Originally Posted by The Swampster:
“The trouble with all these "contenders" Kevin has allegedly had is that they are conveniently viewed in hindsight - after any 'value' that Kevin as a teacher may have added to them. I'm pretty sure nearly all of the contestants view themselves as contenders but history shows us that only a narrow range - particularly among the women - actually are.
For example, did you know that Caroline Flack - who turned 35 during her series - is, by some margin, the oldest woman ever to win Strictly?
Of Kevin's enviable line-up of "contenders", only one came in below that age - Frankie Bridge, who was 25 at the time. The rest: Susannah Reid (42 in 2013 - and 43 by the time the final arrived); Kellie Bright (39 in 2015) and Louise Redknapp (42) were all a fair few years older than the oldest-ever female Strictly winner. The next-oldest female Strictly champ was Natasha Kaplinsky at a mere 31 way back in the first series. The other four were in their 20s. You can argue that age doesn't matter, but apparently it does to the voters, at least when it comes to females.
It seems to apply to the professional dancers, too. The eldest pro dancer is Natalie Lowe who's 36 and has been the subject of a bit of 'will this be her last year' speculation. All the new female pros - Katya, Oksana and Oti - are in their 20s.
I'm sure those who dislike Kevin will find plenty of reasons to carry on doing just that, but this mythical list of "contenders" is in my view a bit deluded. With a few exceptions, all the contestants start out to some extent as potential contenders. Mercifully there simply are not enough Ann Widdecombes and Alison Hammonds to go round. And while the show keeps on Anton (age 50) and Brendan (40), it's not altogether surprising that they put the older, less fit ladies their way.
Anyway, apart from Lesley - excellent, despite being the show's oldest contestant - who WAS the female duffer this year? Tameka maybe? She was the first woman off but she had the same sort of stage school/musical theatre background that posters are getting into a lather over Danny about. If Kevin had done well with Tameka she'd have been called a ringer.
Naga perhaps? She has the same sort of background as Susannah Reid (though younger, at 41), and if Kevin had helped her over her confidence issues she'd no doubt have been declared a contender, too.
The truth is, Kevin can't win. The better he teaches people, the more convinced some people are that there's an evil BBC conspiracy to help him win. There's no earthly reason for them to want to do that. They really, really could not care less who wins. They just want people to keep watching.”
“The trouble with all these "contenders" Kevin has allegedly had is that they are conveniently viewed in hindsight - after any 'value' that Kevin as a teacher may have added to them. I'm pretty sure nearly all of the contestants view themselves as contenders but history shows us that only a narrow range - particularly among the women - actually are.
For example, did you know that Caroline Flack - who turned 35 during her series - is, by some margin, the oldest woman ever to win Strictly?
Of Kevin's enviable line-up of "contenders", only one came in below that age - Frankie Bridge, who was 25 at the time. The rest: Susannah Reid (42 in 2013 - and 43 by the time the final arrived); Kellie Bright (39 in 2015) and Louise Redknapp (42) were all a fair few years older than the oldest-ever female Strictly winner. The next-oldest female Strictly champ was Natasha Kaplinsky at a mere 31 way back in the first series. The other four were in their 20s. You can argue that age doesn't matter, but apparently it does to the voters, at least when it comes to females.
It seems to apply to the professional dancers, too. The eldest pro dancer is Natalie Lowe who's 36 and has been the subject of a bit of 'will this be her last year' speculation. All the new female pros - Katya, Oksana and Oti - are in their 20s.
I'm sure those who dislike Kevin will find plenty of reasons to carry on doing just that, but this mythical list of "contenders" is in my view a bit deluded. With a few exceptions, all the contestants start out to some extent as potential contenders. Mercifully there simply are not enough Ann Widdecombes and Alison Hammonds to go round. And while the show keeps on Anton (age 50) and Brendan (40), it's not altogether surprising that they put the older, less fit ladies their way.
Anyway, apart from Lesley - excellent, despite being the show's oldest contestant - who WAS the female duffer this year? Tameka maybe? She was the first woman off but she had the same sort of stage school/musical theatre background that posters are getting into a lather over Danny about. If Kevin had done well with Tameka she'd have been called a ringer.
Naga perhaps? She has the same sort of background as Susannah Reid (though younger, at 41), and if Kevin had helped her over her confidence issues she'd no doubt have been declared a contender, too.
The truth is, Kevin can't win. The better he teaches people, the more convinced some people are that there's an evil BBC conspiracy to help him win. There's no earthly reason for them to want to do that. They really, really could not care less who wins. They just want people to keep watching.”
Good post which I agree with. But its not just the women since Chris Hollins won all the male winners have been well under 30. Its seems that the young men are popular with the Strictly demographic. Danny is also under 30. I would say that all the young male winners could dance but they were not always the best dancer.
Also, there was no "name calling" involved, so it might be helpful and honest to stop stirring the pot by making things up which did not happen. 
I wish all bits of advice were as pleasant
