Now its not a Dancing competition we can get rid of the judges as there opinions dont matter. I think that next year we can change the name to "Vote The Most Popular As Long As They Are Not A Bad Dancer".
Are The Judges Now A Waste Of Time
1 of 2
They should have a 50% say in all decisions, so the public still have a hand in it but it can still be called a dancing competition
The judges said it was the best final four they`ve seen in a series and even tonight they said on the VT that it was a close call and either of the three could win it.
It's fairly obvious that the judges aren't completely objective in their voting either - just like the public, they have their favourites, and they mark them higher.
We might not agree with what they say, but we're entertained by the judges opinions, and we wait eagerly for their scores... and again part of the 'fun' is hurling abuse at the judges for under/over scoring! Then it's over to the public! If the judges scores mattered for nothing, what would be the point of them, really? And I do believe that they are an important element of the show... I know others will not agree and want to have winners selected 'x-factor' style, public vote only - but that is also patently unfair when even on that show the best singers do not necessarily get through. I think the SCD arrangement is more fair... imho!
Originally Posted by gossipfan:
“It's fairly obvious that the judges aren't completely objective in their voting either - just like the public, they have their favourites, and they mark them higher.”
“It's fairly obvious that the judges aren't completely objective in their voting either - just like the public, they have their favourites, and they mark them higher.”
Well, we've always known this but tonight's 80/80 took the biscuit IMO. What a complete joke!
I would like to see the public vote taken out of the equation.
They are no use to man or beast.
But I know this is as unlikely as Rachel or Lisa actually having a chance to win on the basis of their consistently good dancing.
Their decisions frequently fly in the face of common sense - like this year's. Winner: Rachel, runner-up: Lisa.
Tom - third.
They are no use to man or beast.
But I know this is as unlikely as Rachel or Lisa actually having a chance to win on the basis of their consistently good dancing.
Their decisions frequently fly in the face of common sense - like this year's. Winner: Rachel, runner-up: Lisa.
Tom - third.
Originally Posted by Romus:
“I would like to see the public vote taken out of the equation.
They are no use to man or beast.”
“I would like to see the public vote taken out of the equation.
They are no use to man or beast.
”
Wasn't the original idea to raise some money from the votes for 'children in need' or summut? Now it's just a vote... X-factor just make masses of money for peeps like Simon Cowell with their extortionate charges. I dunno if the programme would be as 'credible' or popular without the public interraction?
The problem tonight was that the judges votes had become so confused with the rules that some marks looked as if they might be designed to make sure the rules were not found to have more new holes in them rather than to mark quality. Rachel being top of the part one judges leaderboard would have made it unneccessary to vote for her to go through as she would have been safe if they had just added marks on the usual system. She would have started with 5 added 3 and had a minimum of 9 when they added the second public vote.
Their way out of that was to design a marking system that added two lots of judges marks and one public vote from last week to just produce a 3 2 1 mark or as it was a 3 3 1. The problem with that though was that if Rachel went out people could complain she would have been safe if they had counted the marks normally.
Look what happens - Craig gives Rachel a 9 after saying she did better than with her last time and giving no reason for it . Lisa gets 40 and is first not Rachel = no problem on any way of counting. No tie. No Rachel first problem. Rachel still goes through on the rules if she just beats Lisa with the public so its fair on her. Problem avoided - but only if Craig gives that 9.
Even the NOTW has worked out what the problem was - how fortunate that they avoided it.......
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/show...ng-finale.html
Their way out of that was to design a marking system that added two lots of judges marks and one public vote from last week to just produce a 3 2 1 mark or as it was a 3 3 1. The problem with that though was that if Rachel went out people could complain she would have been safe if they had counted the marks normally.
Look what happens - Craig gives Rachel a 9 after saying she did better than with her last time and giving no reason for it . Lisa gets 40 and is first not Rachel = no problem on any way of counting. No tie. No Rachel first problem. Rachel still goes through on the rules if she just beats Lisa with the public so its fair on her. Problem avoided - but only if Craig gives that 9.
Even the NOTW has worked out what the problem was - how fortunate that they avoided it.......
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/show...ng-finale.html
The judges influence is still tremendous. They effectively have two bites of the cherry up until the final. Their votes constitute half of the votes and then they still have the dance-off where they choose who they want to progress. Whilst I see the purpose of the dance-off I believe that once the couples are down to 5, the dance-off should be removed.
It is arguable that perhaps Lisa and/or Rachel would not have made the finals if there was no dance-off.
The problem this series is that the judges favourites just didn't have the public support leaving the odd situation where the couple that got a perfect 80/80 in the first round of the final finish third.
It is arguable that perhaps Lisa and/or Rachel would not have made the finals if there was no dance-off.
The problem this series is that the judges favourites just didn't have the public support leaving the odd situation where the couple that got a perfect 80/80 in the first round of the final finish third.
Originally Posted by Jewels501:
“The judges influence is still tremendous. They effectively have two bites of the cherry up until the final. Their votes constitute half of the votes and then they still have the dance-off where they choose who they want to progress. Whilst I see the purpose of the dance-off I believe that once the couples are down to 5, the dance-off should be removed.
It is arguable that perhaps Lisa and/or Rachel would not have made the finals if there was no dance-off.
The problem this series is that the judges favourites just didn't have the public support leaving the odd situation where the couple that got a perfect 80/80 in the first round of the final finish third.”
“The judges influence is still tremendous. They effectively have two bites of the cherry up until the final. Their votes constitute half of the votes and then they still have the dance-off where they choose who they want to progress. Whilst I see the purpose of the dance-off I believe that once the couples are down to 5, the dance-off should be removed.
It is arguable that perhaps Lisa and/or Rachel would not have made the finals if there was no dance-off.
The problem this series is that the judges favourites just didn't have the public support leaving the odd situation where the couple that got a perfect 80/80 in the first round of the final finish third.”
Well aint that the truth! The judges do seem to have gained an inflated sense of their own importance this series. They've always had their own thoughts about who should win/get to the final/take the next bus home but they've usually kept a better lid on these thoughts.
This series however, they've bubbled over. They got thoroughly over-excited about John Sergeant (no, no, no, the public are idiots - get the unco-ordinated moron out!) and then seemed to go overboard on Lisa who, while she was great at ballroom (though still not the best at all), had only the cha cha as her Latin party piece. I'm still not totally comfortable with the way they treated Rachel either.
Len said Brendan had taught Lisa to 'heel and toe' which he'd never seen a contestant do before last night.
Therefore Len had previously given 10's for imperfect dancing, yet took a pop at the public for they way they voted.
How ironic in the final the winner was in the eyes of the judges not the best dancer, so why their outrage earlier in the series?
Therefore Len had previously given 10's for imperfect dancing, yet took a pop at the public for they way they voted.
How ironic in the final the winner was in the eyes of the judges not the best dancer, so why their outrage earlier in the series?
Originally Posted by Foxy Moron:
“Well, we've always known this but tonight's 80/80 took the biscuit IMO. What a complete joke!”
“Well, we've always known this but tonight's 80/80 took the biscuit IMO. What a complete joke!”
well IMO Tom winning was a complete joke
Originally Posted by i4u:
“Len said Brendan had taught Lisa to 'heel and toe' which he'd never seen a contestant do before last night.
Therefore Len had previously given 10's for imperfect dancing, yet took a pop at the public for they way they voted.
How ironic in the final the winner was in the eyes of the judges not the best dancer, so why their outrage earlier in the series?”
“Len said Brendan had taught Lisa to 'heel and toe' which he'd never seen a contestant do before last night.
Therefore Len had previously given 10's for imperfect dancing, yet took a pop at the public for they way they voted.
How ironic in the final the winner was in the eyes of the judges not the best dancer, so why their outrage earlier in the series?”
Maybe earlier outrage was because people were voting for John Sergeant to annoy the judges which is simply and purely childish.
Also, people are assuming Rachel was the best dancer - well technically maybe she was but I got bored watching her - dont know why - just got bored and I loved Tom's style of dancing, and thoroughly enjoyed his final dances. I thought his showdance was so different - the others had the usual smoochy stuff (well Lisa and Brendan practically had sex on the floor!). Reminded me a bit of Judy Garland and Gene Kelly in the Pirate.
Originally Posted by tabithakitten:
“Well aint that the truth! The judges do seem to have gained an inflated sense of their own importance this series. They've always had their own thoughts about who should win/get to the final/take the next bus home but they've usually kept a better lid on these thoughts.
This series however, they've bubbled over. They got thoroughly over-excited about John Sergeant (no, no, no, the public are idiots - get the unco-ordinated moron out!) and then seemed to go overboard on Lisa who, while she was great at ballroom (though still not the best at all), had only the cha cha as her Latin party piece. I'm still not totally comfortable with the way they treated Rachel either.”
“Well aint that the truth! The judges do seem to have gained an inflated sense of their own importance this series. They've always had their own thoughts about who should win/get to the final/take the next bus home but they've usually kept a better lid on these thoughts.
This series however, they've bubbled over. They got thoroughly over-excited about John Sergeant (no, no, no, the public are idiots - get the unco-ordinated moron out!) and then seemed to go overboard on Lisa who, while she was great at ballroom (though still not the best at all), had only the cha cha as her Latin party piece. I'm still not totally comfortable with the way they treated Rachel either.”
I agree completely. I find it bizarre that in a show that ostensibly does not have a serious prize (leaving aside the raising of profiles and the reasons and hopes the celebs have for competing) - the judges have more control and are more obsessed with getting their chosen one through than in shows where chosing the "right" winner is more crucial to the makers of the show. In this regard the obvious comparisons are the X Factor (record contract) and the various ALW shows to find leads for West Ends shows.
The judges never learn!
We had an exact repeat of the Zoe Ball situation from series 3 last night. The judges couldn't have made it clearer that they thought the two girls should have been in the final and they totally ignored the public's opinion yet again.
Tom has been the most popular contestant with the public week in and week out since John left (and was second to him before then). He has never been in the dance off and he has been matched with a popular professional. Even knowing that he was the most popular, his fans picked up the phone and VOTED for him (yes I did ring in and it took me over 15 minutes to register my first vote). The reason Lisa went out was that her fans DIDN'T vote in high enough numbers for her to win.
Without the dance off, it is doubtful that Rachel or Lisa would have made the final, and it would have been less humiliating for her to have gone when she was dancing off against Cherie or Jodie than to go through to the final, get a perfect (although IMHO undeserved) perfect score only to be unceremoniously booted out due to a well known by the powers that be lack of public support.
We had an exact repeat of the Zoe Ball situation from series 3 last night. The judges couldn't have made it clearer that they thought the two girls should have been in the final and they totally ignored the public's opinion yet again.
Tom has been the most popular contestant with the public week in and week out since John left (and was second to him before then). He has never been in the dance off and he has been matched with a popular professional. Even knowing that he was the most popular, his fans picked up the phone and VOTED for him (yes I did ring in and it took me over 15 minutes to register my first vote). The reason Lisa went out was that her fans DIDN'T vote in high enough numbers for her to win.
Without the dance off, it is doubtful that Rachel or Lisa would have made the final, and it would have been less humiliating for her to have gone when she was dancing off against Cherie or Jodie than to go through to the final, get a perfect (although IMHO undeserved) perfect score only to be unceremoniously booted out due to a well known by the powers that be lack of public support.
I think it was a perfect result! It should wipe the smug smiles off the Judges faces, I will agree that the best dancer didn't win, imo the best dancer was voted off by the judges in the quarter final, who were so looking for a Lisa/Rachel final. I am very pleased for Tom and Camilla and for the GBP in general... who did as they were told and voted for their favourite. BTW I thought Tom's show dance was the best I have seen.
Originally Posted by welwynrose:
“well IMO Tom winning was a complete joke”
“well IMO Tom winning was a complete joke”
This.
On the streets people were commenting on the girls dance skills and the best they could come up for from Tom was he was hot.
Come on public get a ****ing grip (now Rachel was hot).
Originally Posted by Romus:
“I would like to see the public vote taken out of the equation.
They are no use to man or beast.
But I know this is as unlikely as Rachel or Lisa actually having a chance to win on the basis of their consistently good dancing.
Their decisions frequently fly in the face of common sense - like this year's. Winner: Rachel, runner-up: Lisa.
Tom - third.”
“I would like to see the public vote taken out of the equation.
They are no use to man or beast.
But I know this is as unlikely as Rachel or Lisa actually having a chance to win on the basis of their consistently good dancing.
Their decisions frequently fly in the face of common sense - like this year's. Winner: Rachel, runner-up: Lisa.
Tom - third.”
Then that would be the end of Strictly, it would go the same way as come dancing.
Not being a pure dance fan myself I would far prefer to have it as it is, an entertainment show featuring dance. And long may it continue
Originally Posted by johnno:
“We might not agree with what they say, but we're entertained by the judges opinions, and we wait eagerly for their scores... and again part of the 'fun' is hurling abuse at the judges for under/over scoring! Then it's over to the public! If the judges scores mattered for nothing, what would be the point of them, really? And I do believe that they are an important element of the show... I know others will not agree and want to have winners selected 'x-factor' style, public vote only - but that is also patently unfair when even on that show the best singers do not necessarily get through. I think the SCD arrangement is more fair... imho!”
“We might not agree with what they say, but we're entertained by the judges opinions, and we wait eagerly for their scores... and again part of the 'fun' is hurling abuse at the judges for under/over scoring! Then it's over to the public! If the judges scores mattered for nothing, what would be the point of them, really? And I do believe that they are an important element of the show... I know others will not agree and want to have winners selected 'x-factor' style, public vote only - but that is also patently unfair when even on that show the best singers do not necessarily get through. I think the SCD arrangement is more fair... imho!”
I think the judges should be a bit more profesional in their voting. If they are profesional judges I would not expect there to be more then 2 marks difference between their votes because there is a standard against which you mark. This year we have seen some very silly differences
The bit I didn't understand was the fact that Craig said that R&Vs Rhumba was better yet the still gave it a nine. I think they were under orders not to give the two girls the same marks.
The whole series has been totally discredited for me. It's the first time I have not been happy to see a winner lift the glitter ball.
The whole series has been totally discredited for me. It's the first time I have not been happy to see a winner lift the glitter ball.
The judges aren't a waste of time- they have more experience than any of you and their opinions are valued. The only problem is the dance off- it gives the judges too much power and means the entertaining dancers like Austin leave and the boring dancers like Lisa are kept in. I think the judges should score the dances but then the public vote decides who stays in- after all, this show is made for them, not the judges.
The individuals themselves have got too big for their boots.
Simply employ some judges who are prepared to stick to a bit of simple judging rather than preening, ridiculous alliteration, self-promotion and shouting at each other.
Can't see Philip Jackson (red button fella) being such a prima donna.
Pay them less. Don't help to inflate their ego any further.
And give instructions on the use of 9s and 10s.
We're not idiots. The judges/ BBC think they can whip up hysteria and boost the viewing stats by talking the whole thing up.
We are not so easily duped.
By lavishing top scores on mediocre performances they discredit the judging process and we cease to have faith in their ability to detect a pig-in-a-poke.
Simply employ some judges who are prepared to stick to a bit of simple judging rather than preening, ridiculous alliteration, self-promotion and shouting at each other.
Can't see Philip Jackson (red button fella) being such a prima donna.
Pay them less. Don't help to inflate their ego any further.
And give instructions on the use of 9s and 10s.
We're not idiots. The judges/ BBC think they can whip up hysteria and boost the viewing stats by talking the whole thing up.
We are not so easily duped.
By lavishing top scores on mediocre performances they discredit the judging process and we cease to have faith in their ability to detect a pig-in-a-poke.
Originally Posted by Bob22A:
“I think the judges should be a bit more profesional in their voting. If they are profesional judges I would not expect there to be more then 2 marks difference between their votes because there is a standard against which you mark. This year we have seen some very silly differences”
“I think the judges should be a bit more profesional in their voting. If they are profesional judges I would not expect there to be more then 2 marks difference between their votes because there is a standard against which you mark. This year we have seen some very silly differences”
Whats the point, their vote doesn't really count as we saw this series
1 of 2
