So he spent two years studying many different types of dance but not specifically ballroom, and you still don't think he has a huge advantage?

Knowledge/capability of one style of dance doesn't automatically mean an ability at another style. You just have to look at all the celebs on Strictly who have been good at either latin or ballroom and terrible at the other style to see that.

I wonder though if these celebs that you refer to have had the extensive training that Danny and Louise have had...

I agree with this.

Maybe the question will be will we have anyone who's had any dance experience at all enter the competition again because they will be accused of being ringers left right and centre by anyone who has another favourite and hopes people won't vote for them.

I actually don't think it will stop them because basically the only thing that matters is that SCD is an entertainment show that year after year with the same format and a range of abilities, tops the ratings and all the celebs have been invited to compete by the people who make it. And we can vote for the ones we like best.

I originally spread my votes when people like Judge Rinder, Daisy, Laura, Ed looked to be in trouble, but all the ringer type threads and comments have made me focus only on my favourite who has dance experience because I feel that this could be a disadvantage, especially when you see the ITT panel recently. (Unless it's Louise seemingly!)

Great post 👏👏👏

They are in denial... they've been taught the basic of all the dances... proper posture and proper blocking... lol

We could have this discussion over and over, but the producers are always going to include celebrities with a prior dance training or celebrities who can't even do the two step. That's how it should be. Strictly works because there's something for everyone. Some people want to see great dancing, some just want to see dancers like Ed Balls.

Strictly isn't a show where the prize is a gig on the West, so IMO it doesn't matter what training the celebrity has done as long as they haven't done the dance styles that they do on the show.

For me, the aim of the show is simply to entertain us through celebrities dancing Ballroom and Latin. There's nowhere that says that the show is just about duffers learning how to dance. Perhaps that how it started, but that isn't how it is now.

Jay is doing Big the Musical, there can be a career boost from winning

I think that doing Strictly can be a career boost for anyone even if they don't win.

Wasn't what I was saying at all. Danny, like Louise (and many others past + present) have an advantage. I've said it for years, doesn't stop me enjoying watching them dance.

Danny studied dance, yes, alongside acting + singing.
I simply replied to a poster who said Italian Conti (where Louise trained) did teach some Latin and they assumed that Arts Ed was the same.

Yes I agree. I want to see fab dancing in the final. Don't care if they are classed as 'ringers' ...hate that stupid phrase anyway 😡. I want to see excellent dancing that entertains me. Like seeing the 'journeys' early on but not in final

Even Morris dancing ?

Just to add to the Sports Science debate, my son has this degree, it did involve a lot of physical units as well as completely theoretical units.

One of the physical units that he did at UWIC, for 1 entire year was dance, they look at how the body moves in various different disciplines and then analyse things like how dance should be taught, how to use your body better to improve in dancing etc etc. As part of this they actually learnt to dance, my son learnt various dance disciplines including a few weeks of learning a variety of ballroom and Latin dances.

He also did this with his main sporting interest Rugby throughout the 3 year course and another year was swimming the third year was in L A studying and playing American Football.

So to those dismissing a sports science course as having NO advantage, as stated that course makes you very physically fit, you learn how to move your body well, and how to improve in a variety of physical disciplines, and coaching skills which equally would help him understand the requirements to learn, which may or may not have included dance for Ore.

Obviously it's not the equivalent of theatre school and training as a dancer. However a sports science degree does give an advantage over someone who hasn't got one.

Ore will know how to move his body efficiently and how to improve in a physical discipline. That's what a sports science course is, looking at the body, how it moves and how to improve its movement and succeed at a physical discipline. They experiment on their own bodies, using them to learn to improve.

He has said he does not have any dance training so presumably didn't take dance as a discipline in one of his years.

Nevertheless the poster who said his degree will give him some sort of advantage is correct.

Not equivalent to Danny and Loiuse but Greg and Claudia as elite athletes will also have studied their own bodies, know how to move them, know what you have to do to improve in a discipline. That's a significant advantage for them, and Greg was improving just not fast enough. No one would deny knowing those things gives them an advantage, Ore would have studied those things too.

So don't dismiss a Sports Science degree as having given him no advantage when it comes to the discipline of learning to dance.

It just really begs the question where would you get someone who has absolutely no advantage at all from their previous life in learning to dance. Ed plays the piano to a high level it showed in his musicality in his dancing.

Daisy knew how to move her body elegantly from her modelling days.

I like the variety I don't mind so called ringers, and really I don't think people should be so quick to say even those who have had no or very little formal dance training do not have other skills which give them particular advantages when it comes to learning to dance.

I appreciate the variety. I really don't want 12 weeks of duffers and no hopers.

I like variety as well but I feel the show would be better without the likes of Danny and Louise. We would still get to see some good dancing and plenty of entertainment.

I have to disagree some of my favorite dances of all time have been done by "ringers" equally I have loved some dances done by those who improve a lot. I think the show works best when you have a balance of both, because the so called ringers give the improvers something to aim for.
In schools you need the best of the best to bring up standards for everyone, same in this sort of programme really.
If all you want to do is see learners improve then join a dance school and have fun watching the others around you improve, I am happy with the mix.