If Kevin gets another contender, or makes someone into one, at least it means the final would have something resembling a competent showdance - a feat apparently beyond many of the other pros,
2016 Strictly Professional Dancer line up revealed!
5 of 8
Originally Posted by Jennifer_F:
“Perhaps to an untrained eye, both ladies would seem good from the get go.However despite Kellies previous training at Sylvia Young, it was very obvious that she would have to work very hard to look convincing in both ballroom and Latin. Her feet and legwork were awful and she always looked so ungainly. Having trained for many years in both disciplines, these are the first areas that attract my eyes. So of course I could see that Kellie had the potential,but I would not have called her a ringer due to lack of ballrom/latin training.
With Frankie, I felt she had fantastic potential. Once again, her leg and footwork let her down and despite Kevin's tuition,I felt it didn't improve an awful lot. Frankie had wonderful posture and added grace to her dancing. But again I would call both these ladies, fantastically talented with potential but not ringers. As I and others have said before, sometimes previous dance experience of a different style can actually work against you.
Looking forward to see who they have selected this year.”
“Perhaps to an untrained eye, both ladies would seem good from the get go.However despite Kellies previous training at Sylvia Young, it was very obvious that she would have to work very hard to look convincing in both ballroom and Latin. Her feet and legwork were awful and she always looked so ungainly. Having trained for many years in both disciplines, these are the first areas that attract my eyes. So of course I could see that Kellie had the potential,but I would not have called her a ringer due to lack of ballrom/latin training.
With Frankie, I felt she had fantastic potential. Once again, her leg and footwork let her down and despite Kevin's tuition,I felt it didn't improve an awful lot. Frankie had wonderful posture and added grace to her dancing. But again I would call both these ladies, fantastically talented with potential but not ringers. As I and others have said before, sometimes previous dance experience of a different style can actually work against you.
Looking forward to see who they have selected this year.”
I take all your points Jennifer (although I don't think either lady looked 'awful' by the standards of Strictly) but presumably you would say that Strictly has had no 'ringers' since you define a 'ringer' as having had ballroom/latin training, something which (from memory, excepting CIN specials for Susanna and Harry) none of them ever admit to.
Originally Posted by missfrankiecat:
“I take all your points Jennifer (although I don't think either lady looked 'awful' by the standards of Strictly) but presumably you would say that Strictly has had no 'ringers' since you define a 'ringer' as having had ballroom/latin training, something which (from memory, excepting CIN specials for Susanna and Harry) none of them ever admit to.”
“I take all your points Jennifer (although I don't think either lady looked 'awful' by the standards of Strictly) but presumably you would say that Strictly has had no 'ringers' since you define a 'ringer' as having had ballroom/latin training, something which (from memory, excepting CIN specials for Susanna and Harry) none of them ever admit to.”
Yes,you are right,this is how I define a ringer.There are so very many that have some dance experience of some kind, or have been to stage school etc , I truly be live that whilst they have some advantage it is not an unfair advantage unless they have been balroom/latin trained, as these are difficult skills to master.
Originally Posted by Jennifer_F:
“Yes,you are right,this is how I define a ringer.There are so very many that have some dance experience of some kind, or have been to stage school etc , I truly be live that whilst they have some advantage it is not an unfair advantage unless they have been balroom/latin trained, as these are difficult skills to master.”
“Yes,you are right,this is how I define a ringer.There are so very many that have some dance experience of some kind, or have been to stage school etc , I truly be live that whilst they have some advantage it is not an unfair advantage unless they have been balroom/latin trained, as these are difficult skills to master.”
Hi Jennifer hope you are well, yes that is how I agree too
I do not know how people class susanna as having experience after doing one very limited cha cha (one of her worst dances on strictly) for CIN
Hi Bendy, I am fine thank you. Hope you are keeping well too?
In my opinion, the very limited experience that Susanah had going into Strictly was neither here nor there. Again, you only had too see her Latin to realise that.
In my opinion, the very limited experience that Susanah had going into Strictly was neither here nor there. Again, you only had too see her Latin to realise that.
I don't think anyone thought Susanna was a ringer or contender necessarily but she was his FIRST partner - so it's where she ended up that's the point - ie she was a finalist. To be expected that he'd get someone good the next time, but now, after 3 finals in a row, it would be nice to see him with a different challenge
Originally Posted by wicks:
“I don't think anyone thought Susanna was a ringer or contender necessaril y but she was his FIRST partner - so it's where she ended up that's the point - ie she was a finalist. To be expected that he'd get someone good the next time, but now, after 3 finals in a row, it would be nice to see him with a different challenge”
“I don't think anyone thought Susanna was a ringer or contender necessaril y but she was his FIRST partner - so it's where she ended up that's the point - ie she was a finalist. To be expected that he'd get someone good the next time, but now, after 3 finals in a row, it would be nice to see him with a different challenge”
I'm sure that all ladies were a challenge. Of course it's nothing to do with the fact that he's a fantastic coach
Originally Posted by Jennifer_F:
“I'm sure that all ladies were a challenge. Of course it's nothing to do with the fact that he's a fantastic coach”
“I'm sure that all ladies were a challenge. Of course it's nothing to do with the fact that he's a fantastic coach”
He's lucky he he has been paired with 3 ladies with aptitude and capable of learning. Sometimes, it doesn't matter how fantastic the teacher is, the pupil is just complete pants.
Originally Posted by aggs:
“He's lucky he he has been paired with 3 ladies with aptitude and capable of learning. Sometimes, it doesn't matter how fantastic the teacher is, the pupil is just complete pants.”
“He's lucky he he has been paired with 3 ladies with aptitude and capable of learning. Sometimes, it doesn't matter how fantastic the teacher is, the pupil is just complete pants.”
Yes I think poor Jo got one of those !
Originally Posted by Sandy_Andrews:
“Yes I think poor Jo got one of those !”
“Yes I think poor Jo got one of those !”
she didn't try with Scott if she had tried he may have been somewhat better
Originally Posted by JohnStannard:
“she didn't try with Scott if she had tried he may have been somewhat better”
“she didn't try with Scott if she had tried he may have been somewhat better”
Lol!!
Originally Posted by JohnStannard:
“she didn't try with Scott if she had tried he may have been somewhat better”
“she didn't try with Scott if she had tried he may have been somewhat better”
I doubt it, she probably tried with Scott, he just wasn't good. She was great with Harry. She just needs someone decent.
Brendan says he thinks there might another two news pro's still to be announced:
http://www.ok.co.uk/celebrity-news/5...ancing-overhau
http://www.ok.co.uk/celebrity-news/5...ancing-overhau
Wow 2 new pros besides the 3 new pros that were announced 
Does that mean that some " old " male pros might not make the cut
Does that mean that some " old " male pros might not make the cut
Originally Posted by edy10:
“Wow 2 new pros besides the 3 new pros that were announced Does that mean that some " old " male pros might not make the cut ”
“Wow 2 new pros besides the 3 new pros that were announced
Does that mean that some " old " male pros might not make the cut ”
No, just that they would have the same number as last year - they lost Tristan and Gleb and so far have only announced Gorka as a replacement male. As for the women, they lost 3 and have gained two so far - though Joanne has also got a celeb this time, so maybe that means there will be 1 extra celeb this year, or one of the pros will "do a Joanne" and be a spare.
Originally Posted by edy10:
“Wow 2 new pros besides the 3 new pros that were announced Does that mean that some " old " male pros might not make the cut ”
“Wow 2 new pros besides the 3 new pros that were announced
Does that mean that some " old " male pros might not make the cut ”
Originally Posted by wicks:
“No, just that they would have the same number as last year - they lost Tristan and Gleb and so far have only announced Gorka as a replacement male. As for the women, they lost 3 and have gained two so far - though Joanne has also got a celeb this time, so maybe that means there will be 1 extra celeb this year, or one of the pros will "do a Joanne" and be a spare.”
“No, just that they would have the same number as last year - they lost Tristan and Gleb and so far have only announced Gorka as a replacement male. As for the women, they lost 3 and have gained two so far - though Joanne has also got a celeb this time, so maybe that means there will be 1 extra celeb this year, or one of the pros will "do a Joanne" and be a spare.”
backstageone (who has been right so far) has said another male and another female pro are still to be announced. They also suggested there'd be a troupe in some form, so I can't think how the numbers stack up.
Last year we had 15 pros with partners, plus Jo. The speculation was that her celeb dropped out, though that hasn't been confirmed that I know about, but it's possible that we were supposed to have 16 couples?? Jo has said she'll have a partner this time. Currently we're on 15 pros including Jo. Two more and we'd be on 17 which is too many for them all to have celebs, surely
. Perhaps they're trying to build in some flexibility so they can run with 14 - 15 couples plus a couple of spares to use as a troupe and the final number of couples will be depend on who they can secure for the celeb cast.
Originally Posted by NicPlays:
“I doubt it, she probably tried with Scott, he just wasn't good. She was great with Harry. She just needs someone decent.”
“I doubt it, she probably tried with Scott, he just wasn't good. She was great with Harry. She just needs someone decent.”
Harry could already dance though
Originally Posted by JohnStannard:
“she didn't try with Scott if she had tried he may have been somewhat better”
“she didn't try with Scott if she had tried he may have been somewhat better”
She got him to week 6, which was pretty good considering his lack of ability. I'd say she tried hard, and he wouldn't have got any better, no matter who was teaching him.
Originally Posted by fridgesoup:
“backstageone (who has been right so far) has said another male and another female pro are still to be announced. They also suggested there'd be a troupe in some form, so I can't think how the numbers stack up.
Last year we had 15 pros with partners, plus Jo. The speculation was that her celeb dropped out, though that hasn't been confirmed that I know about, but it's possible that we were supposed to have 16 couples?? Jo has said she'll have a partner this time. Currently we're on 15 pros including Jo. Two more and we'd be on 17 which is too many for them all to have celebs, surely.
Perhaps they're trying to build in some flexibility so they can run with 14 - 15 couples plus a couple of spares to use as a troupe and the final number of couples will be depend on who they can secure for the celeb cast.”
“backstageone (who has been right so far) has said another male and another female pro are still to be announced. They also suggested there'd be a troupe in some form, so I can't think how the numbers stack up.
Last year we had 15 pros with partners, plus Jo. The speculation was that her celeb dropped out, though that hasn't been confirmed that I know about, but it's possible that we were supposed to have 16 couples?? Jo has said she'll have a partner this time. Currently we're on 15 pros including Jo. Two more and we'd be on 17 which is too many for them all to have celebs, surely
. Perhaps they're trying to build in some flexibility so they can run with 14 - 15 couples plus a couple of spares to use as a troupe and the final number of couples will be depend on who they can secure for the celeb cast.”
Hi! I thought we were at 14 pros at the moment including Jo - so 2 more would make 16, which I wonder if it was supposed to be the number last year, and Jo's partner did drop out.
Originally Posted by fridgesoup:
“backstageone (who has been right so far) has said another male and another female pro are still to be announced. They also suggested there'd be a troupe in some form, so I can't think how the numbers stack up.
Last year we had 15 pros with partners, plus Jo. The speculation was that her celeb dropped out, though that hasn't been confirmed that I know about, but it's possible that we were supposed to have 16 couples?? Jo has said she'll have a partner this time. Currently we're on 15 pros including Jo. Two more and we'd be on 17 which is too many for them all to have celebs, surely.
Perhaps they're trying to build in some flexibility so they can run with 14 - 15 couples plus a couple of spares to use as a troupe and the final number of couples will be depend on who they can secure for the celeb cast.”
“backstageone (who has been right so far) has said another male and another female pro are still to be announced. They also suggested there'd be a troupe in some form, so I can't think how the numbers stack up.
Last year we had 15 pros with partners, plus Jo. The speculation was that her celeb dropped out, though that hasn't been confirmed that I know about, but it's possible that we were supposed to have 16 couples?? Jo has said she'll have a partner this time. Currently we're on 15 pros including Jo. Two more and we'd be on 17 which is too many for them all to have celebs, surely
. Perhaps they're trying to build in some flexibility so they can run with 14 - 15 couples plus a couple of spares to use as a troupe and the final number of couples will be depend on who they can secure for the celeb cast.”
We're at 14 pros
Brenda
Anton
Aljaz
Kevin
Gorka
Pasha
Joe Varney
Karen C
Joanne
Katya J
Natalie
Janette
Oti
Oksana
I remember because I was very excited not to have to sit through a show with 15 routines next series. If we are instead getting one with SIXTEEN (which they've never done before) I give up
Originally Posted by wicks:
“Hi! I thought we were at 14 pros at the moment including Jo - so 2 more would make 16, which I wonder if it was supposed to be the number last year, and Jo's partner did drop out.”
“Hi! I thought we were at 14 pros at the moment including Jo - so 2 more would make 16, which I wonder if it was supposed to be the number last year, and Jo's partner did drop out.”
I still don't think that's right
It just followed the pattern of the 2 previous series (11 had 7 male and 8 female celebs; 12 has 8 male and 7 female) it was probably always destined to flip back to 7 male and 8 females.
Originally Posted by wicks:
“Hi! I thought we were at 14 pros at the moment including Jo.”
“Hi! I thought we were at 14 pros at the moment including Jo.”
Originally Posted by Monkseal:
“We're at 14 pros
”
“We're at 14 pros
”
Doh! So we are!
Originally Posted by aggs:
“I still don't think that's right
It just followed the pattern of the 2 previous series (11 had 7 male and 8 female celebs; 12 has 8 male and 7 female) it was probably always destined to flip back to 7 male and 8 females.”
“I still don't think that's right
It just followed the pattern of the 2 previous series (11 had 7 male and 8 female celebs; 12 has 8 male and 7 female) it was probably always destined to flip back to 7 male and 8 females.”
You're probably right, aggs, but I just can't make sense of the Jo situation last year. Why have a female spare but not a male?
Did they think she needed more time to work on choreography - or something - (after Scott), but didn't want to let her go?? Perhaps the ladies are just more breakable...
Originally Posted by aggs:
“I still don't think that's right
It just followed the pattern of the 2 previous series (11 had 7 male and 8 female celebs; 12 has 8 male and 7 female) it was probably always destined to flip back to 7 male and 8 females.”
“I still don't think that's right
It just followed the pattern of the 2 previous series (11 had 7 male and 8 female celebs; 12 has 8 male and 7 female) it was probably always destined to flip back to 7 male and 8 females.”
In which case, they only need 1 more female pro and no male one.
Or they might flip what they did last year and have a male pro in the role Jo had last year - some presenting, ITT etc? Preferably Anton. Still 15 couples.
And Arduino Bertoncello for the new male pro.
And Arduino Bertoncello for the new male pro.
5 of 8
