DS Forums

 
 

Pre Judged and Pre Ordained


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 29-10-2006, 17:51
mossy2103
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,698
Originally Posted by BilliY
Apart from last year when Darren Gough won, yes I know he had improved the most but it should have been between Colin & Zoe.
There you go - last year's judging was a two-horse race, and the 100-1 outsider took it. Therefore the outcome there was not pre-ordained, neither is it this series.
mossy2103 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 29-10-2006, 19:43
mindyann
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: pimple on the bum of back end
Posts: 18,770
Originally Posted by Wingpatrol
Totally different styles of Athlete Callie.

Darren is big and beefy and plays cricket which is totally different to Colin's lean and lithe body. Both disciplines effect different types of training.

When you look at both of them at the beginning though it was evident that Colin had much more rhythm than Darren. Darren was clumpy and stiff whereas Colin was loose and flexible.

Colin had a much better start than Darren and imo (only) Darren had to work much harder to attain the skills.
I've said before, but I sometimes think the judges take no account of the day jobs of the celebs. They are amazed that Darren - and now Mark - can improve and actually dance.

Yes, Darren is a big chap - but his day job is a medium paced/fast bowler. He is light on his feet - he has to be in his run up, and the balance, rhythm and co-ordnation needed in a bowlers action is second to none.

Mark is a batsman - and his balance, timing and co-ordination again are all supberb - as is his footwork.
mindyann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2006, 22:18
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
Originally Posted by DenJ
What the judges have to remember is that they only control 50% of the vote. We the public have the final say and that is a very important 50%

Its the sheer stupid illogicality of the public vote that drives the judges to do odd things in part.

The format is the same from SCD to Cirque de Celebrite to Fame Academy to the X Factor. Who ever the judges don't like attracts a proportion of stupid voters who decide that they know better. Its as if they pick up the phone to right a wrong if anyone has any criticism made of them and don't believe that some people are better than others - a sort of give averyone a GCSE philosophy extended to TV talent shows. The result is that the people at the bottom with the judges feature highly with the public and that people in the middle go home. Georgina at the bottom stays . Spoony goes. Georgina improves - Georgina goes. On Cirque, Sophie Anderton comes last with the judges but at least third with the public and the result is that someone who was joint first last week and suitable for the final goes. On X factor people stay who the judges know are useless whilst better people go.

If the public are that silly you will get odd voting from the judges. The judges have to overmark the best people so they stay and have to either either mark the worst so that it doesn't look as if they are being told they are bad or fix the marks so that the worst people end up against popular people and do actually go.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2006, 22:30
The Lady Boz
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Back with you all!
Posts: 2,557


Cor!! C'mon, networkbabe, dish the dirt, you're obviously a mole if you know that much about how the judges minds work.
The Lady Boz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2006, 22:36
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
Originally Posted by Wingpatrol
Why do you say that it should have been between Colin and Zoe?
Is it because you thought them to be the best dancers overall rather than the most improved? I thought that Darren came from nowhere and had the most improvement overall whereas Colin is an Athlete and did have rhythm (very obvious from his first dance). Zoe had ballet training when she was younger and this gave both of them a head start. It was no different when Jill won. She had stage school and dance training and totally outclassed the others from day one.

Imo the show is about turning the non dancers into dancers. It's just a shame that they pit them with other celebs with some experience under their belts. It would probably be more fair if they were to take all the celebs from similar backgrounds ie, no experience or some experience and then this would be a much more open event.
I think possibly that the voting public took the same view as me to give Darren the title as he certainly was the lesser known of the three of them prior to the show. Zoe and Colin are extremely popular in the celebrity world so perhaps it does come down to seeing the underdogs shine.

I'll never understand how it will work out though. This series so far has the closest call yet with Mark, Ray, Carole, Emma and Louisa all being very close.

I wonder if the judges scores in future will reflect the performances and not just their love for hot totty or their baby girls???
This is part of the problem though. Why should anyone be rewarded for improving a lot if they get to a 8.5 if someone else improves less but ends up as a 9.5. Its the old question of whether you should get excited about the person who improves greatly to get an essentially undemanding qualification or the person who sails through it and comes out with top marks. In most fields of life you would want the most qualified not the most improved doctor, dentist, football player or investment manager.

Same with "other " factors. You can't weigh these and can't actually know lots of them so why reward the cricketer for looking less ungainly when other people start looking less ungainly than they do at the end? Its true Zoe might have had dance classes but its also true that world class athletes are usually fitter, more use to training and have better body awareness than the average radio DJ. To take an example from another current reality show who should be able to balance better - a fit model, a dancer,a boxer or an olympic athlete?
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2006, 22:47
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
Originally Posted by The Lady Boz


Cor!! C'mon, networkbabe, dish the dirt, you're obviously a mole if you know that much about how the judges minds work.
Nah - just to long watching the wrong people go early all over the place plus enough maths savvy to be able to work out the public's voting order when there is enough information to work it out. Tonight's Cirque de Celebrite public voting was utterly bizarre.

if you know that and know who the judges think is good enough for the final (and there's probably three topping the list with other 3 possibles in SCD) you can start to think of what order you would produce to defend the ones you think are good. Problem is it can go horribly wrong - sticking Brendan down the bottom for example is probably a good move as it means that people will save him and be careful who else they vote for at the bottom but if the public bump him up three places and also bump Peter up 5 you are still left with a situation where anyone in the middle of the judges order could go.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2006, 22:59
Wingpatrol
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,347
Originally Posted by thenetworkbabe
This is part of the problem though. Why should anyone be rewarded for improving a lot if they get to a 8.5 if someone else improves less but ends up as a 9.5. Its the old question of whether you should get excited about the person who improves greatly to get an essentially undemanding qualification or the person who sails through it and comes out with top marks. In most fields of life you would want the most qualified not the most improved doctor, dentist, football player or investment manager.

Same with "other " factors. You can't weigh these and can't actually know lots of them so why reward the cricketer for looking less ungainly when other people start looking less ungainly than they do at the end? Its true Zoe might have had dance classes but its also true that world class athletes are usually fitter, more use to training and have better body awareness than the average radio DJ. To take an example from another current reality show who should be able to balance better - a fit model, a dancer,a boxer or an olympic athlete?

But Hey we're not talking Doctors or Dentists here are we??

It's a reality entertainment show after all, not exactly in the same league as Professional Qualifications for a life saving vocation.....
Wingpatrol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2006, 23:24
sugartingles
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 733
[quote=thenetworkbabe]

Sorry, network babe, I'm not getting at you. I just find this whole thing of slagging off the public quite ridiculous. We are the public. We are not immune.If we have brains and the sense to mark people out of talent and skill, shouldn't we try and allow it in others? I feel uncomfortable looking to the public to right the wrongs of last night. I personally think the judges have a lot to answer for. But I didn't mean to offend you and I'm sorry if I did. I'm just cross that the public as a whole gets written off as this brainles entity. I think that's too easy and I think that lets us all down.

Sorry xx

Last edited by sugartingles : 29-10-2006 at 23:40.
sugartingles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-10-2006, 23:34
Buzzy Bee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 288
Originally Posted by bendymixer
I truly thought the judging was out all round agree that emma and louisa overmarked and that carol was marked low whilst Karen and Mark probably deserved their win thought to put them 5 points ahead of the field was wrong
I agree. Carol's routine was lovely - her's were also the only heel turns that I saw all evening, and I definatly didn't see Emma doing any so how they could mark her higher is beyond me. I also think that the 5 mark difference between 1st and 2nd place was too much. I enjoyed Mark and Karen's dance and thought it was v good and well performed but didn't rate it that much better over Ray and Camilla.

As for the mark's they gave Brendan...aren't they supposed to be judging Claire ?

I thought Brendan was spot on with his "rant" to the judges - as was echoed by the cheer from his fellow contestants when they went to chat to Tess for their scores.
Buzzy Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-10-2006, 00:23
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
Originally Posted by sugartingles
Sorry, but that's happy horseshit.

1, Who are you - or anyone - to decide that members of the public are operating out of 'illogicality' or stupidity. Very wrong. And very offensive.

2. We don't make the judges do anything!

2, The judges don't always know best. If you want to agree with the judges, that's lovely. But please, credit the public with actually having knowledge about the dancing, the performances, the steps, etc. and having the right to disagree with the majority without having a dance step shoehorned into their arse from some perturbed off-size demographic. You don't actually speak for the rest of us.

Silly, silly talk!!!! You don't actually know these voters, so you can't call them stupid from any position of authority.

Seriously, don't speak for the intellect or judgement of others, please, it's outrageous and totally unacceptable.

Do you really think anything other than a small proportion of SCD voters judge anything on who did what step better? the judges are there precisely because of that and they mark on wider factors because thats the nature of the show. Anyone can make up their own voting system but the judges are there to try and provie one that fits the reality of the show and guide anyone modest enough to seek guidance.. True they make mistakes but thats why you have 4 of them to even things out.

The problem isn't that the public are finding different conclusions to the judges - though its pretty bizarre to reverse the experts order - its that they are producing irrational, indefensible, inconsistent results in terms of any criteria possible - dancing technique, entertainment value, or personal journeys . Do you think Spoony and at leat two other people were worse dancers than Georgina and Jan the week before last? Or that Peter danced better than at least 5 other people this week. Or that Georgina was the worst dancer this week? Or that someone in the top 6 with the judges has been in the bottom 3 both weeks? Thats what the voters are telling you.

if you get nonsensical results that clearly bear no relationship to either the talent displayed or the stories in the VTs or the judges comments, its pretty undeniable that other factors are at work unless you believe the public is always right which every politician in history would tell you is the biggest joke in history.

The voting results tell a very clear story which is universal to all reality TV shows - at least until much nearer the end. Significant numbers of people vote on the exchanges with the judges. They not only ignore the judges views but seem to deliberately vote the opposite way. It has little to do with seeing merits the judges ignore and usually ends up meaning that people who are better go home. Its got little to do with any story or personality that any particular contestant has because it happens randomly to whoever is doing worst with the judges that week and people who benefit from the anti-judge/sympathy vote can lose support again the next week.

Obviously not every voter is doing it but it looks as if a significant group do vote for the victim or anti-judge and they are probably more important early on when the most popular people are not in danger and fewer people are voting. The sheer scale of the swings in popularity week on week though suggest that unless you have massive support on a reality TV show anyone can be victims of it - totally regardless of how relatively well they perform on the night.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-10-2006, 01:28
Mrs Harman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,775
I don't think Louisa Lytton was overmarked this week except by Bruno, BUT she was overmarked for her Jive, quite simply because the judges had already way over marked Emma's Jive and Louisa's was better. I felt sorry for Carol, as she did have the best foxtrot and they scored her three points LOWER than Emma.

I am growing heartily sick of the blatant favouritism and sycophantic behaviour towards Emma, and I believe it will cost her the competition and possibly a place in the final. (Ray, Louisa, Mark) Brendan was right to speak out.
Mrs Harman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-10-2006, 10:16
sugartingles
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 733
Originally Posted by thenetworkbabe
Do you really think anything other than a small proportion of SCD voters judge anything on who did what step better? the judges are there precisely because of that and they mark on wider factors because thats the nature of the show. Anyone can make up their own voting system but the judges are there to try and provie one that fits the reality of the show and guide anyone modest enough to seek guidance.. True they make mistakes but thats why you have 4 of them to even things out.

It looks as if a significant group do vote for the victim or anti-judge and they are probably more important early on when the most popular people are not in danger and fewer people are voting. The sheer scale of the swings in popularity week on week though suggest that unless you have massive support on a reality TV show anyone can be victims of it - totally regardless of how relatively well they perform on the night.
Groan, good morning! Sorry about last night, networkbabe. I do get uncomfortable with large categorisations. You make some very thoughtful points. Some voters probably do vote for the 'hero', or against the pantomime 'villain', I guess.

I don't think this necessarily swings the judges in the decisions they make through the evening... I'm not convinced that they are subtly responding to perceived public opinion and are attempting to address the balance, although I'd like to believe it. I do sometimes sense another agenda at play.

Some acts seem to get rated higher *despite* obvious flaws, while others get deconstructed and marked down *despite* doing a comparitively decent performance. Some decisions the judges came out with on Saturday were beyond baffling and massively inconsistent. The fact that you have four judges becomes a farce when their marks are so wildly different to each other.

I do still believe that yes, a lot of people do vote because of technique, improvements made, effort put in, chemistry, elegance, energy and enjoyment, all as well as having a particular favourite, although I appreciate the main reason people vote is just to keep their favourite in.

If the judges, as you say, are there to guide people who want to learn, I think they need to start doing their job better. At the moment, I'm not convinced they are helping the people who need help, or always wanting to provide constructive criticisms. In some cases they are pandering to egos and celebrity rather than keeping their eye on the ball. At leat, that's the way it seems to me...
sugartingles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-10-2006, 10:23
Hamlet77
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Liverpool. Champions of Europe
Posts: 15,515
Sorry I have to disagree with the OP Mark has not been the most consistent celeb, he has improved enormously every week. And I have to agree with the judges this week, Karen and Mark were easily the best performance, is that allowed this week agreeing with the judges?

He cannot improve much more, that just would not be possible, and with Emma performing badly this week, but still getting hugely inflated marks and Louisa showing her youthful inexperience I do not think it is a foregone conclusion and if the likes of Ray or even Carol get on a similarly steep improvement curve then anything could happen, although Ray and Carol do not have the genius that is Karen to help them improve so much.
Hamlet77 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 30-10-2006, 15:39
nancy1975
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: On an enforced UK holiday.
Posts: 19,360
Originally Posted by CaroUK
I have a feeling that its not so much a sympathy vote in these situations as it's a backlash against the judges vote.

Certainly in the first series - the nastier the judges comments about the celebs were - the more the public voted for the slated celeb to express their dismay at what had been said. Certainly in Series 1 - the likes of Claire Sweeney ( judges pet) and Lesley Garrett went as the public voted for Chris as they felt the judges were uneccessarily nasty and personal.

They need to realise that this is either a dance competition and mark and comment objectively on ALL the contestants, or its a straight personality contest and realise that being nasty only gets the public voting. Had they not got quite so personal in week 2 - and moderated the nastiness Geoorgina would have gone then - I reckon Len's autopsy comment would have got Georgie several thousand votes as did Arlene's and Craig's.

Someone should explain to them that 10 is absolute perfection, 9 is almost perfect, and in the early weeks of the competition - even an 8 should be beyond the reach of most of the celebs, and who the judges personally like or dislike is totally irrelevant.

I'd hazard a guess that most of the GBP tune in to watch this this programme because they want to see the celebs either do unexpectedly well or fall flat on their faces - TBH they watch to be ENTERTAINED by the dancing and couldn't care less about technical perfection or a difficult routine - they want to enjoy what's put in front of them...

Drooling, leching judges of both sexes, who clearly have their own agendas are ruining it for most viewers who DO tune in to see Brendan be a bad boy, listen to Brucie's lame jokes and watch the celebs strut their stuff. The judges hated James and Camilla last year - but whilst yes - his Latin was clunky and left a lot to be desired - his ballroom was a dream to watch - if not technically perfect - probably the reason he and Camilla came 4th!

I for one refuse to be told by a judge that I should respect their opinion when they have blatantly overmarked their favourite whilst penalising another for making the same mistakes - if spatula hands is a problem for Darren G or Ray - its a problem for Zoe and Emma too ditto poor footwork - if one contestant is being clobbered the others should be too!

They need to get rid of the shrivelled harpy and the overexcited no-mark, and get in at least ONE other judge who can assess ballroom properly (Paul Killick for Bruno - and Flick Colby/ Babs Lord ( well if we can have Hot Gossip on a dance team - why not Pan's People???) in place of Arlene - or even that Salsa woman.....

Just let us have some objective marks and comments - PLEASE!
I'm sorry I'm a bit late with this, but brilliant, brilliant post.
nancy1975 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:21.