Agreed

The public vote CAN make a difference in the final stages - admittedly it's rare for the leaderboard to be turned on its head, or seriously upset, but it has happened.

Series 2, last 4 - I forget the exact marks etc but Denise was in the bottom two despite being either first or second with the judges. Julian got through as of right despite being, if memory serves, bottom of the leaderboard. No dance off in this series, obviously, but he avoided the bottom two anyway.

Series 3, last 3 - Zoe topped the leaderboard, Darren was at the bottom, but Darren went through to the final to as of right and Zoe went out (in this case, he was definitely top with the public, she was definitely last - no other scenario fits the result). Again, bottom dancer avoids the bottom two.

Series 4, last 4 - another where I forget the exact figures, but Mark R and Matt D both got through as of right although Matt at least (and possibly Mark? I forget) were not topping the leaderboard. I'm not certain but I think Matt was actually bottom, and yet he avoided the bottom two. (Also final 3, although Matt would not have survived a dance off scenario he still beat Emma with regards to the public votes)

Series 5, final 4 - Matt DA was bottom of the leaderboard, Alesha was 2nd, and yet Matt avoided the dance off and Alesha was in it. I forget the exact situation with regards to what public voting scenarios led to that result, but certainly Matt's public vote outweighed the judges scores by some margin to allow him to escape from the bottom spot.

Personally I think the dance off, for a start changes voting patterns (people know that a favourite but weak dancer will have to be kept out of the TWO bottom spots, not just one, and conversely they know/assume that a strong dancer will be safe in the dance off), and for seconds it gives too much power to the judges later in the competition and is slightly biased against an all round dancer versus someone who is very weak in one discipline and very strong in the other. Do I think it should be dropped? I'm not sure. Potentially in the last rounds (say from the quarter finals and there's an even stronger case for the semifinals - IMO if there were, as there should be, 5 couples in the quarters there is enough room for the public to save someone they really love) maybe it should be? Overall, I can see merits of arguments both ways. But beyond doubt, the public CAN make a difference in all but the case of a tie, and they have proven they can make a difference, by reversing or seriously upsetting the leaderboard and keeping the judges' least favourites from the bottom spots, on several occassions.

I think Austin was unfortunate in the quarters this series as the way the leaderboard was set it was VERY hard for him to avoid the dance off, but that was due to the relative popularity of the dancers above him, which combined with their relative popularity made the combinations that would see him saved highly unlikely. He was in trouble because the necessary public leaderboard was highly improbable rather than because it was not actually possible (there were scenarios where he could have avoided the dance off; it was just very very unlikely). Conversely for Matt DA in S5, with Gethin at the top of the leaderboard and receiving both great marks from the judges AND a good public vote, taking him out of the equation, Matt just had to jump the not especially popular Letitia and the popular but assumed safe Alesha; similarly, things might have been very different for Austin if Rachel had not received the highest score from the judges or if Tom had joined him in the bottom two on the judges' leaderboard. Austin was in a similar-ish situation to Gethin in S5's final three: Gethin could have avoided the dance off but only if he was most popular with the public and Alesha was least popular... a possible result (as Darren Gough provd in S3) just exceedingly unlikely.

Basically, except for something like the tie situation on Sat, the dance off doesn't "rob" us of our ability to change the result; it is always possible it just makes it a heck of a lot more difficult and, in some situations, highly unlikely.

Yep, the dance off has helped keep better dancers in, no doubt. Should have gone before semi though.

My impression last year in this forum was that people were generally in favour of the dance-off, because it protected the better dancers.

One complaint I can recall was that two relatively good dancers might end up in the dance-off, because of a voting pattern that meant the dancers in the middle of the leaderboard were in danger, while those at the bottom tended to be saved by the public. So the dance-off didn't protect them enough.

Last year, people could see that a couple could end up in the dance off even if they weren't unpopular. Failing to get enough votes didn't mean they were disliked. I could just mean that they'd seemed safe, or that they weren't enough people's first choice, or that they'd danced more poorly than usual, or even that the judges hadn't excited an "anti-judge vote" to help them. Last year, people could see that.

Of course, there were complaints from people who thought the judges were biased and had favourites. But the idea that the dance-off was part of a bizarre conspiracy to keep unpopular dancers in the show seldom came up. Now, for some reason, some people seem to believe such strange things.

. But following audience research we found that viewers appreciate the expert knowledge of the judges and like them to make decisions about who stays and goes.

Audience research is very vague term - this can be two men and a dog on their way to the pub on a wet friday night

Ah yet again we disagree - my favs are yours and vice versa. Nope I wouldn't have wanted Austin's salsa against Lisa's jive because that wouldn't be fair - if he'd had to his AS against Lisa's jive then he would have stood a chance - a fighting chance. He may well have lost but the battle would have been fairer and since it's your worst dance that is the raison d'etre for being in a dance-off then it actually makes more sense to do it that way anyway. It's not just Austin that's made me feel this I thought it was unfair that Leticia Dean was up against Kenny when his latin was worse than hers - as it is she was ok but the point still stands.

I wanted to shout at the screen when Arlene said Tom might have survived a dance-off if you come against someone who's dance scored 39 or 40 then you're doomed - end of (Arlene did last series vote against Matt with a 40 score but she was a exception) and if someone just has one good dance like Lisa did then that's not fair.

deleted

I think the dance off should go next year, the judges have the score board to protect the good dancers in the early rounds, it should go back to being 50/50.

That'll do me nicely!