Well, he is a judge after all. They're all capable of doing the same, and do so.

The trouble is he doesn't do this to everyone, only those he wants to help. If this is not bias, what is it?

Besides, what authority he has to compensate other judges' scores?

I agree this isn't a bias towards Emma. We've seen them do this on many occasions.

However I do think it's a bit high-handed of Bruno to decide he knows best and deliberately reduce the impact of the other judges. If they retaliated, we would end up in a situation where one judge gave 10 and another 1, just because one thought it was slightly better than the other and wanted to get their way.

Bruno seemed to imply he thought it was worth an eight, and that he gave a nine because he thought the other judges should have given eight instead of seven. Well, that's not up to him.

But by his admission, he's doing the jobs of others as well as his

I understand what you're saying, but it's still a bias for Emma. I doubt very much he'd have done the same for Schmichel or Claire, so in that sense it is a specific bias for those he considers to be final material or 'the best dancers'. In Bruno's case that's Emma and Louisa, possibly Mark.

He's admitting that he specifically, knowingly and with intent warped her scoring to keep her from the bottom. By saying that, he's stating a preference for her above others who he did not do that for. Hence, a bias.

The whole point of unbaised Judging is to give a fair, accurate mark based on personal appraisal of the dance and it's merits. If he is over compensating for others marks for those he likes, that's just pure corruption I'm afraid.

Brilliant post!

lol, will you guys get over it...it's not like Bruno is the only one ever to give Bias marking and certainly not just for Emma, i'm pretty sure in the past Arlene has probably marked Mark higher than deserved etc etc.....i've seen the same things in the American version also. You could say all the judges are bias towards Emma infact given they gave Carols cha cha the same overall score when from their comments you would believe it was better than Emmas.
IMO Bruno has certainly marked Louisa up in the past because 'she's 17' which should only really give her the advantage of learning quicker and being more flexible having more stamina and a better body than the others really, plus she's an actress which from what i've veiwed certainly seems to help with the performance side of the dances for most actors/actresses.
I did love her Tango on Sat though before anyone comes bashing me as some Louisa hater or whatever.
I've loved different dances that most of the celebs have done in fact. My allegience seems to change every week hehe.
Also if Bruno considers them the best dancers overall why shouldn't he mark them up i mean would you rather have someone with no dancing talent at all stay in just because someone else has a bad week? I mean it's not like the audience voting is completely fair either...how many ppl vote on the best dance and how many vote on who their fave celeb is but it probably all evens out in the end...and if it doesn't well thats just life. If it was fair well Arsenal would win the Premiership every year :P
Last edited by missmanics : 20-11-2006 at 20:50

Totally agree.

And - as Emma was the first dancer and so the 'benchmark' why not score the dance what it was actually worth (8 if he felt so inclined) and if he thought the others were not as good - then score them lower!

Even if that meant that only a couple of the pairs scored over 30 would that be so bad?

The leader board should find it's own level week by week - obviously people are going to be better at some dances than others - so just go with that. Mark what you see (said in Roy Walker-style) and not what you want to see.

Firstly, I think Bruno - like any of the judges - would and have done so for other couples and not just the "best" ones. We see almost every week how he and Len more often than not score the couples higher than Craig and Arlene. Why do they do so? Not to keep them from the bottom evidently as they do it with everyone including the ones they think should go. They do so because they think that by giving higher marks, the total score will then be more balanced to produce a fairer overall result and a fairer leaderboard. This is the same motivation behind him giving Emma a 9. It wasn't to keep her from the bottom. Bruno didn't have foresight to know that she might be bottom without a 9. For all he knew, everyone else could have been worse. It was clearly because he felt the others undermarked and he adjusted accordingly, just in the way that all the judges do, not because of an irrational preference for Emma (which would indeed have been a bias). If Bruno was truly biased he would be giving Emma 9s and then everyone else 1s-8s to make sure she's not on bottom. He can do this after all if he wanted; if he was motivated by bias alone. This didn't happen however. This was not a bias for Emma, or biased marking. It was the exercise of normal scoring practice that has been jumped upon by those continually claiming Emma is the judge's favourite and is overmarked.

A quick look at scores given will show you otherwise. If Bruno votes on bias and Louisa is the object of that bias, then why give her only a 7 for her quickstep when he must have known this could have endangered her, esp with the 7 and 6 from Craig and Len respectively? Surely if he was working on a bias, he would have given higher scores to keep her from the risk of coming bottom.

But Bruno said so himself! This is one of the reasons he gave for scoring her higher than the others

Go Brendan!

If Bruno had an ounce of common sense he would have given her the score the routine deserved. All he has done is create more backlash for himself and more importantly, caused yet again further anti-Emma feelings.

Trouble is, he doesnt suffer from his idiocy, Emma does

Although I don't blame Bruno for admitting what we really knew about the judging anyway, it does reinforce the point that this is not a serious competition. The inference was that Emma & Darren were not worth the '9' he gave them and therefore - all other things being equal - should have been placed equal 4th on Saturday rather than equal 3rd. We can't be sure but that might have led to Emma's elimination....although it's possible that Emma's low public vote was partly due to Bruno's over-marking.

However, as I said in another post, the other judges may be doing the same thing as Bruno so it may be a case of swings and roundabouts. Ultimately, it's just a piece of theatrical light entertainment and not to be taken too seriously.

But surely the others cannot be compensating, not as much, as they don't come on last? Bruno is the one with the majority of the power. It's almost like he has taken Head Judge on his shoulders and gives a balancing mark to get the couples where, within reason, he wants them in the table!

Thats undermining all of the others.

OK, we all like some more than others, but if they are going to be given an opinion then surely it shouldn't be able to be overridden. That's our job!
Last edited by Kez100 : 20-11-2006 at 21:18

Burno has lost Emma some votes I think this week

I think so and I am very sorry for her. I'm no fan of hers but when she dances well she deserves support, as she is good.

Emma must have lost a few when she said she smiles so that people don't notice her feet.

Judging by Saturday's results she can't afford to loose any more votes!

One would have thought he'd learnt his lesson by now after the Zoe Ball fiasco last series

Well it was exactly what I thought when he did it. Having said that however, I am a little shocked that he would actually admit it on TV. If Emma gives a weaker peformance then she deserves to be marked lower than she was before. This is kind of like the Anton/Jan thing in reverse.

Just watched ITT as i recorded it........i think Bruno has really come unstuck tonight.

Where's the professional integrity in a judge stating that no matter what the dance is like that he's judging he will overmark because he thinks the other judges will undermark (in his opinion)

Surely as a judge you are supposed to look at the dance.........and score it totally independently according to what you thought about it

Sounds pretty simple to me.....

No they are not. How can Craig, who goes first, compensate for marks others give after him. Each judge should give the marks they honestly feel the dance they see is worth, otherwise, why bother?

At the end of the day Bruno marked her dance not on her dance ability but as a defence against her going out. Which means his 9 (a step below perfection) is virtually worthless. He should and MUST show more integrity and mark accordingly and "let the dice roll as they may" when it comes to the leaderboard and eventual public vote. He clearly hasn't learned from last series with Zoe Ball. If I was Louisa and Emma I would be worried

What effect is that? Giving a good dancer high marks? Or disliking a good dancer because they get high marks?


Perhaps part of the problem is thinking 9 has to mean a step below perfection.

What should he have learned from last series with Zoe Ball?
Last edited by Veri : 21-11-2006 at 05:41

Oh Bruno and the Case of the Attack of the Runaway Gob. What was he thinking to admit this? Of course I may be OTT about this (not the first time and I'm usually totally wide of the target!) but what price his credibility now?

It's not that I don't have some sympathy with what he tries to do. I suspect, as a sufferer along with many on these boards, of Obsessive Mark Ramprakash Disorder that our man may have benefited from adjustment after CRH's almost petulant score of 5. What was that about? OK the dance didn't sizzle, but it was technically accurate and error-free. Pontificating Craig "This is a dance competition why don't the viewing public understand!" Revel-Horwood came very close to threatening the continuing participation of arguably one of the most talented dancers. I'm not saying he shouldn't score how he sees fit but surely little bit of context and perspective is required.

So Bruno & Len might have upped their scores, who knows? But surely the first rule at Light Entertainment TV School is "never admit anything".

What is Mr. Cole going to make of all this?