It has ensured the 2 best dancers for the Final. The judges have been honest from the beginning that this was what they wanted.

Or do you feel that the judges have to much power in getting to give half the points and decide who goes in the dance off.

Being able to change the criteria for judging the dance off ( sometimes it's on overall potential, sometimes on improvement and at the moment absolutely on the dance at that moment.

Erratic and inconsistent judging that sees wide inconsistencies between judges, between dances and between celebs. That often result in board placements that ensure the judges choice to go goes eg Lots of ties at the top of the board.

If you don't like the system what would you do to improve it?

the main change is that when it gets to the final three it should be public vote only, because it's the only way someone at the top of the public vote could realistically go out

Der Chef says

What I would like to see is the judges having two votes

One for technical merit and one for performance

That way the fab 4 will have to justify their decisions better rather than that waste of space Bruno screaming platitudes and holding up 10 because he simply loved it


Ohhh Yeah

Judges will never want to reduce their power. I'm surprised they haven't got a dance-off in the final by now!
The public vote must hold sway even if there are glitches early on. And certainly this late on their vote should be decisive.
Forward to the past - and bring back the old system.

I don't like the dance off and judges' final decision system. But if the BBC insist on sticking with it I'd prefer that Len did not have the casting vote; instead, if there was a tie in the judges' decision the person with the highest public vote would be saved. So effectively the public have the final say if the judges are divided rather than just Len.

Am loving the judges veto as it over-rules the insane British public love of rewarding the mediocre.

I think the BBC thought that this new system would 'weed' out the poorer dancers which it obviously didn't (Kenny and Kate) as the judges were so annoyed at who the public were putting into the dance-offs whichever system is used this will always be the case but I would like to go back to the old system as we are the ones who have to pay for the calls and we should have the final say.

That will just lead to more Darrens & Matts in the final.

Unfortunately though, it often didn't, it just made the manic folk who vote for bad dancers vote twice as much and leave better ones in the dance off.

I'd prefer the results on a Saturday night, but I've got used to the Dance off and think it's okay.

I have to say that I go off the show at the end of the series when there are too few couples left to give variety. That is what makes the early rounds so interesting.
So how about keeping 4 or 5 for the last 2 or 3 weeks with results rolling forward towards the final night?

Yes, that's what I was going to write too. I quite like the dance off early on because it makes it less likely really good dances go out early, plus it adds to the suspense. But it was absolutely pointless having a dance off with only 3 left in the competition, and made the public votes almost irrelevant.

If it's fair to have a dance off in the semi final when the judges can overrule the public, why don't they keep it in the final too?

How is it fair at one stage of the competition and not the next?

If they are justified in having it in the first place, why not be consistent?

I agree totally, and have said this since the beginning.

I think this is a feasible option, and it's only fair the public have their say.

I think in fairness, the judges have always voted the right person out - with the exception of Gethin. But the truth is, the dance off hasnt worked, as poor dancers like Kenny and Kate still lasted way to long, over much more gifted dancers like Gabby and Penny.

It's imperative to look at what the new system has actually produced.

It always makes me laugh that so many people approach these questions from the POV of what they believe the 'stupid' producers were trying to achieve. Ignore that...and focus on what's actually happened.

1. The dance-off is the centerpiece of a highly successful Sunday evening results show.

2. The dance-off has produced more controversy. Controversy is the life-blood of this type of RTV show.

Those who believe the propaganda that the dance-off was introduced to save 'good' dancers being eliminated don't know what they're watching. It doesn't do that clearly. Instead it introduces an extra layer of controversy. We still have controversy over rubbish dancers being saved and now we have more controversy over judges booting the 'wrong' and/or possibly the most popular dancer in the dance-off.

The system works for the producers because they have more control and extra powers of manipulation...and yet that they have convinced substantial numbers of viewers that it's not about that at all. It's certainly not the producers who are 'stupid'.

It hasn't produced a fairer competition but of course it wasn't remotely about that in the first place.

I like that point, and it works for other shows as well. I mean that there's often an assumption that the producers were trying to do this or that and failed, because they're stupid, or because they're "Tarquins", or because they were outsmarted, or whatever -- when maybe what it's what actually happened that the producers wanted to happen.

There are numerous applications in Big Brother.

If they have to have a public vote it may be necessary to go a stage further and ensure the potential finalists don't go out early again to the most dire. There might be some mileage there in looking at the Fame Academy 2 approach and letting someone save two of the bottom three in the public vote ( judges and ?) . Or you could make the dance count more by going to the FA 1 approach (I think) and saying these people are in the bottom half of the judges leader board you can vote for one of them to go but no one higher up it is at risk.

I like to see people with real dancing potential progress, through this programme. And there's little doubt that Gabby Logan and Penny Lancaster had a bit of potential - not a lot, I think, but rather more than say Kate or Kenny. So sometimes the public are an ass.

I don't think there is any "fix" involved. How stupid do you think the BBC are? I don't like the new system, for sure.

I wish both of them the best of luck for the final, and I truly hope that Alesha wins.

Fascinating post. So perhaps the show thought that Alesha v Gethin was too boring because neither one has a good enough story or "journey" -- but with Matt's meltdown, his "greatest comeback since A Star Is Born" -- and the infuriated Gethin fans (and Alesha fans worried about another "sympathy" or prettyboy vote) -- all those stoked, enraged, or worried folks will bring in more money via votes than dull old Gethin v Alesha, who'd only invigorate and force to the phone voters who were fans of theirs to begin with.

Well, I don't know if I'm interpreting what you said properly - but I've been wondering what on EARTH would possess the producers of these shows to manipulate an "unfair" result - and Eureka! I think you explained it!

But then, I'm a huge Matt fanatic and I think his Waltz was worth Craig's rare and radiant "10" but even if they didn't think his waltz was worth a 10 and even if they didn't want to keep him in the dance off, I can see why the producers might urge them to do so. and you don't bite the hand that feeds ya.

Also, Matt was pretty smart to make that promise to Flavia to get her to the finals. What a sweet human interest story, added to the meltdown story. Matt's the SCD PR man's dream. Or at least the best he can do this season. Then throw in the Mavia romance rumors (or did they get planted by said PR man?) and all the intimate hugging and snogging etc. Maybe Gethin should have played the game a little more savvily - get some showmance stuff going, or at least the dating rumors w/that opera singer, sooner?

The problem with that is that there hasn't been a 2-2 Judges split yet and I've thought some of the 3-1 votes have been so as not to make the losing Celeb feel too bad.

There is no way the Judges don't discuss it.

Go back to the old system, let the people paying to vote, rather than those getting paid to Judge, have a major say. You had shocks with the old system, we've had shocks with the new system, let "people's favourites" get through.

I think that the BBC would be very foolish not to revert to the old system for the next series.

One change I would like to see made to the system is a procedure for replacing couples who have to drop out.

That's happened 2 series in a row, and has had the effect of reducing the excitement of all the following shows in each series. Being one couple down makes a significant impact as the final approaches.

There could either be: a non-elimination week, or having a standby couple, or pulling back the previous weeks leaver, or pulling back the couple with the highest previous score, or anything else.

Now I was supporting Tish, and have no gripes about her going out when she did. (so that takes the bias out of my answer).

If you look back on series past, all the finals have been good - they have had exciting dances in, and a good contestant has won. There have been surprises in all series with good dancers going out early (spoony) and bad dancers staying in longer (Chris Parker) - exactly the same as in this series.

Therefore, I find it difficult to see what difference the judges having a vote has had on the couples in the final. From about half way through it seems that it would be one of
four (Alesha, Kelly, Matt or Gethin), and I believe that it would have been one of these four, without the judges vote.

I haven't seen any viewing figures for the Sunday Night show - I like seeing more of the professional dancers, but, if that's what people enjoy why not bring back the old "Come Dancing"..it would be nice to see them compete properly in thier couples.

I think that the judges are beginning to be a bit of a liability, the comments v's the marks have been really inconsistent, some of the stuff that they have said has been rude, and thier egos are taking over.

So, in short, the Sunday programme has done nothing for the series - however, it has saved the BBC the trouble of thinking of anything new to put on on a Sunday.