|
||||||||
FAO all those alleging ‘fix’ … |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,470
|
FAO all those alleging ‘fix’ …
There seem to be an awful lot of sore and bitter people complaining that last night’s show was rigged - yet not one of them have been able to produce a single shred of evidence, and all of them seem unable to come to terms with a few basic facts …
'Distortion of public votes' Both the BBC and ITV have been caught out doing this in the past and then very publicly named and shamed - so why on earth would the BBC do that with its most high profile entertainment show? What reason could there possibly be for them to jeopardise Strictly’s credibility, in the year when it lost another of its most successful shows? It would effectively kill Strictly off and inflict massive damage on the BBC at a time when its future hangs in the balance more than ever. So there is no reason for the BBC to ‘fix’ who wins Strictly - which brings me onto … ‘Favouring BBC staff’ First of all, let’s look at some more facts. Gethin Jones, Alex Jones, Matt Baker, Susannah Reid, Christine Bleakley, Anita Rani were all in the same position as Ore - working on BBC programmes - yet none of them won. So there is no pattern for the BBC ‘favouring’ contestants who work on their shows. Furthermore, I very much doubt that Ore is actually BBC staff. Like the vast majority of his colleagues, he will be freelance but currently under contract to the BBC. Indeed, this must be the case, as Ore has already guest presented This Morning while doing Strictly. So, bearing in mind what happened with Susannah Reid, there is no guarantee that Ore will even remain at the BBC. ITV, Channel 4, Sky and all other broadcasters have diversity quotas and a black presenter who has won the popular vote on an entertainment competition will be of huge interest to them. So the BBC is quite conceivably a loser now Ore has won. Voting patterns Yes, Ore has been in the dance-off. But he’s hardly the only contestant who did that and then went onto win (see also: Alesha and Abby). So that doesn’t mean anything. The fact is that we don’t know public voting patterns - but we do know they can change; and, the further into a series we get, they can become more apparent … and the true extent of Danny’s popularity became clear in the semis when he was second on the leader board, yet ended up in the dance-off. Statistically, this must have meant that both Louise and Ore scored higher with the public than he did (and than Claudia did, too). I would have thought that Danny’s fans would have tried to counter that last night with multiple votes, but obviously nothing they could do was enough. It is conceivable that Danny may not have been that popular wth the public all along, and the high scores he got on the judges’ leader board protected him (see also: Rachel Stevens, Lisa Snowdon). The journey Next to Mark Ramprakash, Ore is probably the ultimate Strictly journey contestant. Despite allegations by the apparently forever embittered James Jordan, he never had any dance training - which makes his achievements all the more remarkable. It was clear from the off that Danny was borderline semi-professional - he was technically great - but that can count against contestants (see also: Denise Van Outen). Ore’s arc from no previous dance experience to what we saw last night was undeniably impressive, and I’m sure helped him cement his victory. I’m sorry if your favourite lost, but just because that happened doesn’t mean that it was a fix … however much you might like it to be. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Under The Ivy
Posts: 16,585
|
I was all for Danny before last night.
Truth is, sadly Danny performed two sub-par dances both with errors, while Ore blew everybody else out the competition and deserved to win. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,021
|
I know I went into the semi final with the mindset that I liked all the contestants and would be happy with a win from any of them, so would just vote based on who danced best on the night. I voted Ore because he pulled his routines off with the best performance and fewest mistakes and his showdance was a real magic moment for me and impressed me more than the other two.
Every year people talk about how this is "the most competitive ever" with "the highest standards of dancing" but I think it was actually true this series. I think a lot of people liked all three finalists so were more likely to be swayed, like me, just on the basis of the final performances. If Danny had made less mistakes in his QS I may well have voted for him. If Louise had had a different judges pick and showdance I may well have voted for her. Fact was that Ore had a great selection of dances and he performed them very well indeed. That's why he's the winner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,316
|
Quote:
There seem to be an awful lot of sore and bitter people complaining that last night’s show was rigged - yet not one of them have been able to produce a single shred of evidence, and all of them seem unable to come to terms with a few basic facts …
'Distortion of public votes' Both the BBC and ITV have been caught out doing this in the past and then very publicly named and shamed - so why on earth would the BBC do that with its most high profile entertainment show? What reason could there possibly be for them to jeopardise Strictly’s credibility, in the year when it lost another of its most successful shows? It would effectively kill Strictly off and inflict massive damage on the BBC at a time when its future hangs in the balance more than ever. So there is no reason for the BBC to ‘fix’ who wins Strictly - which brings me onto … ‘Favouring BBC staff’ First of all, let’s look at some more facts. Gethin Jones, Alex Jones, Matt Baker, Susannah Reid, Christine Bleakley, Anita Rani were all in the same position as Ore - working on BBC programmes - yet none of them won. So there is no pattern for the BBC ‘favouring’ contestants who work on their shows. Furthermore, I very much doubt that Ore is actually BBC staff. Like the vast majority of his colleagues, he will be freelance but currently under contract to the BBC. Indeed, this must be the case, as Ore has already guest presented This Morning while doing Strictly. So, bearing in mind what happened with Susannah Reid, there is no guarantee that Ore will even remain at the BBC. ITV, Channel 4, Sky and all other broadcasters have diversity quotas and a black presenter who has won the popular vote on an entertainment competition will be of huge interest to them. So the BBC is quite conceivably a loser now Ore has won. Voting patterns Yes, Ore has been in the dance-off. But he’s hardly the only contestant who did that and then went onto win (see also: Alesha and Abby). So that doesn’t mean anything. The fact is that we don’t know public voting patterns - but we do know they can change; and, the further into a series we get, they can become more apparent … and the true extent of Danny’s popularity became clear in the semis when he was second on the leader board, yet ended up in the dance-off. Statistically, this must have meant that both Louise and Ore scored higher with the public than he did (and than Claudia did, too). I would have thought that Danny’s fans would have tried to counter that last night with multiple votes, but obviously nothing they could do was enough. It is conceivable that Danny may not have been that popular wth the public all along, and the high scores he got on the judges’ leader board protected him (see also: Rachel Stevens, Lisa Snowdon). The journey Next to Mark Ramprakash, Ore is probably the ultimate Strictly journey contestant. Despite allegations by the apparently forever embittered James Jordan, he never had any dance training - which makes his achievements all the more remarkable. It was clear from the off that Danny was borderline semi-professional - he was technically great - but that can count against contestants (see also: Denise Van Outen). Ore’s arc from no previous dance experience to what we saw last night was undeniably impressive, and I’m sure helped him cement his victory. I’m sorry if your favourite lost, but just because that happened doesn’t mean that it was a fix … however much you might like it to be. Quote:
I was all for Danny before last night.
Truth is, sadly Danny performed two sub-par dances both with errors, while Ore blew everybody else out the competition and deserved to win. Lastly, Last night there were a couple of million extra viewers and potentially extra voters who watched as 1/ It was a final, 2/ Notjing on ITV. That can and could have changed voting. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 19,222
|
People complaining that "The BBC rigged the votes for Ore" last night are ridiculous, THE JUDGES POINTS ARE FOR GUIDANCE ONLY in the final, IT IS ALL DOWN TO THE PUBLIC VOTE, it IS NOT A FIX.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 🍷 🎼 ☔
Posts: 10,117
|
I don't think the voting was fixed. They wouldn't dare.
The rest is open to some very big questions, starting when Will left. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 650
|
During this year's run of SCD Ore appeared as a guest presenter on ITV's This Morning show. I think that proves he has freelancer status!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Richmond, Surrey.
Posts: 13,811
|
Quote:
I was all for Danny before last night.
Truth is, sadly Danny performed two sub-par dances both with errors, while Ore blew everybody else out the competition and deserved to win. I was particularly disappointed with Oti's choreography in their showdance. After all the great stuff she had produced during the series, it was a bit of a mess. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,196
|
There is no doubt Danny was the best over the series but in a knockout competition it is how the final is danced that counts and on the night Ore brought his A game. Calling it a fix is just madness - If in the FA Cup a team plays brilliantly all the way through wins all their games without a replay and then loses 1-0 to a lesser team in the final - no one would call that a fix would they?
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 353
|
Quote:
There seem to be an awful lot of sore and bitter people complaining that last night’s show was rigged - yet not one of them have been able to produce a single shred of evidence, and all of them seem unable to come to terms with a few basic facts …
'Distortion of public votes' Both the BBC and ITV have been caught out doing this in the past and then very publicly named and shamed - so why on earth would the BBC do that with its most high profile entertainment show? What reason could there possibly be for them to jeopardise Strictly’s credibility, in the year when it lost another of its most successful shows? It would effectively kill Strictly off and inflict massive damage on the BBC at a time when its future hangs in the balance more than ever. So there is no reason for the BBC to ‘fix’ who wins Strictly - which brings me onto … ‘Favouring BBC staff’ First of all, let’s look at some more facts. Gethin Jones, Alex Jones, Matt Baker, Susannah Reid, Christine Bleakley, Anita Rani were all in the same position as Ore - working on BBC programmes - yet none of them won. So there is no pattern for the BBC ‘favouring’ contestants who work on their shows. Furthermore, I very much doubt that Ore is actually BBC staff. Like the vast majority of his colleagues, he will be freelance but currently under contract to the BBC. Indeed, this must be the case, as Ore has already guest presented This Morning while doing Strictly. So, bearing in mind what happened with Susannah Reid, there is no guarantee that Ore will even remain at the BBC. ITV, Channel 4, Sky and all other broadcasters have diversity quotas and a black presenter who has won the popular vote on an entertainment competition will be of huge interest to them. So the BBC is quite conceivably a loser now Ore has won. Voting patterns Yes, Ore has been in the dance-off. But he’s hardly the only contestant who did that and then went onto win (see also: Alesha and Abby). So that doesn’t mean anything. The fact is that we don’t know public voting patterns - but we do know they can change; and, the further into a series we get, they can become more apparent … and the true extent of Danny’s popularity became clear in the semis when he was second on the leader board, yet ended up in the dance-off. Statistically, this must have meant that both Louise and Ore scored higher with the public than he did (and than Claudia did, too). I would have thought that Danny’s fans would have tried to counter that last night with multiple votes, but obviously nothing they could do was enough. It is conceivable that Danny may not have been that popular wth the public all along, and the high scores he got on the judges’ leader board protected him (see also: Rachel Stevens, Lisa Snowdon). The journey Next to Mark Ramprakash, Ore is probably the ultimate Strictly journey contestant. Despite allegations by the apparently forever embittered James Jordan, he never had any dance training - which makes his achievements all the more remarkable. It was clear from the off that Danny was borderline semi-professional - he was technically great - but that can count against contestants (see also: Denise Van Outen). Ore’s arc from no previous dance experience to what we saw last night was undeniably impressive, and I’m sure helped him cement his victory. I’m sorry if your favourite lost, but just because that happened doesn’t mean that it was a fix … however much you might like it to be. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,455
|
Next year they should tell us the number of people who voted for each contestant at least in the final if not throughout, that would put to rest any claims of voting manipulation. We would the see how successful the runners up were, or not as the case may be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,966
|
Quote:
Next year they should tell us the number of people who voted for each contestant at least in the final if not throughout, that would put to rest any claims of voting manipulation. We would the see how successful the runners up were, or not as the case may be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,316
|
Quote:
Next year they should tell us the number of people who voted for each contestant at least in the final if not throughout, that would put to rest any claims of voting manipulation. We would the see how successful the runners up were, or not as the case may be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12
|
I think the issue is not one of favouratism but of the general direction that strictly is now taking.
Over the years the 'ballroomness' of strictly has been eroded to a point where many dances barely contain anything but 'show'. Also noting that marking has no relation to the difficulty of the dance. This means that a difficult dance with mistakes is often marked lower than a dance with simpler choreography and difficulty without any. I guess strictly wants to move away from being a dancing competition to a sparkly fruit machine with flashy lights that may contain dancing. Maybe this is what Len now wishes to leave
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,038
|
The allegations of fix normally come from folks whose favourite didn't win. Last night I read one post saying something along the lines of they have voted for Danny lots of times. Danny didn't win so it was, obviously, a fix.
![]() About 13 million watched last night. I wonder what % voted? I wonder what % are members of DS? |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,829
|
Quote:
There seem to be an awful lot of sore and bitter people complaining that last night’s show was rigged - yet not one of them have been able to produce a single shred of evidence, and all of them seem unable to come to terms with a few basic facts …
'Distortion of public votes' Both the BBC and ITV have been caught out doing this in the past and then very publicly named and shamed - so why on earth would the BBC do that with its most high profile entertainment show? What reason could there possibly be for them to jeopardise Strictly’s credibility, in the year when it lost another of its most successful shows? It would effectively kill Strictly off and inflict massive damage on the BBC at a time when its future hangs in the balance more than ever. So there is no reason for the BBC to ‘fix’ who wins Strictly - which brings me onto … ‘Favouring BBC staff’ First of all, let’s look at some more facts. Gethin Jones, Alex Jones, Matt Baker, Susannah Reid, Christine Bleakley, Anita Rani were all in the same position as Ore - working on BBC programmes - yet none of them won. So there is no pattern for the BBC ‘favouring’ contestants who work on their shows. Furthermore, I very much doubt that Ore is actually BBC staff. Like the vast majority of his colleagues, he will be freelance but currently under contract to the BBC. Indeed, this must be the case, as Ore has already guest presented This Morning while doing Strictly. So, bearing in mind what happened with Susannah Reid, there is no guarantee that Ore will even remain at the BBC. ITV, Channel 4, Sky and all other broadcasters have diversity quotas and a black presenter who has won the popular vote on an entertainment competition will be of huge interest to them. So the BBC is quite conceivably a loser now Ore has won. Voting patterns Yes, Ore has been in the dance-off. But he’s hardly the only contestant who did that and then went onto win (see also: Alesha and Abby). So that doesn’t mean anything. The fact is that we don’t know public voting patterns - but we do know they can change; and, the further into a series we get, they can become more apparent … and the true extent of Danny’s popularity became clear in the semis when he was second on the leader board, yet ended up in the dance-off. Statistically, this must have meant that both Louise and Ore scored higher with the public than he did (and than Claudia did, too). I would have thought that Danny’s fans would have tried to counter that last night with multiple votes, but obviously nothing they could do was enough. It is conceivable that Danny may not have been that popular wth the public all along, and the high scores he got on the judges’ leader board protected him (see also: Rachel Stevens, Lisa Snowdon). The journey Next to Mark Ramprakash, Ore is probably the ultimate Strictly journey contestant. Despite allegations by the apparently forever embittered James Jordan, he never had any dance training - which makes his achievements all the more remarkable. It was clear from the off that Danny was borderline semi-professional - he was technically great - but that can count against contestants (see also: Denise Van Outen). Ore’s arc from no previous dance experience to what we saw last night was undeniably impressive, and I’m sure helped him cement his victory. I’m sorry if your favourite lost, but just because that happened doesn’t mean that it was a fix … however much you might like it to be. No fix.....but there was some clever manipulation by the judges in the semi. Ore has no 'experience' (thanks for that again, len) was almost trending at one point...yet he's out there dancing in front of Arlene Phillips on you tube in 2013 to Hey Ya by Outkast.....he doesn't look 'untrained' for that particular dance...and its a damned sight more 'dancing' than the likes of Greg/Naga/Ed/Melvin have ever done. Sure the other two finalists had more schooled training.. but on t'other hand if we are being asked to believe that Ore picked up those AS and Jive dances in 4 days of training during WEEKS 3 AND 4...come on, there's gullible and bloody stupid! No there was no 'fix'......but the fact that Ore went from bottom two 2 WEEKS AGO to winning suggests more than 'its just about the final. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,817
|
For every post claiming fix, there's another saying, "what's in it for the BBC?" or "It's just sour grapes".
It's an entertainment show and it's micro-managed to produce the desired outcome. The desired outcome is a 'successful' show. Sometimes I agree with their chosen route to get there, sometimes I don't, but I'm in no doubt that I'm being manipulated! Even the News chooses which stories to show us, how prominently and from what angle. It's TV. I accept I'm not watching reality or Truth, but when they pass my own personal threshold for manipulation, then I feel my intelligence is being insulted. The producers need to take care not to get carried away with their own success and remember to rein back on the control. Some things are better when allowed to play out naturally. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,196
|
It was a fix - a fix by Santa cos Jo requested the glitterball when she sang Santa Baby at the RAH a couple of weeks ago
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: The North!
Posts: 2,177
|
I'm not saying they're fixing the voting but there is something iffy about why they won't release the figures. Why? I've worked on a similar show and I'll tell you what happens.
If Contestant A has been topping the votes every single week for four weeks, in Week 5 they will deliberately give them a tougher time with the scoring/song choice/dance choice etc, which allows someone else to move ahead on the leaderboard. They may not fix the actual votes, but the judges scoring is definitely massaged and basically set beforehand (e.g. Don't give Contestant A anything higher than an 8 this week). |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,817
|
Quote:
I'm not saying they're fixing the voting but there is something iffy about why they won't release the figures. Why? I've worked on a similar show and I'll tell you what happens.
If Contestant A has been topping the votes every single week for four weeks, in Week 5 they will deliberately give them a tougher time with the scoring/song choice/dance choice etc, which allows someone else to move ahead on the leaderboard. They may not fix the actual votes, but the judges scoring is definitely massaged and basically set beforehand (e.g. Don't give Contestant A anything higher than an 8 this week). .
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,829
|
Quote:
I'm not saying they're fixing the voting but there is something iffy about why they won't release the figures. Why? I've worked on a similar show and I'll tell you what happens.
If Contestant A has been topping the votes every single week for four weeks, in Week 5 they will deliberately give them a tougher time with the scoring/song choice/dance choice etc, which allows someone else to move ahead on the leaderboard. They may not fix the actual votes, but the judges scoring is definitely massaged and basically set beforehand (e.g. Don't give Contestant A anything higher than an 8 this week). |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,829
|
There was another type of 'fix' being mentioned in the early weeks of the show, about certain celebs going early. I notice those cries of 'fix' have dried up with Ore winning.....unless...........
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,817
|
Quote:
Why not release the figures at the end of the series, like XF do, in terms of percentage? Are they afraid of upsetting a few egos?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,729
|
It was the right result. Ore and Jo's dances were all head and shoulders ahead of the other two couples.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
|
There was no fix, just a bit of "manipulation of the public perception," it's a PR skill, some remain blissfully unaware of it.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:21.




