Should the DWTS style of voting be brought in for Strictly? Would it make the show more transparent and less open to fixing accusations?

Here's how it works.
The dances are scored as normal and ranked accordingly. Then each couple is awarded a percentage of the scores from the night and this is added to the percentage of audience vote they receive to create the overall leaderboard.

So, say the scoring is as follows: (taken from week 11)
Jay 39
Georgia 36
Kellie 36
Katie 35
Anita 31
Helen 34

The scores would be totalled to see how many points in all were awarded on the night, then percentages of that number allocated accordingly:
Total: 211
Jay 18.4% (39 is 18.4% of 211)
Georgia 17%
Kellie 17%
Katie 16.5%
Anita 14.6%
Helen 16.1%

This is then added to the audience vote. I've used the DS one just for arguments sake - I know it's hardly the most reliable, but it's the only one I've got!!

Celeb | Judges % | Audience % | Total
Jay | 18.4% | 61.4% | 79.8%
Georgia | 17% | 14.7% | 31.7%
Kellie | 17% | 6.5% | 23.5%
Katie | 16.5% | 7.2% | 23.7%
Anita | 14.6% | 8.8% | 23.4%
Helen | 16.1% | 1.6% | 17.7%

I think the current system isn't great because the ties mean that it can make the really poor dancers easy to save as they gain more judges leaderboard points from other couples scores tying.
Also, this system means that the points they score actually mean something - rather than a placement in the leaderboard - is this a good thing or not??

You're trying to correct something that doesn't really need fixing. The public get to keep the celebs they like. That's more important than the judges keeping the celebs they like. The tail shouldn't wag the dog.

One thing which bugs me is the way the BBC change votes into points to produce the list.

When there is a tie, they should make the next one after the tie two or three points lower.

For example:

Jay - 39 = 6 points
Georgia - 36 = 5 points
Kellie - 36 = 5 points
Katie - 35 = 3 points[
Helen - 34 = 2 points
Anita - 31 = 1 point

They used to do that Gill - but changed it after Tom Chambers year when there was that huge stink in the semi final about being unable to save Tom from the dance off

They used to until the problems in Series 6, but then a tie at the top made Tom Chambers impossible to save.

Judges
Lisa 3
Rachel 3
Tom 1

So if the Public Vote was
Tom 3
Rachel 2
Lisa 1

Add them together and Tom couldn't avoid the dance-off, even though he was top of the public vote.

So they had no elimination that week and carried the public votes already cast to the Final

Since then they've scored the present way and also had more couples in the Final - also gives them a bit of leeway if someone drops out.

Personally, think there shouldn't be a dance-off in the Semi-final as only the one at the top of the public vote is safe from the dance-off.

Otherwise I wouldn't change it - the DWTS system is too complicated.

It could also make the contest boring.

It's suspected by looking at dance-offs, polls and even betting that Jay's been ahead in the public vote for weeks (plus the PTB have been trying to 'create' competition).

If it's true and the public knew Jay was well ahead, the contest and interest would have been over ages ago?

Who decides what the scoring system should be?
Who is the scoring system designed for?

I think the key person will be very happy with the current system.

To me, it seems like an overly-complicated system.

I reckon some viewers would liken it to the rules of that well-known game show Numberwang:

http://www.ukgameshows.com/ukgs/NumberWang

or Mornington Crescent

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mornin...ent_%28game%29

I think the current system works well, maybe remove the dance off in semi finals.
I personally like the dance off , adds another interesting aspect.

What bugs me is that when there are ties, they tend to favour who's bottom.

E.g

Jay - 39 = 6 points
Georgia - 36 = 5 points
Kellie - 36 = 5 points
Katie - 35 = 4 points
Helen - 34 = 3 points
Anita - 31 = 2 points

It makes it easier for those bottom to get through (that said I love Anita). I would prefer if it was something like this:

Jay - 39 = 5 points
Georgia - 36 = 4 points
Kellie - 36 = 4 points
Katie - 35 = 3 points
Helen - 34 = 2 points
Anita - 31 = 1 point

Where is Carol Voderman, when you need her?

I just think the easiest way round ties would be for the judges to have to ranked the tied couples and split the marks.

According to Len, in week 11 out of 6 couples, he gave 5 of them a 9. Is he really saying that for him Helen/Kellie/Georgia/Katie and Anita couldn't be separated!? The tie that week was Georgia and Kellie so, in my ideal marking world they should have had to rank them for their leaderboard positions.

You're the judges - so judge. And if you can't or don't want to, don't get huffy with the voters when they do it for you.

I agree with this - so obvious and easy to implement. It really annoyed me seeing someone like Carol come last yet awarded 4 points due to the judges creating so many ties at the higher end of the leaderboard!

Thing is though, after the debacle of the whole series 6 semi-final when the Bat-phone at Strictly Towers must have been red hot for a good half an hour, they're never going to revisit that again.

The easiest way, in my opinion, is just to have them rank any tied scores so there are no ties. They're paid to judge and score, just do it. How hard can it be to separate 6 couples? Mr Head Judge is supposed to have judged 'proper' competitions - I assume there are no 6-way ties for second there on a routine basis? What's the worst that can happen? He hides under the judges table and has to be lured out with a pickled walnut?

The BBC abandoned that method of scoring following the controversies of Series 6 in 2008 because of the anomaly that that method of scoring ties created.

This kind of scoring will really damage dancers who are not popular with the public.
The difference in the judges points between the celebrities is not much after the initial rounds. Where as with the public votes, the gap can be really big. I am ok with any scoring which gives more power to the public.

I would rather have two simple changes,.
1) Winner is chosen by the public, therefore it's only fair the finalists are chosen by the public.
2) BBC release the voting figures like the other shows.

That is exactly what I said in my post earlier!

But the whole series 6 semi-final debacle means that I'd be very surprised if it were ever to be used again. I think more than one person in Strictly Towers finds their nervous tic starting up again at the very though!

I didn't watch that series. What the judges have to remember is that the winner is chosen by the public, so don't try to take your favourites to the final, let it be only public voting in the semifinal as well. That way finalists and the winner is chosen by the public.

Sorry! I thought you were talking about how you should skip a number after a tie, which I wasn't talking about. Sorry

The counter argument would be that the final is a Strictly showcase and has to please many viewers who don't watch the regular series. There is also a wider audience that could be overseas or watching on a different media than television, who again might not watch the whole series. An Anne Widdicombe shouldn't be in any showcase for dancing.

I find the way DWTS do it is far too complicated and i dont mind the way SCD do it now so for a change my opinion is hell no

It works fine as it is for me, as does the whole show format!! No need for any changes imo!!

All they have to do is break the ties by ranking them at the end of the show. The DWTS system is awful and leads to good dancers being voted off by big fan bases not more popular dancers.

Given their record, I think the judges have a hard job coping with the simplest of systems, making it more complicated might be beyond their comprehension.

A simple solution would be to allow no ties on the judges' leaderboard. I realise that might make scoring difficult for them but they would have to think carefully about to whom they award what and given they watch the dress rehearsal they have a fair idea ahead of the show as to who will score highly, middling and lower.