There are some professionals that get their choreography slated a lot more than others. I really don't think it is appropriate for the judges to be criticising the professional dancers, and especially unfair to mark the celebreties down accordingly (unless of course it is due to illegal lifts )

Vincent and Louisa's American smooth, Vincent & Louisa's Vianese Waltz, Vincent & Louisa's Rumba, and now Vincent and Rachel's American Smooth. Is it me or does Len seem to have it in for Vincent?

I can't imagine Len ever saying to Darren Bennet, 'Sorry Daz, I just didn't like it'. He wouldn't dare! So why do it to Vincent?

Brendan and Camilla also come in for more than their fair share of criticism, but then Brendan is known for breaking the rules, and Camilla does like taking risks and pushing the boundaries - which I think is a positive thing. I'm sure there are more examples, but these are the only ones off the top of my head!

I don't know - I think he would dare - it would just depend on what he thought on the night.

I would have agreed with you but he had a big go at Erin over the Paso. She is a really established heavyweight pro.

On mamaboogies thread 'Did I hear' I've been talking (to myself mostly) about how Len loves to do a bit of whiny patronizing of the pro's. Like a London cabbie - all jovial and contemptuous. (Lighthearted thread though).

I loved the bit where you say 'sorry DAZ - I just didn't liiiiiike it.'

He has a go at Vincent a lot, though , but then I'm a Vincent fan, so I notice.

He's does it a lot more on DWTS than on Strictly, with our judges I think craig's the worst for it, can think of 7 or 8 pros he's had a go at for choreography.

I think it's ok if something's missing, like in Austin Paso or Rachel's AS, but not on the basis that they don't like it.

I think it is appropriate.

The choreography showcases the celebs capabilities so if the Pros get it wrong it can be disaster for a contestant.

Edit to concur with jill. Appropriate when content is blatently missing or if it is too complicated for the celeb (or if rules are broken), but not on the basis a judge doesnt like it.

Totally agree - well put.

Oh definitely it occurs with all the dancers, not just Vincent. I didn't want this to be a 'they're all out to get vincent thread!!'

I have just remembered when the choreography for Ian and Zoe's salsa was criticised, then Ian pointed out that it was choreographed for him by experts!! Shows you that actually when it comes to certain dances the judges really aren't experts

I agree, criticism is justified if content is blatantly left out, or extra lifts put in. But many of the dancers are or have been at the top of their game, and to put down their choreography is to also belittle their professional reputation

I agree too.

I don't think any pro is criticised more than any other and I like it when a judge compliments a pro on their choreography too.

I do agree - I was only putting any bias out on view so to speak.

He was pretty rough with Camilla, last week as well. you could see she was upset. But both times he was essentially talking about a lack of content, in the Rhumba and AT, and that's valid.

I think the pro's find it hard to take and the judges can be wrong.

They all love being praised for their choreography though. So swings and roundabouts?

I don't mind a judge being critical of the choreography a pro has produced for their celeb. However I do have a lot of problems if they let that criticism affect their marking which should surely be for the celeb's performance alone - not for the choreography. Or am I wrong there?

I think the problem is that SOMETIMES a judge will have a go at choreography when there is no need as the celeb has done the basic figures of the dance and been shown off well.

SOMETIMES, though, the choreography can have a serious effect on the celeb dancer's overall performance. The choreography might reveal weaknesses in a dancers technical ability, or not show off their talent.

I think Camilla has a lot of respect for Len and after all the time they have been on the show together she should know what he likes and dislikes - but quite honestly I never know what is going to come out of Len's mouth this series.

He is very inconsistent (e.g. his reaction to when a couple do their intro on the stage), his marking is all over the place, he used to be known as the kind judge who always looked for the positive to comment on, but this year he has been quite blunt on several occasions as if he is grumpy and impatient with certain contestants, but the next minute he's smiling and twinkling his eyes at somebody else. And what is he thinking about saying out loud he ignored a mistake pointed out by another judge and decided to give a 10? And these on screen arguments with the other judges - what is going on with him?

I always thought Len was the best judge before this series, but he really does seem to have lost the plot at the moment.

Sorry - I'm ranting

I would say the pros' job is to showcase their celeb's dancing and if a judge thinks that is not happening or the pro has done a good job, then it is perfectly acceptable for the judge to comment.

ON DWTS this year one pro was told she was showcasing herself too much instead of the celeb - and it showed even to a non-dancer like me. She did adjust a little but I don't think she could help herself as she was very young - it showed to me that to be a pro on SCD you not only have to be a good dancer, but you need certain skills to be successful with a celeb.

I think it's fine. Each couple is a partnership, it's not just about the celebs. The pros need to work out routines to play to their partners strengths and the judges are supposed to give reasons for their marks (even though Craig always gets shouted down by Len just for doing his job).

If a pro does a clever routine, it will quite right win marks if it's a good routine, but in the case of Camilla's Argentine Tango, I think they were quite right in that the choreography was done in an attempt to "play safe" and the judges seem to be marking difficult routines higher marks ( and rightly so in my opinion). If the choreography is influencing the marks (which as far as I am concerned is perfectly valid) then the judges are perfectly right to mention it.

If its dull or inappropriate or wrong for the celeb I would have thought any judge ought to point that out. You can't give a mark for a better dance that ought to have been but you never saw and if you give a low mark you need to explain why.

The bigger problem is that they can't agree on fundamentals - Len on a different planet with Rachel last week or previouslygoing on about on starts and capes and umpteen other issues the other judges had no problem with.

Another problem is they can't deal with difficulty fairly - you have examples of people getting ten for doing simple stuff slowly and looking nice whilst people doing vastly more complex steps faster lose points for making errors or not looking quite right as they concentrate on the steps. In a more accurate marking regime simplicity would have a much lower achievable top mark than something sophisticated.

You can't give someone a high mark for dancing something thats dull or unambitious or too easy or plain wrong though.

Part of the problem is that they are inconsistent doing it. They have ignored problems with the content at some points and then changed tack and pointed out its all too simple - notably with Cherie who got high marks for looking very good and then penalised for only really looking good and not having enough content.Thats still I think happening with Lisa who is doing very good looking but uncomplicated stuff and getting tens while Rachel is trying to remember twice as much. The judges also have a problem not having equal expectations of everyone and marking to those expectations not a standard level. . You could argue Rachel should do less difficult routines too but then I expect you would find she was criticised for not living up to expectations whilst Lisa would get praise for exceeding them.

Excuse me if I've missed your point, and some of those previous, but I think the problem lies with a lack of clearly delineated rules as we, the long-term veiwing public, afficianadoes (spelling) so to speak, have become increasingly more discerning and knowledgeable. But I seriously doubt that the judges would take kindly to being told that they should change their ways in order for fairness to prevail. I feel they'd take it as an attack on their credentials.

Point taken!

While some of that may be true, I think that if a judge doesn't like the choreography of a routine as a matter of taste, that certainly shouldn't affect the marks. As to a routine being unambitious, Lisa's waltz the other week was actually praised for being simple. The difference between simple and unambitious seems to be pretty small to me.

It's a tricky question.

The judges should have limits to what they criticize - basically, for things that the dancers don't have much control over. Music, or outfits, for example.

But it's a dance partnership - it's not a set of solo performances. So whilst it's (generally) not appropriate for the judges to criticize the pro's actual dancing, it's not completely OTT to criticize their choreography if it simply didn't work for their partner.

I think it is in order.
The slebs rely on their pro to bring out the best in them and that has to include choreography.

Lisa is good at spins (spotting) so Brendan really over-eggs the mixture with that. Vinthenth always aims high and it doesn't work every time.
Camilla? Just don't know what to make of Camilla...

So it is fair to mention it. Perhaps not to deduct OR add marks for it. But as a pointer for next time it's fair.

I think Camilla has had some real stick this year bar the Quick step. Why don;t the judges say what they want to see wach week and be done with it. Arlene found it diffiocult to chereograph one dance in a week. These pros have to do two and find a routine that can go along with the tune. COnsidering Camilla has done more then any other pro I'm sure she needs a break more then anyone. I'm sure had teh jove been that bad then Ian would have pitched in with some ideas.

She did try new things in the jive like the Miami wobbly leg thingy!! but also last year her AT had too much leg movement so this year she put in less and still got bashed by the judges.

All I have heard is how great Brendan is this year. Yes he is better then other years but thats not to say the others are rubbish.

Camilla was basically told her routines are rubbish this week and thats why they are bottom despite Tom doing them well. Isn't that the point?? Learn a routine and do it well?

Should they have required figures/steps, then, like DOI? I don't care one way or the other, just throwing it out there.

I've posted this elsewhere so apols for repeating but, on 5Live yesterday morning when discussing the previous evening's events, they interviewed an American woman who they introduced as the AT expert who had choreographed the routines for Saturday (presumably Vincent choreographed his own!).

I'm at a loss as to how Camilla could be criticised for lack of content when it wasn't her creation

Have suggested different scoring on a thread in SCD forum. Would link but don't know how or did it wrong soz!

Basically 5 points artistic 5 points technical - sounds as though this may go towards sorting the problem out.
I also think that the pro has to be judged on whether they have produced a routine showcasing the celebs skills - if they make a mistake and their partner can't cope it is due to them so they need to accept this and take the good critism with the bad. Its what they are paid for.

Agree but Len who is the one most often adrift doesn't describe it as a matter of taste but what ought to be there. As you imply they need to agree what ought to be there - artistic build ups or straight into action, capes flying or no capes, based on a foxtrot or largely a foxtrot?

Simple, slow but beautiful (which can mean easy, or avoiding problems or as you say unambitious) versus complicated and difficult (but impossible to do perfectly) is difficult though. I don't think the public could cope with two scores for difficulty or artistic impression (is that ice dancing?) or a horrendous sum involving different tarifs for added difficulty (gymnastics)