Not so recent apparently that you appear to have forgotten that the first half of the show is mainly about the 2 leads and that dancing isn't a major part.

the mans timing and steps are fantastic though I see him doing a show about Gene Kelly, yes hes that good.

Let's hope he gets one then if that's what he wants.

No one is denying that Danny has had previous dance training as has Loiuse and JR.

There is no need to exaggerate it nor have any of them had specific training in Ballroom or Latin dance.

Virtually all actors and a fair number of singers (and at least one judge) have attended dance classes as part of their education at drama college or wherever they learned their craft. Does that mean they are all brilliant dancers? Of course not. There were over 30 people in my French class at school. They all studied French, but only two or three of them were really good at French. Not everyone who attends classes in a particular subject has a flair for it, whether that is dancing or French. A flair is inborn and cannot be taught. You can be taught to reproduce the steps accurately but we don't all have the grace and the fluidity of of a natural dancer - that can't be taught.

Danny obviously has a huge advantage if you're judging the show purely as a dance competition, as does Louise. Neither trained in ballroom or Latin as far as I'm aware but both have previous experience of picking up choreography and performing it on stage (invaluable), and Danny in particular has incorporated quite a bit of contemporary into some of his routines. Having said that, we all know it's essentially a popularity contest so if you don't connect with voters you're toast. Danny seems lovely, very warmhearted, comes across well on camera - all ingredients that will mean he's well liked and popular with the voters. I may well vote for him myself if my favourites Ed and Claudia go out. I was going to say we wouldn't want a show with 14 Ed Balls but, hmmm......

Didn't read the article btw. It's in The Sun.... so garbage.

Exactly - there are so many other variables. Just looking at the people who have been lumped together as 'ringers' on Strictly - Caroline, who had a degree in musical theatre, was IMO nowhere near as good a dancer as Kara, who never went to stage school but had done after school ballet/tap classes. Patsy Kensit had been to theatre school, but hadn't retained her dance skills in the same way as someone like Cheri Lunghi who had done ballet training. Natural talent, hard work and the teaching of their pro makes more difference than I think they are given credit for sometimes. Plus, all of it means nothing if you don't come across as likeable for all sorts of reasons.

A sensible well balanced post and I agree with every word.

Apart from the BIB, I agree with everything you write here - particularly the observation of Danny conquering the reserve he has despite being a fantastic dancer.

Re BIB, I have never agreed with this.

Had Strictly started out on 15th May 2004 as 10+ COMPLETE NOVICES contesting for the Glitterball by learning to dance and improve week-on-week, people would have watched because they wouldn't have known any different.

Had the first show had featured this line up:

John Seargent
Ed Balls
Darren Gough
Mark Ramprakash
Louis Smith

Ann Widdecombe
Anita Rani
Denise Lewis
Martina Hingis
Anastacia

...why would someone not watch (take an unbiased view as you would never have seen them dance at this stage)?

Fact is, a precedent has to be set for it to take root. Strictly's 'ringer' precedent began with Claire Sweeney - another Westender. Had she not been included, we would have had 10 complete novices...and I'm sure people would not have boycotted the show for that reason.

Agreed!

Hi Sarah. My comment about the Sun wasn't serious. I know what its politics are. I think Ed would have been just defending his presence on the show. Maybe he could have worded it better to make it clear he was not criticising anyone, I doubt that he intended to be critical of Danny anyone else.

Just had a chat in the office over break. My colleagues - 7 of them here today - all women. They have talked more about Ed Balls than anything else on the box last weekend, but I discussed this with them. The consensus is that they love watching Danny Mac because he is so good, will only get better, easy on the eye, entertaining and has star quality and can see him in the West End before too long. I was told that Mark Ramprakash was just as good but he had never danced, so it's just how the "cookie crumbles". They liked Greg because he was "cute" and Rob Rinder because he is a trier and an improver as is Claudia but with more finesse. None of them are keen on Louise and Kevin. They like Ed Balls because he is bloody hilarious and one woman actually says she rather fancies him. They expect he will do panto.

I always root for the underdog, why would I want to vote for a celeb with previous experience?

It's meant to be a competition, if you have trained previously that is in a way... cheating.

It is precisely why the "cast" I listed in Post 33 above features celebrities who have NO type of dance experience whatsoever...and I still maintain that this would not get people turning off this LIGHT ENTERTAINMENT show.

It would just be the Generation Game (ever so popular in its day) all over again - only difference being it features well-known faces and a bit of dancing.


I'm usually the same - and if you had 10 previous non-dancers, root for the worst and hope that they improve - its quite simple without bringing the need to "switch off" in to it.

In your list you include Anastacia who did, I think, dance when she was younger.

I can do both.
Can't dance a step!

If all the celebs were poor or average dancers I guess the ratings would drop. The BBC probably factored in that scenario from series 1. I'm not sure lots of Ed Balls type dancers would have given the show much chance of a success. Having said that, celebs like Danny Mac and the former Coronation Street actress, Natalie Gumede, clearly have prior dance training and this gives them a huge advantage. I reckon Natalie was near pro standard. She came second. And Danny Mac is close to near pro level in some dances. The Sun reports Danny has had four years of dance experience on the stage.

But as I mention, I doubt people would tune in week-in, week-out if the standard of all the celebs were merely average. I feel people would think "they're not that special, I'll switch over and watch something else!"

I don't expect those with dance training to be excluded from the show, I've backed those contestants myself. But the sense of entitlement I sometimes see surrounding them does my head in - that somehow they have more right to be there at the end than the likes of Ed, and if there's a "threat" of him outlasting them then it's an issue that needs fixing either by changing the format or pressuring him to leave. Err no.

Ok, substitute with Naga Munchetty.

a) It was in the Scum, so take it with a pinch of salt

b) Ed doesn't even mention Danny by name

c) Danny isn't the only one with dance training

d) I realise these points have already been made

This is merely just an opinion and there is nothing to substantiate it. Whether you did or not, viewers enjoyed the likes of Widdy, Russell Grant, Judy Murray (despite her being a whole lot worse than she was expected to be). Then you throw in the likes of Ramps, Michael Vaughan, Ed Balls, Jeremy Vine - you know the game triers. Add a bit of glamour & some male eye candy (also non-dancers) and you've got a series right there. The only proviso - NO PREVIOUS DANCE TRAINING OF ANY SORT.

It would be really interesting to see the journey (used here as a matter of necessity) that the non-dancers go on and watching their progress week-to-week. Though it would be much harder work, imagine how rewarding it would be even for the winning pro to look back to where the celeb started and how they took them to the Glitterball. As good as Danny is, I'm sure Oti would get a bigger sense of reward taking Ramps to the Glitterball as Karen did.

Like I said earlier, it would be just like a celebrity-led version of The Generation Game - which I still believe would attract a good enough audience to sustain it. We are only talking about Strictly's success because of what we know now. Nobody knew if it would last a series back in 2004 and, therefore, cannot categorically say that the series would not have worked sans ringers.

Ed may have never danced before and thinks he is hard done by because he has to dance against some who have some kind of dance ability but he needs to think that others who never danced before and were much better than him have left and never complained about others having some dance ability

Greg had never danced before and he got to be a decent dancer who did not have to rely on 'joke' dances to stay in the comp

it works both ways

decent dancers gone because joke dancers got more votes
so IMO no one can complain if joke dancers have to compete with dancers who have ability

If Ed can avoid the dance-off, I reckon he can win and lift the trophy! That will piss off Danny. LOL

Gangham Ed-style!!!!

Couldn't agree more.

I have no problem in the trained people taking part, some of my favourites have been to stage school. But the people with no training should be able to take part equally - i.e. if they get the public votes they don't owe anyone an apology for still being there.

If Danny doesn't win, I think that it will piss off his fans more that it will piss Danny off.

True to an extent. It doesn't totally even out though as, for instance, Ed has had to rely on enough public votes every week to keep out of the Dance off. He can't afford an off week when he is less entertaining as there would no second chance.

Even if he dances better on the Sunday, there is no way that the judges would factor in entertainment value or the fact that he has engaged with the public to the extent that five times as many have watched his dances on YouTube as any of the others.

If and when he finds himself in the Dance Off, he might as well shake hands and pull out immediately.