|
||||||||
The conspiracy theories start already! |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Broughty Ferry
Posts: 30,532
|
IMO SCD is becoming more scripted by the year just like most other reality type shows and like it or not it is the way things are going.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: whitby , n yorks
Posts: 10,118
|
Quote:
I genuinely thought Daisy's waltz was absolutely delightful. Very classical and romantic. I thought she acted it really well and danced exceptionally well for only three weeks of training. She was streets ahead of Naga so did deserve better marks. No conspiracy theory there.
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,500
|
Hello everyone
I don't necessarily think there is a conspiracy in favour of Daisy but did believe a 9 was way too high for her Waltz though it was a nice dance and as a couple she an Aljaz looked lovely together. Like many have said already the scoring on Saturday was a lot more lenient than on Friday night. I thought J Rinder showed great movement and was very entertaining and his score was fair....but I did find it a bit strange to see Anastacia score higher for example especially when there were obvious mistakes in her routine. I did see Neils comment on Louises Jive - she was certainly good - memorable in terms of Strictly Jives..NO. I truly hope TPTB will not engage in favouritism or fudging like last year - I certainly would not like to see a repeat of the fiasco of Jameliagate All the above is purely IMO, I'm not claiming to be a dance expert so only judge routines on what I see and enjoy as a viewer of all SCD series since it started. So my top 4 from week-end in terms of dance and entertainment are: 1. Danny & Oti 2. J Rinder & Oskana 3. Louise & Kevin 4. Greg & Natalie |
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160
|
Quote:
I think two or three of the Friday night people suffered from under marking when you look at the range of marks. And on Strictly entertainment value isn't always recognised in the scores.
The problem is that the judges seem to want to rank 15 couples only using half the range of marks available. Then assume that the top Mark is out of bounds as well, and you have 3 judges ranking 15 people with a range of only 4 marks - and the 4th only manages to make it out of 5 - which is why there are currently 10 couples who have the same score as someone else and only 5 with a total all of their very own. I also don't think the judges pay much attention to score progression through the series - the criteria seems to be that the first dance out on the night is the benchmark and everything else is graded around being better or worse than that |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,439
|
Quote:
Calling it a "conspiracy theory" is giving it too much credit. People put effort into coming up with conspiracy theories. This is two Hollyoaks fans having a bitch on twitter that their wobbie didn't get high enough scores that has somehow been inflated into an entire newspaper story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Plymouth, Devon
Posts: 1,450
|
Quote:
The producers were sitting on a grassy knoll when they matched up the couples.
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,654
|
Quote:
That's what the audience vote is for.
The problem is that the judges seem to want to rank 15 couples only using half the range of marks available. Then assume that the top Mark is out of bounds as well, and you have 3 judges ranking 15 people with a range of only 4 marks - and the 4th only manages to make it out of 5 - which is why there are currently 10 couples who have the same score as someone else and only 5 with a total all of their very own. I also don't think the judges pay much attention to score progression through the series - the criteria seems to be that the first dance out on the night is the benchmark and everything else is graded around being better or worse than that The very high average score overall I think was because there were fewer duffers, what duffers there were were given sympathetic dances (I think they were *trying* to be sympathetic with Melvin, it just didn't come off), and they gave some people who weren't technically great, like Greg and Rinder, bonus points for performance they wouldn't necessarily have given them in previous series. If you compare the scores with last series (which was pretty much bang on average in terms of wk 1 scores), only about 25-30% of the increase comes from the scores in the top half of the leaderboard. The upper ceiling hasn't moved much, it's the ground floor that was higher. And I think it's fair enough, because I can't think of anyone who deserved *much* lower, or who could have got harsher treatment down there, without causing a backlash. |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,847
|
If you step back and look at the situation objectively, there's absolutely no way the BBC would fix this show. Given the "fixing" of other stuff in the past, it's more than someone's job is worth. It would ruin the reputation of the best variety show on TV if it got out.
There's always a high percentage of BBC people in the show, which is only expected. They choose those that they think might do well, there's always a trade off if they can raise the profile of one of their people through their continued progress in the show, but I don't think they really care that much if one of theirs doesn't win, not enough to fix it anyway. However, the progress of some individuals is not beyond some influence. This can be achieved by selective use of clips in training videos, to hopefully improve the public's perception of them, "in a good way." I think Emma Bunton was given "every assistance." (She came across like Mother Theresa, always "sweetness and light" no momentary strops, in training clips) before her appearance in the Strictly element of Children in Need that year, even to the inclusion of a visit from French and Saunders to give her support during one of her training sessions. What was that all about? I've no idea what are the motives behind the judges scores for some people on occasions, nor do I suspect do they have much idea either. |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,487
|
Quote:
That's what the audience vote is for.
The problem is that the judges seem to want to rank 15 couples only using half the range of marks available. Then assume that the top Mark is out of bounds as well, and you have 3 judges ranking 15 people with a range of only 4 marks - and the 4th only manages to make it out of 5 - which is why there are currently 10 couples who have the same score as someone else and only 5 with a total all of their very own. I also don't think the judges pay much attention to score progression through the series - the criteria seems to be that the first dance out on the night is the benchmark and everything else is graded around being better or worse than that |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,531
|
Quote:
You have no idea how much I LOVE this post! Top effort!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() I guess you have to be of a certain age group to get it ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,247
|
Quote:
Great post . I'd love to ask all the judges what each of their marks represents , especially marks 1 to 5 .
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 598
|
Quote:
I just wanna see if one of the four "experts" behind the desk go one better this year and give their "10" paddle an airing in Week 2....
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,161
|
Quote:
I just wanna see if one of the four "experts" behind the desk go one better this year and give their "10" paddle an airing in Week 2....
![]() And actually that is a good point that dance was a 10 dance no matter which week it was in. Also Sophie peaked very early, that dance shouldn't have been penalised because it was early ( it wasn't a 10 dance though) . |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160
|
Quote:
I think the level of scoring is about right on the whole - there was a very obvious attempt in the first week or two of Series 10 to bring the scoring levels down a bit, and use the full range of paddles a bit more, and it just made the whole show feel very sour, because after 9 years of a 7 paddle more or less being seen as "average" it was a shock to adjust to.The only mark that stood out to me over this weekend as being really out of sync with reality was Craig giving Anastacia an 8.
The very high average score overall I think was because there were fewer duffers, what duffers there were were given sympathetic dances (I think they were *trying* to be sympathetic with Melvin, it just didn't come off), and they gave some people who weren't technically great, like Greg and Rinder, bonus points for performance they wouldn't necessarily have given them in previous series. If you compare the scores with last series (which was pretty much bang on average in terms of wk 1 scores), only about 25-30% of the increase comes from the scores in the top half of the leaderboard. The upper ceiling hasn't moved much, it's the ground floor that was higher. And I think it's fair enough, because I can't think of anyone who deserved *much* lower, or who could have got harsher treatment down there, without causing a backlash. I also wish they would drop the fallacy that there is a scoring arc for the celeb through the series when it's apparent each show is marked individually and the scores reflect the show rather than the dances. Which is why there is no point comparing scores across different series really ... or even in most cases across the same series ... heck, sometimes not even the same show! |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Honiton, Devon
Posts: 1,930
|
Quote:
Great post . I'd love to ask all the judges what each of their marks represents , especially marks 1 to 5 .
|
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,487
|
Quote:
Pretty certain Len has done that very thing though it might have been on DWTS. He did say that it would take a complete catastrophe for him to go lower than 5.
Seriously though it seems 6 or 7 are the most used marks, but what does 2 or 3 represent . The answer is they haven't got an answer . |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:50.






