I am not anti Rachel, but she did not deserve 4 10's. It was 4 9's worth.
Why are people anti Rachel????
4 of 5
I think Rachel's dancing is understated which some people don't like (not a criticism of them just horses for courses). She doesn't really have a wow factor to her dancing - one of the things I like, but some will find it dull.
She just looks like the media all-rounder pro performer that she is on the dancefloor. SCD is no stretch for her...she's technically good..but there's no magical wow factor.
for me - I just find her really dull. Cherie was also very dull. Dancing above average, both over rated and over marked, and totally totally dull.
Her over-the-top reaction at being in the bottom 2 the week that Heather went annoyed me a lot - all of them have to expect to end up in the bottom 2 no matter where they are on the leader board, to be that stunned by it smacks of arrogance.
It was all a bit Tanya from Muriel's Wedding "I'm Beautiful".
Her over-the-top reaction at being in the bottom 2 the week that Heather went annoyed me a lot - all of them have to expect to end up in the bottom 2 no matter where they are on the leader board, to be that stunned by it smacks of arrogance.
It was all a bit Tanya from Muriel's Wedding "I'm Beautiful".
Never liked to snooty b#tch since she left SClub to go solo, failed at that then announced she was going to be an actress instead and never got anywhere, however her dancing is ok but not enough to win.
Originally Posted by mr_wonderful:
“Maybe it is because she seems so desperate to win. And the crying after being in the bottom 2 didn't help.”
“Maybe it is because she seems so desperate to win. And the crying after being in the bottom 2 didn't help.”
As opposed to everyone else who doesn't want to?.......Rachel is about the least competitive there. Austin and Tom are probably the most competitive since the last good sportsmen.
I would cry too if I produced a fine performance and no one voted for it because the votes were all going to people who couldn't dance to annoy the judges.
Originally Posted by MissKhim:
“I am not anti Rachel, but she did not deserve 4 10's. It was 4 9's worth.”
“I am not anti Rachel, but she did not deserve 4 10's. It was 4 9's worth.”
They had already given people 9s for less........thats what 10s are for.
Originally Posted by moonbaby:
“No way did she deserve four tens! She stumbled and missed several steps- had anyone else done that they would have penalised. Its a travesty that she received a perfect score.
For me she is cold and she doesn't sell the dance at all.”
“No way did she deserve four tens! She stumbled and missed several steps- had anyone else done that they would have penalised. Its a travesty that she received a perfect score.
For me she is cold and she doesn't sell the dance at all.”
But they need a strong female contender to close in on the boys, they have chosen her it seems now Cherie has gone
I think it was the 4 10's thing.
I like Rachel, the performance was good, but was it a 40? Hmm, I think not.
I like Rachel, the performance was good, but was it a 40? Hmm, I think not.
Originally Posted by footygirl:
“Well I have news for the judges and they may not like it- Rachell is the lowest on the public vote- that is why they put her out of harms way
However it'll become harder and harder to protect her from next week”
“Well I have news for the judges and they may not like it- Rachell is the lowest on the public vote- that is why they put her out of harms way
However it'll become harder and harder to protect her from next week”
How do you know where she is? She was bottom weeks ago when only a very small group were voting. The better dancers usually pick up votes as less driven people join in the voting.Her compettion is stalling as she solves some of her problems. its true that a big JS vote may be sloshing around looking for another way to anger the judges but I doubt if thats decisive enough to keep anyone with it away from the judges. Rachel's males have no standard amle journey story, have every problem that she had and probably are not that popular too.
It won't be harder to save her because the judges will just throw out anyone in the dance off with her. Thats the advantage of being the best dancer there or near to it any week. The new rules were designed to stop the voters trashing the show by going on any more irrational vendettas against the good female competitors and if they were designed properly should be able to contain the problem.
Originally Posted by Like A Star:
“I think it was the 4 10's thing.
I like Rachel, the performance was good, but was it a 40? Hmm, I think not.”
“I think it was the 4 10's thing.
I like Rachel, the performance was good, but was it a 40? Hmm, I think not.”
A 40 just needs Craig to think it is a 10. Len and Bruno give 10s and their threshold is lower for everyone. They give 10 if they think its impressive and as they give 9 to something less impressive they have to give 10 anyway for something better. Arlene gives them only when she really likes something - Rachel now looks right for her so she is getting the marks she didn't get earlier on . Craig giving 10 means he liked it and couldn't see anything wrong with it. As its not a very lively dance its not going to wow all the public unless she does cartwheels in it. Vincent said he had made it subtle, understated and romantic on ITT so it obviously worked like that in the studio - equally obviously it won't impress people who don't understand subtle or like Rachel.
Given there are threads about on how both Tom and Austin are overmarked its pretty clear that the order was defensible on Saturday and given the mark below hers and the problems with that dance I can't see much justification for saying she should have got got the same 9s.
Originally Posted by SCD-Observer:
“You are certainly not one of those 'female' viewers I alluded to in my post, to be sure.
But there ARE a lot of irrational ones out there. Missed heel leads? What the h*ll were they talking about? Rachel's footwork looked fantastic. Albeit I am not a dancer, but I certainly saw the heel leads (when the camera actually showed her feet that is).
I do think she doesn't deserve perfect 40. BUT, foxtrot is a very, very boring dance. It's basically dancing in a straight vertical line, and to make foxtrot entertaining is very, very difficult. Sometimes, people go for entertainment value and they produce less perfect posture and therefore get lower marks. Vincent knew they can't afford to do that. But rather they chose to please the judges and worked hard to perfect the foxtrot. I thought Rachel was engaging with Vincent. I don't see why she was so treated in this forum?!
She deserves to be the top of the leaderboard as she was clearly the best dancer of the night. Maybe not a perfect 40, but she's the top girl tonight.”
“You are certainly not one of those 'female' viewers I alluded to in my post, to be sure.
But there ARE a lot of irrational ones out there. Missed heel leads? What the h*ll were they talking about? Rachel's footwork looked fantastic. Albeit I am not a dancer, but I certainly saw the heel leads (when the camera actually showed her feet that is).
I do think she doesn't deserve perfect 40. BUT, foxtrot is a very, very boring dance. It's basically dancing in a straight vertical line, and to make foxtrot entertaining is very, very difficult. Sometimes, people go for entertainment value and they produce less perfect posture and therefore get lower marks. Vincent knew they can't afford to do that. But rather they chose to please the judges and worked hard to perfect the foxtrot. I thought Rachel was engaging with Vincent. I don't see why she was so treated in this forum?!
She deserves to be the top of the leaderboard as she was clearly the best dancer of the night. Maybe not a perfect 40, but she's the top girl tonight.”
Yes but there is no mark of 39.5 and no way to get there. There is not even an agreed mark of 40 but 4 marks of 10 . That means you can't collectively decide to give Rachel 38 or 39 or 39.5. You either give 9 or 10 which means on SCD whether you get 38 or 39 or 40 depends on individual calls by two people. The only reason why people don't often get 40 is that Arlene and Craig don't mark from just 7- 10 and use 10 a lot like Bruno and Len .
The reason why Rachel gets 40 is that first Arlene and then Craig decide to give her the extra mark. Thats relative to what they had just given 9s for, what she did, what the choreography worked in the studio, what was possible with the dance and what they couldn't find wrong to deduct for. All it means is that she met their threshold for a 10 - not that its perfect. If they were allowed to give decimal points she might have ended up with a more precise score.
The assumption in there is that Craig should not have given her a 9. Thats odd though because its Craig who usually carries the can for deducting marks when he sees errors and marking lower. He clearly saw nothing noteworthy to take a mark off for. Its a shame really that he gets attacked for using the scale properly and consistently - his 9 is better than his 8 and his 10 is better still - just as someone waddling around is so far from his 8 that he gives it a 1 or a 3.
What I don't understand is why caring so much about competition is viewed as a sin.I would much rather see someone who really wants to do well, and strives to be the best they can than someone who doesn't really worry whether they do well or not. From what I gather, the celebs are paid the same amount whether they stay in til the end or go early from the competition, I could be wrong about that, but I don't think I am. I do like Rachel, nevertheless I think her high mark last night was unjustified. Iloved her foxtrot, but felt that 9s across the board would have been a fair mark, however, I think the whole JS saga may have been the reason for the erratic marking last night. She certainly, IMHO, delivered the best dance of the evening.
I like Rachel and Vincent, so I'm definitely not anti. I don't know whether her dance last night was worth 4 tens. When they finished I certainly didn't expect them to get 4 tens, and I was rather surprised (however, I'm not a dancer and I have no technical knowledge). I think overall on the leaderboard, they were in the right position. I think the judges have painted themselves into a corner by starting everyone off with a 8/9, maybe they had nowhere else to go. However, I fear this might have done Rachel more harm than good. If people now perceive her to be overmarked, they are less likely to vote for her when it counts (e.g. in the final).
I didn't expect them to get 40 but I watched it back a couple of times and I must say it was faultless, classy and IMO made all the other performances seem a little bit, well desperate and trying to impress. I was worried because they were doing the only slow dance of the night and everyone else was doing a wow dance but once again Vincent's choreography was spot on for the dance and of course Rachel.
Originally Posted by thenetworkbabe:
“Yes but there is no mark of 39.5 and no way to get there. There is not even an agreed mark of 40 but 4 marks of 10 . That means you can't collectively decide to give Rachel 38 or 39 or 39.5. You either give 9 or 10 which means on SCD whether you get 38 or 39 or 40 depends on individual calls by two people. The only reason why people don't often get 40 is that Arlene and Craig don't mark from just 7- 10 and use 10 a lot like Bruno and Len .
The reason why Rachel gets 40 is that first Arlene and then Craig decide to give her the extra mark. Thats relative to what they had just given 9s for, what she did, what the choreography worked in the studio, what was possible with the dance and what they couldn't find wrong to deduct for. All it means is that she met their threshold for a 10 - not that its perfect. If they were allowed to give decimal points she might have ended up with a more precise score.
The assumption in there is that Craig should not have given her a 9. Thats odd though because its Craig who usually carries the can for deducting marks when he sees errors and marking lower. He clearly saw nothing noteworthy to take a mark off for. Its a shame really that he gets attacked for using the scale properly and consistently - his 9 is better than his 8 and his 10 is better still - just as someone waddling around is so far from his 8 that he gives it a 1 or a 3.”
“Yes but there is no mark of 39.5 and no way to get there. There is not even an agreed mark of 40 but 4 marks of 10 . That means you can't collectively decide to give Rachel 38 or 39 or 39.5. You either give 9 or 10 which means on SCD whether you get 38 or 39 or 40 depends on individual calls by two people. The only reason why people don't often get 40 is that Arlene and Craig don't mark from just 7- 10 and use 10 a lot like Bruno and Len .
The reason why Rachel gets 40 is that first Arlene and then Craig decide to give her the extra mark. Thats relative to what they had just given 9s for, what she did, what the choreography worked in the studio, what was possible with the dance and what they couldn't find wrong to deduct for. All it means is that she met their threshold for a 10 - not that its perfect. If they were allowed to give decimal points she might have ended up with a more precise score.
The assumption in there is that Craig should not have given her a 9. Thats odd though because its Craig who usually carries the can for deducting marks when he sees errors and marking lower. He clearly saw nothing noteworthy to take a mark off for. Its a shame really that he gets attacked for using the scale properly and consistently - his 9 is better than his 8 and his 10 is better still - just as someone waddling around is so far from his 8 that he gives it a 1 or a 3.”
Excellent post - I completely agree.
A she's boring
B some of us can't abide Vinthenth
C I'm not ANTI anybody - I just wouldn't waste my money on a vote
D if I liked anybody that strongly it would be Christine
E there are some reports out there that Rachel is a bit precious
F I enjoy good dancing but I think it's more important in life to be a pleasant person
B some of us can't abide Vinthenth
C I'm not ANTI anybody - I just wouldn't waste my money on a vote
D if I liked anybody that strongly it would be Christine
E there are some reports out there that Rachel is a bit precious
F I enjoy good dancing but I think it's more important in life to be a pleasant person
Beats me.
I dont dislike anyone on the show, in fact I like nearly all of them.
The worst I have to say personally of anyone, is that I think Gary Rhodes had the wrong attitude and expectations.
I dont dislike anyone on the show, in fact I like nearly all of them.
The worst I have to say personally of anyone, is that I think Gary Rhodes had the wrong attitude and expectations.
I thought their foxtro last night was technically good and very poised but lacked flair, somehow. I do think the judges are a bit free with both very high and very low marks this year...I do wonder sometimes if they are trying hard to make their scores more influential on the overall result after the votes by marking differently than they would if the vote were not there. Perhaps the system needs an overhaul.
I was never anti-Rachel but up to last week I was neutral on her (thought she lacked 'something'). Until last week...I thought her Rumba was the best ever on Strictly and she totally deserved to be top of last night's leaderboard (don't know enough about dancing to comment on the four 10s.
Unfortunately for her though, there does appear to be a lot of anti-Rachel sentiment around so I don't think she has any chance of winning.
Unfortunately for her though, there does appear to be a lot of anti-Rachel sentiment around so I don't think she has any chance of winning.
Originally Posted by thenetworkbabe:
“Yes but there is no mark of 39.5 and no way to get there. There is not even an agreed mark of 40 but 4 marks of 10 . That means you can't collectively decide to give Rachel 38 or 39 or 39.5. You either give 9 or 10 which means on SCD whether you get 38 or 39 or 40 depends on individual calls by two people. The only reason why people don't often get 40 is that Arlene and Craig don't mark from just 7- 10 and use 10 a lot like Bruno and Len .
The reason why Rachel gets 40 is that first Arlene and then Craig decide to give her the extra mark. Thats relative to what they had just given 9s for, what she did, what the choreography worked in the studio, what was possible with the dance and what they couldn't find wrong to deduct for. All it means is that she met their threshold for a 10 - not that its perfect. If they were allowed to give decimal points she might have ended up with a more precise score.
The assumption in there is that Craig should not have given her a 9. Thats odd though because its Craig who usually carries the can for deducting marks when he sees errors and marking lower. He clearly saw nothing noteworthy to take a mark off for. Its a shame really that he gets attacked for using the scale properly and consistently - his 9 is better than his 8 and his 10 is better still - just as someone waddling around is so far from his 8 that he gives it a 1 or a 3.”
“Yes but there is no mark of 39.5 and no way to get there. There is not even an agreed mark of 40 but 4 marks of 10 . That means you can't collectively decide to give Rachel 38 or 39 or 39.5. You either give 9 or 10 which means on SCD whether you get 38 or 39 or 40 depends on individual calls by two people. The only reason why people don't often get 40 is that Arlene and Craig don't mark from just 7- 10 and use 10 a lot like Bruno and Len .
The reason why Rachel gets 40 is that first Arlene and then Craig decide to give her the extra mark. Thats relative to what they had just given 9s for, what she did, what the choreography worked in the studio, what was possible with the dance and what they couldn't find wrong to deduct for. All it means is that she met their threshold for a 10 - not that its perfect. If they were allowed to give decimal points she might have ended up with a more precise score.
The assumption in there is that Craig should not have given her a 9. Thats odd though because its Craig who usually carries the can for deducting marks when he sees errors and marking lower. He clearly saw nothing noteworthy to take a mark off for. Its a shame really that he gets attacked for using the scale properly and consistently - his 9 is better than his 8 and his 10 is better still - just as someone waddling around is so far from his 8 that he gives it a 1 or a 3.”
That may be true. However, shouldn't the judges be more conservative with their marking ? A mark of 10 should indicate perfection. In my opinion ( but I'm no expert ) that should be for the entire "package" of the performance not merely because there was nothing considered noteworthy to merit the deduction of a mark. In other words, the dance should have the "wow" factor as well as being technically "perfect". Judging by the majority of posts, it was clearly not memorable...rather like a goal in football that was a perfect finish but would not be a candidate for the goal of the season.
Originally Posted by xsalsafanx:
“I like Rachel but I think she's been overmarked by the judges for the past two weeks because they don't want to see a situation where she's in the dance-off again.”
“I like Rachel but I think she's been overmarked by the judges for the past two weeks because they don't want to see a situation where she's in the dance-off again.”
Or it may be that she was undermarked by the judges in the early stages and they are only now providing a just analysis of the performances...
4 of 5
