo the the judges are wrong to mark unfairly. for whatever reasons they are getting progressively worse in their wild markings. If Jay loses points for errors then so should they all it's as simple as that. Imo ( I have to keep clarifying it is only that) if the others deserved 10's then so did Jay as his was the best dance of the night and error free.

Everyone always thinks that the judges are 'playing some game' or 'wrong' if they don't score their favourite as highly as they would like them to. They also think that the judges are 'playing some game' or 'wrong' if they score someone who is a threat to their favourite higher than they would like them to. That says more about the biases of the public than it does about the judges though. The scoring system isn't perfect and having to give a score after each performance rather than after everyone has danced when there would be a true basis for comparison between all of them is always going to be a recipe for bunching on the leaderboard, especially when you have so many who are seriously talented. However, they aren't going to change it so we just have to learn to live with it (and carry on moaning about it )

The judges mark independently of each other. If you think he was undermarked having received a 9 from each judge, then that means you think he should have got a 10 from each judge.

The judges didn't think that Jay's dance was the best dance of the night (I didn't either) so they were perfectly entitled to score him below those they thought were better. To score him at the same level as those who danced better would be unfair on the other couples. Fairness goes both ways.

very sensible post. i'm so incredibly bored of the x was under/over marked / messing with the running order / powers that be etc conspiracy posts . i only wish i could believe most of the 'i'm leaving if x stays/ wins/ scores more than y' posts.

natalian, but this is RHUMBATUGGER, and you agree with me because I'm bloody RIGHT.

Goddammit.

But how can dances with clear spotting errors, hold issues and a lack of Flamenco shaping be marked higher than one where the errors were, at worse, equal to them?

They couldn't decide whether Jay's was not the best dance of the night because he was on first, so they had no one to compare him with. I still feel that he would have got at least a couple of 10's if he had danced last.

No, it means that I think the judges were scoring others far too high which in turn means that others being placed below including Jay were in essence undermarked. I don't know why this is so difficult to understand.
One persons overmarking is anothers undermarking and vice-versa.

I do not think that anyone danced better last night as most routines were littered with errors and if I believed for one moment that the judges were giving an honest to god opinion then I would not be complaining...............the truth is that I believe that the judges are following a script in order to manipulate the leader board to the productions liking.
Imo the judging is getting worse and worse in favour of keeping the show at the top and the contestants are just fodder...............it's dishonest and grubby and as a viewer since the very 1st show I find it disheartening and very distasteful.

The judges hadn't seen any of the others' dances yet when they scored Jay.

That assumes that the errors were, at worse, equal to them. Maybe the judges think otherwise or maybe there are other factors being taken into consideration such as the quality of the performance being displayed. Maybe spotting error plus brilliant performance beats no spotting error with substandard performance. Maybe they considered the errors they spotted in Jay's routine to be more serious than a spotting error. And we can't say that they are deliberately going out of their way to 'underscore' Jay, he has at times been top of their leaderboard after all so if they had a bias against him that would not have happened. I just don't see this conspiracy against Jay that his fans so obviously do.

This is true but by going first his scores set the benchmark. By giving him a score of 9 thereafter when each couple dances they have to consider whether they were better than Jay (in which case they have to get 10), the same as Jay (in which case they get 9) or worse than Jay (in which case they get 8 or below).

Going first is generally a bad draw for someone who wants 10's for that exact reason - if you give 10 to the first one out then you leave yourself nowhere to go if someone comes along later and dances better. This is one of the flaws in the scoring system but by and large the overall leaderboard positioning is fair.

Would he have got 10's if he had gone later in the evening. I doubt it. Some of the others might not have got 10's but 9's in that scenario which may even have depressed his score to an 8.

You might think that but the judges didn't think that. The fact that they disagree with you doesn't mean they aren't giving an honest to god opinion. What is your evidence that the judges are following a script (other than the fact that you like Jay and so disagree with them)?

The complaints about the judges marks that go on every week are primarily driven by the personal biases of the public rather than any lack of objectivity on their part. I have read on here on a weekly basis that they are trying to pimp Peter. If so, how come he was bottom or the leaderboard last night? It can't after all have anything to do with the fact that he didn't dance as well as the others can it. I keep reading how they are undermarking Jay and yet he has been top of the leaderboard a couple of times - hardly a sign that they have some kind of bias against him is it.

Id like to see a season where the judges still comment on each dance after it happens, but not score until everyone has danced. (As happened in the comps I went to for over 14 years).
I think it's exciting waiting til the end for scores, plus it gives the judges the option of juggling their fave (best) dances into a respectable order. It also saves some of the pressure on dancers following a fab score.
I think many ardent fans (of assorted couples) would then watch others much more objectively.
Personally, after Craig's 6 for Jay last week, I lost interest, did a bit of wandering, (made tea, got changed etc), happily I was back in my seat full time, in time to enjoy GG's charleston.

And therefore the judges need to make clear why they mark the way they do, rather than saying 'yum yum in my tum' or falling off their chair. Maybe explaining their thoughts clearly and concisely would depress the number of claims towards the leaderboard being fixed.

The judges made it very clear that they did not think Jay's performance was 'substandard'. They actually pressed on that point as Craig particularly was so critical the week before.

Those in the know on the thread (and they're basically echoing what has been said previously by the judges themselves and It Takes Two) hold Jay's dance in high regard and believe it should have finished higher on the leaderboard. Yes, he has finished high in other weeks, that cannot be disputed. But just because he finishes top in two weeks doesn't mean he shouldn't on another just for the sake of it.

I don't think dances should be marked according to number of errors. Someone was telling me the other day about someone who came to their lesson and danced accurate footwork. Unfortunately, they were one of the worst dancers they'd ever seen.......

That said, Jay was probably placed a bit low. However I think that is to his advantage at this stage of the series (assuming he has a solid public vote, which I'm sure he has).

The evidence is as plain as can be...........a dance with errors should not get a 10. Despite what you say about the first score being a benchmark the fact is that every dance should be marked on it's merit. Dances with errors should never get full marks.

Love this post! I can only go on the 'performance' side of things because I have two left feet and no dance knowledge, but that overall feeling of a contestant being 'in' the dance and understanding what a movement means, or feeling the music, or connecting to the pro... those things are more persuasive from my uninitiated point of view than the fine points of flecky-wotsits or spotting. It hadn't occurred to me before that they could also be a factor from the expert point of view sooo you've cheered me up

Every dance is marked on its merit but the scores are not absolute and don't mean anything by themselves. The judges points are allocated according to leaderboard ranking not score. What the judges are trying to do is to rank the couples in order of merit. Therefore, dances with errors that are better than dances which have scored 9 should always get full marks.

What would have been more sensible would have been for the judges to score Jay as an 8. Then they could have scored the others as a 9 to signify that they were better but not perfect. However, having given Jay a 9 they couldn't do that. I would suggest, therefore, that they overmarked Jay. I am sure that you will disagree because you love Jay but we will have to agree to disagree.

My OH is convinced Karen Hardy was stopped from doing the 'red button' commentary as she so often disagreed with the judges.

The judges will always be taking into account both technique and performance. They may differ in their opinions on how much weighting should be given to each but they will take both into account