With John Sargent going, one thing that makes me wonder is, John tried his best (open to question) and the public voted him in. Before him, I can't remember names but we had people who I would say would have had difficulty to adapt anyway - non-sporting types, older people or people who are bigger than others.

Now, if the BBC chose these people for the show but only the fit, able, young and physically talented progress further every year. Also, only those contestants take park in Celeb Reality shows, who have the time, who place it in their schedule, need publicity or I'm thinking fill up the spaces?

So for me, this is the only thing that puts me off every year and although I love watching the dances, I have never seen it as a fair competition. I do have a favourite every year and I do enjoy the general concept but with John Sargent in the show and progressing as he was - you can't tell the guy or nobody can imply that he should have gone earlier because there is clear cut way of picking people for the show - it's just who is available.

The same thing happened on X Factor a couple of weeks ago. The judges started to tell the public to vote for those who are talented. The strange thing about that, as it was for Strictly is - they choose these people and the show is based upon the public decided.

So - I don't get it in the end. I can see people put a lot of effort into it but it is the public's show.

I think the job of the producers try to do is get the balance right between fairness, simplicity and entertainment.

Given that Strictly is an undoubted TV phenomenon, I think they've done a pretty good job up to now.

As John himself pointed out, the positive voting system means that people who wanted him out couldn't do it. There is nothing especially fair about that.

The same problem can occur on BB in reverse when a load of people are put up for eviction. Arguably it's not fair that a minority of voters can get rid of a 'marmite' HM.

If you think about it the way the SCD lineup is chosen is quite tokenistic. They (by which I mean to some extent the producers and the judges) seem to want the winner to come from maybe about 3 or 4 predetermined people and the rest are just there to make up the numbers.

I've said along, how are we to treat Strictly as a serious competition when the competitors don't start on an equal footing?

Yeah this is how I see it Sid and I know they try to make it look professional but when somebody like Mark Ramprakash comes on in a show with almost peak fitness and flexibility against somebody who is getting on in years and finds it pretty hard to do 20 to 30 hours of physical training a week - it's not fair.

You're banging your head against a brick wall mate.

This debate has been going on and on all series!

If we are expected to treat Strictly as a serious competition, don't invite portly old men with no ability whatosever to compete against spritely young lasses from stage school.

I'm glad they pick all shapes, sizes and ages - one of the points of the programme is to show that [i]anybody[i] can have a go for themselves and enjoy it, even if they're not the most polished dancer on the floor.

Is it? I thought it was meant to be a fun, light entertainment show on a Saturday evening.

That's how I view it, and I welcome the likes of John on the show.

But if he is pressured to drop out because so-called superior dancers are being voted off, I'm inclined to think we are supposed to be treating this show as some sort of serious competiton.

Well until the format is rectified, I refuse to do so.

It is why I can't take the show seriously.

Like Big Brother is blatantly a popularity contest. I know their celeb shows are on the same premise but we know we are voting for popularity and the most popular will win.

In light of what has happened, it's very difficult to take any of them seriously, unfortunately even the dancers when there is such a grand inequality in ability across the field.

But on that basis, why did John have to leave?

I think Kristina could see she could have won. I just saw Heather Small on Newsnight saying that John was way ahead in the voting every week.

Strictly has always been unfair. As has been already mentioned, you have a portly, overweight sixty year old man like John competing against young, physically fit men like Austin and Tom, who are half his age. Then you've people with a dance background like Rachel and Cherie competing against people who've never danced like Jessie and Gillian. Plus, you've four judges and only one of them is an actual ballroom/latin expert.

Strictly is not a dancing competition. If it was, why is the audience given 50% of the voting when a large percentage of them wouldn't know the differece between a samba and a salsa (I certainly don't, anyway!)

Until it's a level playing field it can never be a competition.

It's an entertianment show that shows dancing. The judges and "professional" dances don't seem to understand that. John has said he wasn't forced out - not sure I believe that.

This is why I find it all so odd. I think they want to try and hold up some integrity for the show but this just highlights the inequality if anything.

Agreed. I didn't see it coming and don't think he should have done it. He had every right to be there.

We've coped alright previously.

A lot of us don't see it as a "serious" dance competition - just a dance competition that entertains me. Why will people refuse to let me see it like that? I have happily watched it from day one without people throwing the "it's not about the dancing" card at me.

Loads of people are asked to do it - some fair well, others don't. I expected Kate to do well last year, as well as Patsy Palmer. I was wrong.

John came on the show, had hours and hours of one on one tuition with an excellent dancer and can now probably lead his wife around a dance floor. I daresay he's happy.

so do you feel that heather was the token minority, john the token old fat boy, only included to make the others look good and to be seen to be appealing to all when in fact at the end of the day it was already decided who they would want in the final,

And considering at the beginning everyone on here thought that Cherie was the favourite, things are beginning to backfire on that theory!