Ah, I get you.

Yes, the ballroom dances are harder to sell than the Latin ones. "Latin" is always equated with "sexy", so it's easier to promote them.

Hmmm... how about West Coast Swing as a new dance? It's quite respectable, and there's a small-but-growing scene in the UK for it.

I just hope they don't include bloody Bachata, it's almost as silly as Merengue.

I'd rather they didn't have any new dances to be honest, just the ten dances would be fine for me! Although I do have a soft spot for American Smooth.

I know the BBC want to milk it, but I think fourteen weeks is far too much. What exactly are they going to do if two celebs need to withdraw this year, have a one person final?

Personally, I appreciate the structure that the 5+5 provides, but I'm also under no illusions that this structure is anything but artificial - there's nothing special about those 10, they just happened to be inside the curriculum at the time these things were being set up.

I also appreciate that it's a good thing to represent partner dances which are actually being done socially. Not many people go out on a Saturday night and dance the paso doble, for example.


Yes, I agree. It's excessive, and it's devaluing the brand. Moreover, with the 4-week training period, that's 18 weeks to commit - 4 months. It's a serious amount of time and energy, and it limits people's availability.

I hadn't thought about it like that actually. But then isn't the significance of those ten to do with dancesport?

My main reason for thinking it should stick to those, is that way at least all the pros have some experience of each dance. I'm not sure it's such a great thing to put the pros in the position of being expected to teach dances they've never done themselves. I know being dance professionals they'll pick these things up much more quickly than the average person would, but I'm still not sure it's a great thing.

Also I've read a lot of criticisms of the way some of the 'new' dances are choreographed and danced. So is it such a great thing to represent other dances, if they aren't being done correctly?

LOL. Wouldn't put it past them...... I doubt they'd manage to come up with a better idea!

I kind of want that to happen now just to see what they do!

The Argentine Tango was new to Camilla and it did not come off well with Gethin on the night of their eviction. Matt D did not take to it either, but he was saved by the Argie expert Flavia.

In the Final Alesha reprised her highly-marked waltz, highly marked again on the reprise. Not a criticism, but I would have preferred any repeated dance to be done to new music and new choreography, to demonstrate that the celeb has understood the wider aspects of dance, not just monkey-watch monkey-do one fixed routine. So Ten Dance, plus repeats with variation.

Why single out Alesha? Matt DA and Alesha both reprised two routines in the final. That's the way it has been done for the last five series.

It was just an opinion. We all have them Katie P like arses

Right, but did I say he was wrong or that he wasn't entitled to hold it? All I asked was why Alesha reprising her Waltz bothered him, when there were three other reprised dances that night, and when that is the tradition of the Strictly final.

Perhaps because Matt Di Angelo didn't re-do his highly scoring waltz? The dances he did were not his best scoring ones as i presume they cannot reprise their semi-final dances - that's how i took the point anyway.

I do a agree that the way the semis and final is done on DWTS is much better - new routines to new music. I'd rather see that than do 5 dances at a lower standard because they have too much to do.

Not singling out Alesha at all. Indeed reprises were the norm.

Alesha's waltz came to mind as it was an outstanding memory for many the first time round and eagerly awaited the second time, although some say not with the same impact second time.

Alesha unquestionably had much more than just that waltz in her, and it would have been welcome to see a second sparkling variation. Had Matt D been allowed by the rules to reprise the four-10 waltz in the Final, then the same point would have been made about that high-profile reprise.

A tradition might be reviewable, unless it is already perfect.

There might be more room for that if in fact they do finish on a three person final this year, as presumably that will end the need to do five dances each. No way on earth would they have time to learn new dances in the ballroom and latin rounds on top of the three new dances they also learn for the two person final!
I'm pretty sure it is because of that, because I remember that Darren Gough wanted to do his Waltz in the final, but wasn't allowed because he had done it in the semi.

I guess they don't want the same dances repeated two weeks running, although it's hard because a lot of people have done their best dances in the semi.

Yep, I agree ~ the same thing was brought up when Mark & Karen did a cracking AT in the semi (iirc) but then chose not to do it again for the final as it would have been performed two weeks in a row.

I have to say even though Camilla isn't an expert in AT, her dance with Gethin in the semi-final last year was absolutely gorgeous, it was powerful and I thought personally very sexy and seductive, better than Matt Di Angelo's and just as good as Alesha's.

From Hayley

Yes, that set is the set defined as DanceSport by the relevant governing bodies.

And in practical terms, there's a ready-made set of professional dancers, choreographers and judges available within that set, who are familiar with all those dances. As you say.

Yes, arguably, it's a bit mean to ask professional dancers to learn, teach and perform a highly-complex dance like AT, which is unlike any of the ballroom or latin dances (although salsa should be a doddle for them).

On the other hand, they are professional dancers, teachers and choreographers, and they should know more than enough to do a reasonable 90-second showcase.


Mostly from me probably


Yes - because I'd rather have them danced and displayed than not.

One of the things that inspired me to finally take up AT was watching it on SCD, for example.

Camilla did fantastically well under special cirucumstances, as did Gethin. When they came out it was immediately after Matt D's four 10 waltz. With their paso having scored low they both knew their goose was cooked, that their long hopeful journey was to end on the night. Of the two Camilla looked more shocked and dismayed. I was scared how she would react so soon after a fresh shock, but she carried it off like a trooper.

In a Norfolk radio broadcast at Easter Camilla commented on her first reaction to dancing the Argie - how she thought the dance was unusual in that it was less an exhibition for the public, more externalising a dancer's internal feelings. A woman makes such thigh movements that I wonder if pre-puberty children would even understand what it is about.

Interesting. Personally, I though Gethin was superb - the best of the three, in my view. Confident, stylish, commanding.

Whereas Matt looked horribly out of his depth, he had a "rabbit in the headlights" expression throughout.


Agree

...at least some of the changes in format.

e.g.
Season 3 - order of elimination: Siobhan, Jaye, Gloria, Fiona.... notice anything??

Therefore, Season 4: introduction of mens' and womens' weeks to ensure a better gender balance.

AND THEN

Season 4 - shock eliminations of Ray and Spoony before their time, against much worse dancers

Therefore, Season 5: introduction of judges' decisions.

So, people voting for the crap dancers (or their favourite pro ) are provoking these format changes.

I'm pretty sure the men's and women's weeks were brought in when they increased the number of contestants to fourteen, because they thought fourteen dances in one night was too many.

As for those celebs in series three being eliminated, frankly none of them was a great dancer, and the only shock was that Fiona lasted until week four.

There is utterly no logic to your statement whatsoever.

The extra dances are required to fill in the extra weeks due to a gradual increase from 8 couples in series 1 to 16 couples this year. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the vagaries of the voting public. In previous series the American Smooth, AT, salsa and VW have been added to fill in those extra weeks. Hence us all wondering what they will bring in to fill in the extra weeks with the unprecedented 16 couples this year.

I doubt that the beeb have chosen to add extra dancers purely because they're dissatisfied with the voting patterns in previous years. They've done it becaase the phrase "too much of a good thing" is unknown at BBC HQ and they're going to milk SCD for all it's worth.

I just don't get the basis of your point at all, I'm afraid......


That is exactly right.

Errr, not sure of the logic there.

Also not sure how this equates to the "more dancers" thing?

It's really not that hard to understand what I'm saying even if you don't agree with it....

Ok, we don't know exactly why the male/female weeks were introduced... it may be because of the extra number of contestants, but the fact that in S3, the first four celebrities voted off were female may also have had a role in the decision (which was my point).

And the judges' decision was introduced to apparently keep the better dancers in - something which was almost certainly a result of crazy voting patterns of the GBP.

Can anyone just confirm for me please....will the judges have the casting vote this year in the dance off again?

Pretty sure they will yes.....certainly the dance off is back again this year.