Remember we are often dreading the dreaded dance-off, especially if the bottom two couples are not deserving to be there.

I watched some youtube clip of this year's *cough* X-Factor and noticed that they also have four judges. So when their votes tie, they revert back to the public vote!

Why didn't BBC get this into their head? If the four judges tie in their decision, then it's only right they respect the public votes fair and square? Why should Len have the decisive vote?

What do you guys think?!

Edit to add: Maybe they should raise a card to say who are are saving at the same time so that there is no time for them to 'confer' or 'conspire' who to save. This will ensure the judges' decisions are not biased...

The judges vote was introduced to ensure Good Dancers, like Ray Fearon(series4) were not eliminated early......but as we know it was a bit hit and miss last year, in that the worst dancers did`t end up in the bottom two every week and the judges ended up having to eliminate contestants that had more to offer than the likes of Kate Garroway. I don`t watch the X-factor but I do know that the judges will always support their own act and their vote is therefore biased....hence in the event of a tie the public vote wins.Love or loath them the SCD judges don`t have this inherent bias and can therefore vote to save the best Dancer....we may argue about their choice but at least they don`t have a vested interest to save a particular contestant......I think the BBC just want to ensure that if the likes of Alesha/Rachel ended up in the bottom two with Kate/Gary that the right person is saved......but the problem is when Dancers of equal merit like Gethin and Matt end up in the bottom 2....if you defer to the audience vote for them then you have to defer to the audience vote for a Rachel/John scenario.....Having said all that......if it really is a close call then I don`t think Len should have the final say and the audience vote should be the decider......eg..last year..Matt/Gethin; Rachel/Gabby.

ps...re-reading this post I`v just realised I`v spent 10min writing a post that basically agrees with yours......and I started off with the premise that I disagreed with you.

BUT, Len and the judges complained when they have to choose between two GOOD dancers, case in point Penny and Gabby, and Penny and Matt of last year. So they should be given a choice to 'relinquish' their responsibility if they can't decide between the two. If Arlene and Craig chose couple A and Bruno chose couple B. I can't see how could Len be 'fair' at overriding the decision of both Arlene and Craig when he chose couple B? Either they have five judges otherwise I think the public votes should come into play when there is a deadlock.

I`v edited my post and added a little more.....I must be feeling tired.

I disagree with the judges deciding all together! I think whoever gets the lowest overall score should go be they the "best" dancer or not. If some celebs like Gaby or Ray etc aren't getting the votes it's because we viewers aren't bothered about seeing them dance anymore. We're the ones that pick up the phone and pay to vote so we should decide who stays and who gets the boot!

I agree, it would be fairer than giving Len the casting vote. Let's face it, if it's a bad dancer and a good dancer (supposedly the situation the dance-off was created for) the four judges, or at least three of them would be in agreement - the public vote would only be for people of similar ability.

How many times has Len used the casting vote? I shamefully only remember it being in the very first week of this series, with Don and Lilia.

the point driving the change was that the public was making innane choices that were ruining the competition - taking people who might have made the last 4 on ability out early and producing finals without the best people even making them. The judges vote was put in to make the least damaging choice available from whoever ended up in the bottom two. At worst it could change a catatstrophy into just a disaster. The responsibility that placed on the judges was weighty but thats what you pay judges to do. Its debateable whether Len is always up to the job of having the final casting vote but experience suggests he is more likely to make the sounder choice than the public vote which changes week on week and often has no relationship to the dancing.

The alternative has just been demonstrated on X factor where Louis ducked out of his responsibility to dcide who went - probably assuming the public would make the right choice for him. The result - his stronger group went and he's pretty certain to lose all his acts earlier than he otherwise would have.

I think there was one other time, last series. Believe it was Stephanie v Letitia (week 2) when Len opted for Letitia.

But, as has already been pointed out, it's very unlikely that Len's casting vote would ever be called upon to save a good couple over a bad one. If two such couples were in the dance off, I can't imagine that the judges wouldn't be in a majority to save the better pair.

I do think if Len had the option he'd always end up pushing it to be deferred to the public vote, so I doubt it would work.

I think though that in the case of two strong dancers, it would be a good thing if they could somehow go back to the public vote, because it would be better for the competition if the more popular one stayed in.

My point exactly! Thanks Katie for being so short and sweet!

You see, that's why there should be no 'duh duh duh' moment of the judges thinking (and changing) of their decision of saving which couple, assuming they are of similar dancing abilities, they should punch in their decisions after the second dance, and then raise the card together (whether it be couple A or B). And in the case of a tie, the public votes win.

Easy peasy, isn't it?