I have read this forum for several years but never posted before but feel moved to do so by what I see as so much snobbery by some posters who get angry when "better dancers' are eliminated whilst weaker ones are still in the competition.
I have read in many rants 'this is a dancing competition" as a reason why dancers like Ed should not make it beyond the first couple of rounds. Nonsense I say. This is a dancing competition which works on the premise that celebrities are taught to dance. I am of the opinion that it would be perfectly legitimate for the celebrity who has made the most progress in learning to dance to win the glitter ball.
It seems to me that each year the standard of the celebrities at week one gets higher and higher which I find rather boring, I would much rather see somebody totally out of there comfort zone making real progress.
Where are the rules that state that the best dancer had to win? The judges are there to judge from a professional perspective but the public who by a huge majority don't have the knowledge to vote from a technical perspective can vote for using any measure they
choose.
Ed Balls to win I say.

Exactly and because Ed has been consistently abysmal in his dancing and not improved very much at all, it most definitely shouldn't be 'Ed Balls To Win!'.

Any one of them deserves to win, so what if some people like to watch the better dancers. It's a show for all and I think that they all deserve to win if they can get the votes to do so.Reverse snobbery is no better than the other sort and saying he deserves to win just because he is the worst dancer is nonsense too, and rarely imo does the best dancer win strictly.

I would rate Ed more if he was getting through each week by doing serious performances. His popularity has increased due to him using comedy to get through each performance. Out of all of the underdogs, Greg probably deserves to win the most. He is trying very hard to get the dances right and isn't relying on tricks to get through the dances.

I'm expecting Ed to win, but he would be the wrong winner for me. I would rather anyone but him and Judge Rinder to win.

I'll be voting for Ed and only Ed for as long as he is a competitor.

Sorry but I disagree with you.

I think Ed is taking it very seriously indeed.
He is not choreographing so cannot be blamed for any 'comedy'.

Also I disagree about Ed winning. Much as I like him, I'm confident that the second he faces the dance-off, he will be booted.

This isn't a dance competition - it's a popularity contest with some dance thrown in. Someone said elsewhere that if it was only about dance, why not just have one episode and Danny vs Louise? It's about the performance, the journey, embracing the experience, the personality of the contestant, the routines, the popularity of the pro, the relationships between couples. If Ed win, so be it. I will have enjoyed him - and some terrific dance routines from others along the way.

The great thing about Strictly is that it has both amazing dancers and terrible dancers. That is and has always been its stregnth.

The duffers have their place but I've always believed that as we move to the later stages of the competition the public have the good sense to take the poor dancers out of the "game" to leave us with the strongest field possible going into the final two or three weeks.

And that's not happening this year with Ed Balls.

Now to be fair it didn't happen with Ann Widdecombe either but at least there was never much "love" or warmth for her (I think most people just took sadistic pleasure in seeing her humiliated on national TV week after week) so even though she went on and on and on I never thought her winning was a realistic prospect but with Ed there seems to be so much love for him that I'm concerned he'll not only get to the final but might win the whole thing, which in the long run would destroy the show's credibility, IMO.

Ed's had a great run, has provided his fans with loads of entertainment, but now it's time for him go. Please.

He's too popular so he won't face the dance off.

I agree. At this stage of the competition, the good dancers should be left.

He's not as popular as you might think. Third in the public vote at best with Danny and Louise well in front, I reckon. Rest assured the Dance Off will be beckoning for him in the next week or two. There is no escape.

I think there should be a 'Highly Commended' dancer picked each week for sheer effort, regardless of age or physical ability, and that dancer is given a bye to the next week.

I hope that you are right.

I hope you're right too:

In my opinion if he wins then good on him.

The British Public will vote for who they want to win...I personally think he has come a long way and is not trying to be a comedy act unlike others.

The guy has never danced unlike others have...would love to see him have a ballroom dance if he gets through.

Do you mean that you hope that Gary Baldi is right?

If he wins then he'll have to have topped the public vote not only in the final, but also almost certainly the semi final and most probably the week before that as well. If he can do that, then fair enough he wins. The public gets what the public wants.

I am well aware Ed won't win. However thst doesn't stop me enjoying him while he's there. I watch strictly for the journey that people like Ed go on.

While I can appreciate polished performers like Danny and the likes I like seeing how less naturally gifted dancers progress.

I find it is becoming ridiculous Ed Balls has been fun but his lumbered clonking dancing is certainly not that great., There are others that have had no dance experience and are far far better at this stage than him.
If he gets to the final and wins, SCD will become a farce we need great dancers in the final for an exciting show dance and good dancing unfortunately Ed does not have that.I have thoroughly enjoyed his performances but now it is time for him to go.

I hope the public do not mess this show up for good and vote stupidly we need a great final with the best dancer winning and sorry Ed is certainly not that.

I think that does a big dis-service to Ed. I think he is genuinely trying to do each dance style as well as he possibly can, and Katya is choreographing for him brilliantly. I certainly don't put him in the same category as John Seargeant or Ann Widdicombe who didn't take it seriously at all, whereas Ed most definitely is and really is giving it his absolute best every time. A lot of his comedy comes from his natural dance movements being just so unintentionally camp - he's not putting that on, he can't help it, and that makes it even funnier.

He's also completely different to the person who danced a bland and stiff waltz in week 1 and who looked very uncomfortable, and like he really did not want to be there.

I don't know how that would work? Could you really pick out one of last night's celebs and say they had made the most effort? I couldn't.

I would like to see the dance off stopped from the quarterfinals, so the people with the most public support definitely get into the final. Whoever then wins is the right winner, whoever it is.

I like Ed and Katya and I admire their fearlessness and he is often the most fun bit of the show. Not last night, for me, but often. I don't think they are underdogs because they have had miles more publicity and media promotion than anyone else, and been turned into a cause, whether against more trained dancers, or even against the current political situation (I don't have a lot of time for that personally but there we are). Personally I'm pretty happy if he stays in or if he goes out. I'd be surprised if he makes the final, but if he does good luck to him. Good luck to them all.

I also say Ed and Katya to win. It will strike a blow for the non-dancing underdog. It's a shame dancers like Ed don't usually make it to the final.

However, bluntly speaking, no one dancer deserves to win any more than any other dancer. At the end of the day, we have not a deserving winner, but just a winner, specifically the one who gets most votes.

It's not a dance contest: it's a popularity contest based on dance.

I agree with everything you've said, especially the bits in bold.

And I don't think he should be criticised for only doing 'comedy' routines. He doesn't get to choose the music. I doubt if he has any say at all in the theme of the routine or his costume, or the choreography. All he can do is put his best effort into what he's given. That includes putting on a good comedy performance, if that's what's required of him. I think that might actually be harder than just doing a straight dance as the 'serious' dancers do, as it's an extra aspect that he has to remember and get exactly right in addition to the footwork etc. I'm thinking of his Laurel & Hardy themed quickstep, for example. It's often said that comedy acting is much harder to do well than straight acting. In particular, the timing is so important.

I like Ed but I don't think he should win. Maybe come 4th.

This deserves a poll!!!