The judges between themselves are inconsistant...the public is not.

For them is a lot about personality, perseverance and taking the knocks from the judges who instead of offering constructive criticism throw out insults which makes the public defend their favourites even more...their comments may get a 2 second laugh but they put the public on the defensive, as they see these celebrities who are struggling to overcome their shyness, lack of rhythm and awkwardness
with such effort and committment.

Both Kate and Kenny laugh at their short comings, go out and enjoy themselves, and entertain in a way that intense, competitive and technically competitive celebrities don't.

It is not all about the technical aspects of dancing... it is about raw celebrities going out and trying to learn to dance.

Some have previous experience, some pick it up quicker than others, and watching how they progress is what it is all about and it should be judged as much on efort, lack of previous experience, as much as anything else.

Great post..... this is the thing which made Series 1 the original and best. Ever since, the BBC have tried to get more and more accomplished participants and this year it finally seems to be backfiring on them

its not that oneof those two escaped the bottom two. Its that both did. Its also where they must have come to escape - 4th and 5th at least. its also what happened to everyone else because the only reason the people below Gabby were not in the bottom two was that the voters must have reversed the judges order pretty comprehensively there too. Its not only Penny and Gabby not getting votes - its Letitia, Dom and possibly Gethin too.

Basically its as bad as you say it is - but then worse still.

Personally I prefer the format of the BBC shows like Joseph and The Sound of Music <or whatever it was called> I realise there is much more at stake to the competitors than SCD.

The judges give their constructive criticisms and opinions etc <without resulting to nasty personal insults!> they don`t have a vote until it comes down to the final two with the least public votes each week.

At least there wasnt the backlash that we are seeing in SCD.

There is no consistency in the public vote (though the top 3 may be immune to the problem.)

It doesn't seem to have anything more to do with story than it does dancing ability, Some people seem on the results not to vote on story any more than they vote on the dancing. Some that do just produce unforseen random consequences as the vote to save kenny is the one that dumps Penny or Dom or Letitia into the bottom two which wasn't their intention when they did it. and wouldn't be their desird result if they voted on whose dancing they liked.

The votes historically do not benefit the people who are trying hardest. or have the best story , or are improving most, or bring something else to the show. People who are trying hardest often go. Willie had a superb story but wasn't saved. Letitia is trying and improving but was almost in the bottom three last night given the maths of who wasn't in the bottom two.Stephanie was really funny but went. Dom got fewer votes than Kenny last night with a bravery story and a personality. All experience last year was that the people who were doing badly but winning popular support went out as soon as their performance attracted positive comments and marks from the judges.

In so far as there are patterns in recent SCD voting its that attractive females in the last three series have attracted fewer votes than their judges marks suggested whilst hunky male sportsmen, regardless, pick up a journey vote. Apart from that , the biggest correlation is that who ever the judges dislike that week is moved well up the public voting order and people who danced better and may have an equally good story are shunted downwards to fill the gaps and go.

Might get around the problem of people voting against the judges but taking out the judges votes would mean even more good people in the bottom of the only (public) vote . I don't think you can be constructive about dire performances either - some people would still react even to milder language. It may have something to do with some people just not liking judgements or standards and any situation where everyone doesn't pass and get a gold star.

You could let the judges pick the bottom two or three and the public decide? Wasn't Fame Academy one like that? Or they could do a Fame Academy Two and have three in danger and let the judges decide who stays or split the decision between the judges and the pros or the judges and the other pros/celebs. It worked on FA2 as the students made sensible calls. The problem then is if he public put three good people in the last three - which I think they did last night. On my maths Letitia would have gone with 3 up - which would have been less of a loss but still a bad result.

Wow. Guess it has nothing to do with Kelly Brook winning the whole thing!!!!!

Get rid of the competion early. Hmmm BBC and phone in's.

That may work but could see alot of arguing between the judges especially when the number of celebs dwindle. Judges have their own favourites too.

Unless she starts to get the public backing I honestly don`t see her winning. Anti-Kelly votes will probably exceed the pro-Kelly votes when it comes to the final.

Unless she is against Kate in the final

If more women than men phone up and vote, I think Matt Di Angelo will win. You're already seeing bizarre tactical voting taking place. Gabby Logan wasn't the worst dancer - far from it - but she's got booted off the show.

Zoe Ball was the best dancer of series three - lost out to Darren Gough. Being the best dancer has no bearing on the final result. It's who is the most popular with the audience.

And it's possible the whole voting is rigged. The producers could decide who is going to be booted off prior to the show. Go prove it's genuine. You can't. TV show routinely con the audience. Just look at all the tv show telephone scams this last year. The producers could do market research as to whom is the most popular with the audience (not by how many people phone in and vote) and then ditch the least popular. If that is the case, expect Angelo or Jones to win the show. Every time a good dancer is booted off at the expense of a poor one you could be seeing some form of rigged voting.

A load of random thoughts:

I cannot believe for one minute the voting is rigged in any shape or form - if this were true and were exposed, the BBC would be shaken to the core.

This is not, and has never been, a true dancing competition. Anyone who thinks so is gently deluded.

There was a dancing competition on the BBC some years ago, and it was axed because no one was interested (I think it was called Come Dancing if I remember correctly).

Even the very, very best celeb dancers cannot come within a country mile of the pro dancers. So if the show was about the best dancers, we'd boot out the slebs now (including that Kelly Brook creature and Alesha too) and have a competition between Anton, Nicole and all the rest of them.

No, this show is supposed to be about gutsy, determined effort and winning out in the face of adversity.

The public can see Gaby for what she is - a former (edit: commonwealth) gymnast => near the finished article => still quite boring => not worth voting in.

What about Penny? Well, a nice enough girl, but as far as I know famous only for marrying some old farty rockstar - Camilla's better than her as a dancer (in looks too) - so why should I vote for her? I'd rather vote for John Barnes - not much of a dancer but much more fun to watch.

Anyone who thinks this is a dancing competition needs to wake up.

Travesty? Gaby and Penny have no chance of reaching the final anyway, so what does it matter which week they get booted off?

Matt and Alesha's dances - now they were worth getting excited about. We should have the final now and bin the rest of the wreck of this once great programme.
Last edited by ITMA : 29-10-2007 at 00:58

Just got home and watched it. does not cover it. I screamed about 1000 decibels when Kate and Anton were called. Its going to be like that series of IACGMOOH when the public repeatedly got Natalie Appleton to do bushtucker trials. I think that saving her now is just going to torment the poor woman. I would never have guessed that it would be between Penny and Gabby. I wasn't blown away by Gabby's samba at all, and neither was the general public by the looks of things. There was just an air of smugness that refused to go away on the part of Gabby, that didn't make me warm to her. I like Penny and Ian and am happy they stayed.

If you accept all the its not a dancing competition case you could end the show after programme one .Give Kelly the win on night one if people like a slightly more polished version or Alesha if you want it a bit more natural. If the voters wanted hunks you would let Matt win for being a bit worse than the girls but male or Gethin for being shy or Kenny for looking hunkiest Thats all visible in week one.

If there is a series you have to allow the top people to compete to see who will get better and challenge the order - a compettition between the top two or three and the dire just isn't worth watching - its predictable now - as you said. . Its not obvious yet either that Gabby or Penny won't be contenders at the end - the judges marks don't suggest that, people slip up , other people can gain strong stories and its even possible that Alesha and Kelly (or one of them) have no votes either.. its pretty obvious Kenny and Kate won't be anything like as good though - however long they try.

There is no relationship in recent results between doing well and guts, effort or adversity - the people on so called journeys have never demonstrably had more of any of these than the people who danced better (and often worked harder) or tried harder and went out earlier. I can't see any argument that kenny has more guts, determination or is dealing with more adversity than Willie was or Letitia and Dom are - yet the vote put Kenny and Kate above (in one case way above) those people. Jon wasn't gutsy one week and less so the next which is waht his public vote would suggest. Being bad isn't a virtue - how hard you try and where you get to are. We know that Gabby, Penny, Letitia, Kelly and Alesha are working harder.

Agree about the rigged voting . They wouldn't dare. They are not playing with the marks either to protect their good people from the nonsenses of tthe public vote - probably because it made a mess worse last year and they expected the judges choice who went to sort the problem out .

The rigging argument isn't necessary . All you need to get Saturday's vote is for two things to happen. Enough people have to vote for who ever the judges don't llike and another group of people have to cast sympathy votes for the weakest performers without understanding that a vote for somebody weak means that someone better inevitably goes. There might be a betting scam or a particularly active fan base on top of that but those are probably less liklely as people with big fan bases do poorly too and we havn't heard of any betting enquires.

I don't really try to work out the tactical and statistical elements of the public vote as a rule (maths is not my strongpoint) but it seems to me that GBP knows full well that if Kate or Kenny were ever in the bottom two with another couple then the judges would vote them off in a heartbeat, never mind a dance off. If they were up against each other, I think that Kenny would win through. It seems that the majority of the studio audience were of the same opinion, that Kate, Kenny and John Barnes were the poorest dancers on the night. IMHO Barnes is the best of the three, and these are the ones that should be fighting it out over the next few weeks, leaving the more promising dancers to get on with the competition. I have, however, seen in all of the series over the years, a distinct battle developing between the judges and public choices.

This new system was supposed to prevent poor dancers getting through at the expense of better ones, but the public seem to have worked out a way of saving their favourites from the dance off, simply by making sure that they are never in the bottom two. Process of elimination should, however, mean that eventually, these dancers should appear before the judges.

The sorry state of the first series was supposed to be avoided by this system...we shall see...

I was shocked too by the result, but on the other hand have to accept that it isnt just based on the dancing, it is based on the characters, whether they are improving, the criticism they take, whether we think they could improve next week. I understand it is a dancing programme, but if we were meant to just vote on dancing and not personality, then we wouldnt have celebs in it. Its about them as people as well as the dance

I felt Gabby was far too competitive, although she didnt deserve to go, her attitude was not that of someone who I would of liked to win

It was even worse than that. When you look at who must have got more than Penny's minimum of 9 points overall and how many public votes they needed to get them, it becomes clear that one of Letitia, Matt, Alesha or Kelly was also dumped in ninth place (unless the maths went wrong) - you suspect Letitia. The vote didn't only thrust the worst dancers up - it saw everyone move up and down as the voters order reversed the judges.

If Kate is at least 4th and Kenny fifth (which is what must have happened to give them more points than Penny) unless something changes they could stay a very long time until the alternative is each other or someone at the top of the vote. Even that assumes they are no higher than 4th and 5th which they could be.

The judges tried a marking varaition already when they put a lot of people on the same marks earning 5 points so Kate was way below them on 1. That didn't work as she jumped up at least 6 places in the public vote that week.

They could try the ultimate trap and put say the top 2 on 10 and 9 and evryone else but Kate on the same mark in third place with 8 points from teh judges leaving Kate alone on 1. If that didn't get her into the bottom 2, i think Len and Bruno might decide to stay in LA.

Brucie's not amused either.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...icle398224.ece

How anyone can dance the American Smooth to that strange band I will never know. Those that do deserve a medal for doing that anyhow.

The whole ethos of this dance is swing music. And swing this band cannot do. The situation is hardly helped by the inability of the singing group to stay on key and insist on making the effect worse by adopting gospelish wailing cadenzas (I think that is what it is called - I believe they might think they are improvising)

If the band gets any smaller they might just as well import the band off Peter Kay's, Pheonix Nights.

This travesty of a result may just be avoided if the producers actually chose contestants who could win, instead of purposely selecting unlikely characters who they think will create controversy keeping the tabloids happy.

I hear Patrick Moore will be asked onto the next series.

The producers will have to decide whether thay want a soap opera or a genuine series celebrating ballroom dancing.

This is the first series of Strictly I've actually watched...I thought Gaby was really good, and didn't deserve to be booted off.

The only way to stop the contestants' fan bases keeping them in, regardless of how good/bad they are, is to have the public vote for who should go rather than who should stay.

I totally agree. I was so upset last night when poor Gabby had to leave. What's the matter with people? Are they voting for the worst dancers on purpose? If this kind of thing continues the judges will just have to be given more power to ensure that the best couples do stay in and the worst have to go.

The BBC should remember that it's the viewing audience that matters the most - for the judges and presenters to sit there and basically slag off the public for their voting was a very dodgy thing of them to do. The customer is supposed to be king after all.

I thought it was pretty hilarious actually, no doubt Gabby will be crying on Mummy's shoulder for a few days. And boy am I sick of hearing she's got twins, you'd think she's the only woman alive who has managed that feat!

Exactly. The show is flawed and they only have themselves to blame. But hey, look at all the publicity the show is getting this morning...

Are you a musician? My other half (who is a semi pro trombonist and head of music) both think the band are brilliant. They have to play all styles of music and part of the enjoyment of the show for me is listening to them - especially in the big band swing numbers.

The musicians are fine, the singers however are beyond belief. They are consistently awful every week.