Danny, Louise, Natalie, Pixie, Denise...do 'ringers' have any chance of winning Strictly?

It seems to me that it is nigh on impossible for a ringer to win Strictly these days. Is it because there is no journey? They start off too good so have no room for improvement?

Danny must be the best ever contestant in terms of purely technical dance ability not to win and when you look at previous contestants highlighted above, it seems that it is better to be a middler with potential in terms of being able to win.

I suppose Jay might be the exception...

A small part of me would love to see Strictly do a series full of duffers and celebrities with no dance experience, just to see if it will be as boring as I expect it would be.

Jay won last year and he was a pretty big ringah.

I guess even looking at the likes of Jill and Alesha...they'd be considered ringers, I think. So I think they can win - they just have to have a bit more to them than just being a good dancer.

Jay, Caroline, Kara, Alesha, Jill and maybe Tom Chambers (he did tap, didn't he?)

Kara, Jill, Tom Chambers and Caroline Flack were all ringers so they have a better chance of winning than beginners.

The whole ringer thing is tiresome. I have had truckloads of dance lessons in different modalities over the years, yet if I went on Strictly I'd look more like a convulsing goat than an amateur dancer.

So-called ringers are people with natural dance ability who've had the opportunity to put it to some use before Strictly; others only discover that dance ability on Strictly. Ed could have 5 years of dance training and I'm sure he won't ever get to even Ore's standard. Will he be called a ringer based on those 5 years?

I don't think previous ability has as much bearing as people think.

It seems to be more about getting the public on side and peaking at the right time (or peaking so high you become unstoppable - Jay is a good example of this!)

Danny lost momentum in the last few weeks, whereas Ore gained some. The energy was high and he just hit it out of the park at exactly the right time, whereas Danny fell under the pressure of being consistently good.

Yes, plenty of "ringers" have won - just not some of the better ones!

Also helps if you have another more obvious ringer to take attention away from you e.g. Pixie for Caroline.

I'd say you're a ringer when you have an extended period of focused dance study, like at stage/dance school - particularly as an older child/teen. I don't think that sort of training leaves you.

Well I thought it would be hard for a non ringer to win again so I think that this result is a great positive for Strictly. Jo did an amazing job getting to him to that standard.

Yes such a person would clearly have an advantage, but the term is used to describe anyone with "previous" dance experience which is unfair as many people in the entertainment industry will have some dance experience as part of whatever they did that made them eligible to compete on Strictly.

Obviously neither of them won, but happened this year with Danny and Louise too. Everyone mentioned Danny's experience, but very few people mentioned Louise's ringer credentials.

It's just a word, and it doesn't seem to have had that much of a detrimental effect. Quite a few with a solid dance background behind them have won.

I personally think it is better to be a middler with potential a la Ore than a ringer. I felt Danny peaked too early and had nowhere else to go whereas Ore improved each week and peaked last week and this week.

OK. What's a 'ringah'? Is it someone good from Day 1?

It's a ringer on steroids

Indeed - the focus on her was how lovely a lady she is; her background hardly ever came up in conversation.

Someone who has had dance training in the past. Usually stage school graduates, pop stars, etc, but there have been a few with more training than that.

It only seems to matter when as a narrative the reality has no relationship to the belief of the GBP.

You can win as a ringer - but you've got to have a lot of charm and something relatable too. All the winning ringers have that (apart from Tom Chambers in my humble opinion...).

Each person has different definitions but for me it is someone who has danced in either their educational (e.g going to stage school) or professional (e.g. west end shows) lives extensively. Someone like Natalie Gumede is for me a complete ringer.

I wouldn't vote for one as I don't see the point of them. The show's premise is that celebs are LEARNING to dance. If I wanted to see professional dancers, I'd watch a serious competition.

What actually was it about Natalie that put her above other ringers? All I read was that she went to Italia Conti

The problem with Danny was that he was the ringer of all ringers

I think its because she wanted to be a dancer before an actor. She was amazing to watch though and still the best ever dancer on Striclty despite her past training.