Anyone think they might as well just abandon the public vote until the final.

In the end no matter who the public vote for the judges will decide the final two (and can easily determine who is in the bottom two in the final few weeks by their judging scores). It is really shocking that the semi final will continue to have a dance off despite there only being 3 couples left and that the two finalists may well be the celebrities who appear to have come bottom of the public vote for the last few weeks (Lisa and Rachel).

I don't understand these posts all of a sudden complaining about the voting system. Why start now?

What the OP obviously doesn't understand is that the public have more influence than the judges. If the judges and public scores are tied when combined then the one with tghe higher public vote is ranked higher.

What do you not like about this???

Not true in the semi final. Only one couple is safe and it isn't necessarily the public's favourite. The public's favourite could be eliminated in the dance off. I do not agree with this with just three couples remaining. I've also been whinging about it since last year...

Hi tabs,

Know that. Just wondering why the OP is complaining about the whole dance off thing.

Maybe it's just a dawning that their favourite could be out despite a huge public vote and so they're letting off steam. While those of us (i.e. me) who are sad enough to exist in a world surrounded by figures and statistics and so read them more easily than letters and words have known it for a long time.

Not irrelevant but obviously the dance-off has given the judges more power.

However, the rules are very clear and it's the voters' choice as to whether or not they want to spend money when their votes can be over-ruled.

The semi-final potentialities are hardly shocking...nevertheless they are IMO wrong in principle....BUT ultimately nobody is forcing anyone to vote.

I don't.

It is the judges who decide who goes each week in tne end via the dance off - not the public - so clearly the judges have more power. I can live with the dance off for the first few weeks (i.e. to avoid good dancers being overlooked and voted off early) but there really is no reason for it at all once you are down to the final five. If the public can't be trusted after 11 weeks of the contest to decide then why bother asking them at all.

Not of course forgetting that it is the public via the TV licence that are paying for the show and the judges salaries!

Apologies but what has this to do with the arguement?

Me neither. I've only ever voted in the final when I knew (or thought I knew ) that my vote would actually count.

A lot - because of the way some people are implying 'ooh the stupid public we can't allow them to decide who the best dancer is'. Without the public paying their licence there would be no BBC and no SCD.

In the end I believe in the old fashioned concept of democracy - let the people decide (as X factor does and every other reality TV show once you are down to the last 5 acts) and not a self appointed elite!

But didn't you realise those were the rules? And were last year as well??

And how is the funding of the BBC adding to you arguement? Without the licence fee you wouldn't have made the previous post.

The X factor though produces some terrible winners. Thats in theory more OK because votes now suggest sales later - but even then the voting audience is so different to the buying one that sales often never follow. . Leon has very little potential but he clearly can sing after a fashion and everyone else is singing in a different fashion so comparisons are difficult.

SCD is a dancing show with clearer criteria. There is a stronger element of right and wrong and appropriate and not so and common dances to perform. It also has a clear history of voters voting on sex grounds or even for the people who the judges think are worse. It would be quite ridiculous if the worst surviving dancers get to the final and perform poorly or one good and one bad one got there and the contest is a walkover.

Democracy never works any differently. Someone always sets the question in a referendum (which is what the SCD judges do by deciding who is in the final) and every election is between set options - you can vote for the Matt Party or the Alesha party and thats it unless you waste your vote.

This is a big issue for me also with a 3 couple semi but I have a faint bat-squeak of hope that the BBC might be changing it this year after last year's farce when it became apparent to fans of the show that it was a possibility Gethin topped the public vote and still went out on the judges' say so.

Didn't Craig say on ITT way back that the public was going to have the final say in the semi?

Also some people on here have been checking the listings and there seemed to be some doubt as to whether there was a Sunday show on the semi week (BBC Sports Personality instead).

I'm not holding my breath though.

As Len would say "give over" surely if the John Sargeant issue proved anything it's that the judges DON'T have all the power - the public can and still do effect things in spite of the dance-off.
I think there's an element here of fans blaming the system when their fav goes when there's a possibility they were going anyone but then I got the result I wanted so I guess I can afford to be happy although I'd have much preferred Lisa going last week.

There is NO proof that Gethin topped the public vote (although admittedly like the existance of God the lack there is no proof he didn't means it comes down to what you believe at the end of the day) - remember Alesha and Matt also had very strong fan bases too.

I'm pretty sure there is a Sunday show - the shows have been combined on the press release programme info for most if not all weeks. It specifies that there isn't a Sunday show on final night.

There's quibbling about the wording for the semi-final programme, since it doesn't mention a dance-off, though it does in other weeks: "However, it is the public vote which will decide the contestants' fate."

But still not a good idea to hold your breath for it

I agree. My own persional opinion is that it is unfair for the judges to still have influence in the semi-final more so when there is one less couple again and their decision holds more importance. In effect the result we obtain from the semi-final will make the final a near foregone conclusion.

if the public vote wasn't important how come John stayed in so long

???


As Quizmike says, the public always have the final say. To prove this, I give you a Mr J Sargeant.

And, actually, the judges have less power to determine the bottom two as time goes on, because there are fewer choices for the public.

So, what, you think the public should have a direct say in the making of all BBC productions? Because that's where your argument's going.