Dunno about the public, but the SDC number crunchers certainly couldn't.

They can't manage with variations of 3+1 =
Giving them decimal points and big sums would be carnage.

I think Brendan's choreography was better, and much more interesting, last year. (I'm leaving the illegal lift out of it.)

What was "missing" from Rachel's AS?


I think that's almost backwards.

Of course, if a judge "doesn't like it" for no reason, then marks shouldn't be based on that, but if they have reasons, they may be valid ones. If a judge thinks the choreography is weak artistically, for example, then taking away some points may be perfectly ok. (I reject root and branch the idea that the judges' marks should be only about technical aspect such as whether there were heel leads.)

But I find it outrageous when a judge marks down because the dance "wasn't a foxtrot" or didn't have enough basic steps, or similar.

If the pro has choreographed a dance that the judges won't accept as being the kind of dance it was supposed to be, then something should be done about it well before Saturday night.

Imo, it's outrageous for a celeb to spend a week on a dance that the judges were going to reject as not being the right sort of dance.


Yes, it needs to be agreed and clearly stated.

It's outrageous for Len to mark down a dance because there's "faffing about" at the start or for anything of the sort.

Either such "faffing" is a legitimate part of the dance or it's not. If it's not, then it should be noticed and corrected well before Saturday; but if it is a legitimate part of the dance, Len should have to put t f up with it.

Good post Veri - I agree. On Itt Vincent defended himself, Craig also disagreed with Len, so Len's take on the dance's content is obviously debatable.

Len's attitude to the dance cost R&V an extremely valuable point.

I've posted about this idea too and supported others who make similar suggestions.

I actually think could be a natural progression for the show and the best route to go down. We are coming to the end of series 6 and lots of people like me have watched all of the series picking up a little knowledge of each dance to the point where we have an idea of some of the steps and problems the judges talk about.

I wouldn't go as far as saying there should be 'required elements', but the judges should be able to mark separately on the technical aspects and performance aspects of each dance. The technical aspects would cover the degree of difficulty included and the level of skill displayed and the performance aspect would cover the suitability of the choreography and the actual presentation of the routine. It would be a starting point at least for discussion.


I agree and I've come to the conclusion it might be because Lisa is maybe slightly too tall for Brendan to dance with - just my thoughts.

I think Vincent was rather annoyed (and rightly so) by Len's comments, but he put his response over very well on ITT I thought.

I hate to defend Len, but Vincent has a habit of letting his partner down by coming up choreography that is inappropriate for particular dances (his VW with Louisa being the most obvious example).

Camilla's choreography hasn't been great this series; Jive was too conventional (Darren's & Jill's thing with Darren's tie was a stroke of genius), and her AT didn't give Tom enough to do.

If Tom couldn't have done more than he did, I would have been more sympathetic. I've just watched Jill & Emma's Pasos (with Darren) back to back and it is obvious that the inferior choreography of Emma's Paso is down to her not being to do Jill's spins & spotting etc. Tom could have easily done more, so I'm slightly miffed with my favourite pro...

I thought Len was correct about Austin's Paso, which resembled Emma's in many respects but Austin performed it better. No coincidence that Erin loved Emma's Paso

I agree with those who think that criticizing the choreography in subjective terms is unfair, but I think the judges have the right to object to inappropriate or just missing choreography, or criticize a pro for making a dance too difficult or too easy/uninvolving for their partner.

There have been some occasions when I do feel the pro has let the celeb in terms of choreography (Louisa and Vincent's VW was barely recognisable as a VW, and I'm not usually a fan of Camilla's choreography either), and generally I think the judges have fairly commented on it when it has let down the celeb, and is often only usually commented upon when it's a talented celeb let down by bad choreography.

I think it's very appropriate, for the public; they're in the public domain and it's part and parcel of being in the spotlight, something they all signed up for.

The judges are there to give a supposed expert opinion and the panel consists of 3 choreographers. When the pro dancer has let his or her celeb down for whatever reasons, surely there should be someone to say this. I remember Brendan getting a talking to for not doing justice to his celeb, Kelly Brook, and others have been criticised for giving his or her celeb too complicated or difficult choreography. Can't recall a comment ( or diatribe) for making the choreography too simple but there probably are some instances.

Though saying that, personal criticisms at the celeb to my mind are just not on. It's not a fine line, it's a line the judges have crossed too many times, sometimes bordering on OTT insults couched in dance critic.

I agree Camilla's Jive (with hindsight!) wasn't brilliant but, as I understand it, she didn't choreograph the AT - the AT expert devised their routine and also Lisa & Brendan's.

Yes, but they still have to work within limitations - choreography is not a mechanical process of "just learn these steps". If the celeb simply can't grasp the dance, you have to reduce the level of content.

Good post.

I've just tried to post 3 times - a great long post and been timed out. Iwill see if this posts and try again.

I think it can be good to bring the pros back to reality a bit as well. I always remember Arlene saying to Karen about the foxtrot she and Mark did "what were you doing choreographing something so difficult at this stage of the competition?" which I think was the first 2 dance week. Yes it is great to push the celebs but a good choreographer should know the limits of their partner. It was a good thing she did such a good samba!

I think Camilla's ballroom routines have been OK. Its the latin's (bar the Salsa) that have not been up to much and shes meant to be better at latin!

Lisa's not as good of a dancer as Kelly either.

I sort of agreed with Len's comments about Austin's Paso, which I loved. When I played it back it did seem rather 'empty'. Darren Bennet intimated the same on ITT.

Len criticised Rachel's Paso on the same grounds - not enough content. Yet I saw quite a lot and Bruno said it was difficult. So when is enough, enough?

Also, quite simple choreography, danced well has been given high marks by the judges. Yet 'simple' and 'not enough content are very close on a continuum to me.

Rachel's AS was an AS, not a foxtrot. I know that 40% has to be in hold and you can have two lifts. Vincent said it had a lot of foxtrot.

Bruno thought it had enough - he gave the AS a 10.

Craig thought that in an AS it didn't matter.

Len thought there wasn't enough content.

I don't know if it was foxtrotty enough - but the judges don't seem to have a consensus of opinion on it either.

The content argument is then a very contentious one.

Yet it gives Len's views a sort of technical LEGITIMACY, people listen and they believe him.

Ithink there should be a set of figures for each dance that should be employed. Not too many - the pro's should b e able to adapt and put more in if they wish.

This would clarify the content argument, which is damaging to the pro's and very unclear in practice.

Len would not be able to 'hide behind' it. He would have to then give more personal reasons why he doesn't like a particular dance.

I read on the 'did I hear' thread, a poster who said that Vincent had 'form', for technical content.

This shows the effect that Len's comments have. I'm not saying Len is always wrong. But when Len criticises content, it sticks. And if Len's arguments about content are open to challenge ( which they often are) then they should not have this power to influence.

Again, because it is a 'technical' argument, the criticism about content' becomes a LEGITIMATE one if a judge employs it. And, as I have argued, it is a flawed one, unclear, debatable and unreliable, thus it is unfair.

Vincent & Louisa's VW was taking the michael though (lovely though it was); I don't think it is unfair to say that Vincent has a very loose interpretation of dance standards sometimes (the one thing guaranteed to annoy Len).

Disclaimer: I think Vincent is fantastic and I think Len is a bit of a tit, but Len sometimes has a point. I also think your point about Len using pseudo-technical jibberish because he doesn't want to say that he just doesn't like something is valid too; he is the least consistent of the judges by far. I can usually predict the marks; Arlene will rarely score below Craig but will often score higher than Craig; Bruno tends to score the same as or above Arlene 50% of the time, but Len's scoring can be anywhere (apart from 1 to 7 for most of the competition).

Of course, sometimes he's right - but sometimes he's not. Because it is a technical argument, it can seem true when it is open to debate.

We, and the pro's need to know when enough content is enough. If this is left vague, it could be argued (and is) that Len uses it as a powerful and spurious attack on the pro's.

If there were clearer perameters, ultimately it would protect the dancers, and Len, who, because of this has come under attack as a judge for inconsistency and irrationality.

I agree with your statement, my OH & me have noticed recently that certain dances have been marked down simply because the judges have not liked the choreography, surely not very fair to the celebs

Is not, is it? The celebs can only perform to the best of their ability the steps they are given.

In proper dancing competitions is there a list of steps or moves thave have to be incorporated into a routine?

I'd say Kelly was a more natural dancer, but Lisa does work hard.

Tbh I think Len has lost a lot of credibility as a judge this year, especially with his,`I noticed a stumble but I`ll ignore it and give you a 10` or `Your posture isnt right and your bum was sticking out but I`ve ignored that and given you a 10` type of comment this year.

I agree. Before this year Len and Craig were the judges the pros wanted to impress. Len has lost the plot this year and now he's a bit of a loose cannon for the couples, as they have no idea which way he will react. Craig on the other hand is still Craig.

I agree with you Buddy and Tissy - but he has the paddles and is head judge.

Then again, perhaps it all makes it a bit more 'random' and exciting in a national lottery sort of way