Sounds like the judges should have their 10 paddles removed IMO....
Problems With The Christmas Special
4 of 6
Originally Posted by Alli-F:
“One of the strengths of the show is that the audience at home have the power to totally reverse a leader board so that the person at the bottom can win because the audience vote in the event of a tie carries more weight.”
“One of the strengths of the show is that the audience at home have the power to totally reverse a leader board so that the person at the bottom can win because the audience vote in the event of a tie carries more weight.”
I think actually the strength is that the audience can disagree. Yes, when the numbers are small, they can reverse the leaderboard, but we're talking about three couples, four at the outside. I can't think of a single example when the top couple of five or more has been eliminated- and very rarely would the top couple even be in the bottom two. The chances of it happening are pretty low, because it depends on the exact voting order.
eg. Series four quarter final
Judges ranked the couples (IIRC)
Emma 5
Louisa 4
Carol 3
Mark 2
Matt 1
The public then voted
Matt 5
Mark 4
Louisa 3
Carol 2
Emma 1
Leaving overall
Louisa 7
Matt 6
Mark 6
Emma 6
Carol 5
If you assume this was to win rather than to stay in the competition, Matt won the public vote and the outcome was noticeably odd, but it still wasn't enough for him to win overall. I don't think any outcome has come close to that either.
So the public can make a difference, but they can't reverse the leaderboard. All that happened last night was that the theoretical possibility of the bottom couple winning in spite of being the worst was removed... but the chances of it happening with six couples were pretty low to begin with because of the maths required.
If the public can totally reverse the leaderboard, it makes a nonsense of having judges. The idea is that the public voting on likeability and entertainment, combined with the judges voting on dance merit, produce a winner that compromises these two factors. Ie for the quarter final scenario- the judges can't force an Emma win because she is unpopular, and the public can't force a Matt win because he isn't a good enough dancer. But we can compromise on Louisa, who was second with the judges and third with the public.
Originally Posted by tabithakitten:
“The Christmas special is meant to be a feelgood show to round off the season. The judges' scores mean nothing to this particular show (and if four couples did get 40/40, surely this is fairly strong evidence for that) and should count for nothing. The judges should comment but not mark. If they actually commented properly, this would probably hold more sway than a few hundred meaningless tens but I'm not holding my breath.”
“The Christmas special is meant to be a feelgood show to round off the season. The judges' scores mean nothing to this particular show (and if four couples did get 40/40, surely this is fairly strong evidence for that) and should count for nothing. The judges should comment but not mark. If they actually commented properly, this would probably hold more sway than a few hundred meaningless tens but I'm not holding my breath.”
I do agree with this for the Christmas show.
G
Originally Posted by lizajean@lizake:
“It wasn't just Len's decision: the judges came to a decision between them and Len announced it. (I was there Len said it was a joint decision.)”
“It wasn't just Len's decision: the judges came to a decision between them and Len announced it. (I was there Len said it was a joint decision.)”
oo you were there.
Please would youu be able to post in the spoiler thread who came second?
And who the 4 people with 40 were?
Originally Posted by cobaltmale:
“They've done no different than in previous years.
Their appearances are all part of promoting the show.
G”
“They've done no different than in previous years.
Their appearances are all part of promoting the show.
G”
I totally agree, but they can't have it both ways. If they're going to play the panto baddies and not be neutral until they've seen the dances, they have to be prepared for us to disagree with them.
I think that lots of people feel that they went too far the other way too and overscored to protect their favourites. That's not fair either, that makes them just as bad as the thing they're criticising us for.
Many people feel that they have overscored Rachel and especially Lisa on occasions to keep them out of the bottom 2, that's just as bad as the viewing public voting in huge numbers to keep John out of the dance off.
There has to be trust on both sides, but I think this series has proved that trust has completely broken down. The judges don't trust us to vote on the dancing, we don't trust the judges to score fairly.
The Judges are to blame with their overblown marking and bias of certain couples.
No way do i believe that the 4 couples were all in the same league to get the same mark. Thats my imo anyway.
In the semi Rachel was above Lisa and shouldn't have been in a tie with her.
They need to stop the silly dance off and get rid of the Judges they are ruining this show and bring in new ones that judge on what they see on the night and not forgiving things or overmarking just because they want them in the final etc!
And in the end i think the public always choose the right winner for that series. Their winner!
So i hope they don't mess with it too much but i bet it ends up more power to the judges.
No way do i believe that the 4 couples were all in the same league to get the same mark. Thats my imo anyway.
In the semi Rachel was above Lisa and shouldn't have been in a tie with her.
They need to stop the silly dance off and get rid of the Judges they are ruining this show and bring in new ones that judge on what they see on the night and not forgiving things or overmarking just because they want them in the final etc!
And in the end i think the public always choose the right winner for that series. Their winner!
So i hope they don't mess with it too much but i bet it ends up more power to the judges.
Originally Posted by katie_p:
“I think actually the strength is that the audience can disagree. Yes, when the numbers are small, they can reverse the leaderboard, but we're talking about three couples, four at the outside. I can't think of a single example when the top couple of five or more has been eliminated- and very rarely would the top couple even be in the bottom two. The chances of it happening are pretty low, because it depends on the exact voting order.
eg. Series four quarter final
Judges ranked the couples (IIRC)
Emma 5
Louisa 4
Carol 3
Mark 2
Matt 1
The public then voted
Matt 5
Mark 4
Louisa 3
Carol 2
Emma 1
Leaving overall
Louisa 7
Matt 6
Mark 6
Emma 6
Carol 5
If you assume this was to win rather than to stay in the competition, Matt won the public vote and the outcome was noticeably odd, but it still wasn't enough for him to win overall. I don't think any outcome has come close to that either.
So the public can make a difference, but they can't reverse the leaderboard. All that happened last night was that the theoretical possibility of the bottom couple winning in spite of being the worst was removed... but the chances of it happening with six couples were pretty low to begin with because of the maths required.
If the public can totally reverse the leaderboard, it makes a nonsense of having judges. The idea is that the public voting on likeability and entertainment, combined with the judges voting on dance merit, produce a winner that compromises these two factors. Ie for the quarter final scenario- the judges can't force an Emma win because she is unpopular, and the public can't force a Matt win because he isn't a good enough dancer. But we can compromise on Louisa, who was second with the judges and third with the public.”
“I think actually the strength is that the audience can disagree. Yes, when the numbers are small, they can reverse the leaderboard, but we're talking about three couples, four at the outside. I can't think of a single example when the top couple of five or more has been eliminated- and very rarely would the top couple even be in the bottom two. The chances of it happening are pretty low, because it depends on the exact voting order.
eg. Series four quarter final
Judges ranked the couples (IIRC)
Emma 5
Louisa 4
Carol 3
Mark 2
Matt 1
The public then voted
Matt 5
Mark 4
Louisa 3
Carol 2
Emma 1
Leaving overall
Louisa 7
Matt 6
Mark 6
Emma 6
Carol 5
If you assume this was to win rather than to stay in the competition, Matt won the public vote and the outcome was noticeably odd, but it still wasn't enough for him to win overall. I don't think any outcome has come close to that either.
So the public can make a difference, but they can't reverse the leaderboard. All that happened last night was that the theoretical possibility of the bottom couple winning in spite of being the worst was removed... but the chances of it happening with six couples were pretty low to begin with because of the maths required.
If the public can totally reverse the leaderboard, it makes a nonsense of having judges. The idea is that the public voting on likeability and entertainment, combined with the judges voting on dance merit, produce a winner that compromises these two factors. Ie for the quarter final scenario- the judges can't force an Emma win because she is unpopular, and the public can't force a Matt win because he isn't a good enough dancer. But we can compromise on Louisa, who was second with the judges and third with the public.”
But didn't Darren Gough win by totally reversing the leaderboard? I don't know I didn't watch?
Of course, it can make a mockery of the show if the leaderboard is reversed, but that, I think, is an important part of the tenet of the show. We have the power, if we so wish to ensure that the person at the bottom of the leaderboard wins.
Tom was bottom of the leaderboard and won on Sunday (it was a little more complicated because of the semi hangover). I can't think of anything that shows more clearly that we no longer trust the judges, Lisa in the eyes of nearly everyone, did not deserve her 80/80.
Originally Posted by Olls~:
“And in the end i think the public always choose the right winner for that series.”
“And in the end i think the public always choose the right winner for that series.”
Ironically, that's exactly what Craig and Bruno said on 'Breakfast' last week.
G
Originally Posted by cobaltmale:
“Ironically, that's exactly what Craig and Bruno said on 'Breakfast' last week.
G”
“Ironically, that's exactly what Craig and Bruno said on 'Breakfast' last week.
G”
And I don't think they believe that any more than I do!
Originally Posted by Alli-F:
“But didn't Darren Gough win by totally reversing the leaderboard? I don't know I didn't watch?
Of course, it can make a mockery of the show if the leaderboard is reversed, but that, I think, is an important part of the tenet of the show. We have the power, if we so wish to ensure that the person at the bottom of the leaderboard wins.
Tom was bottom of the leaderboard and won on Sunday (it was a little more complicated because of the semi hangover). I can't think of anything that shows more clearly that we no longer trust the judges, Lisa in the eyes of nearly everyone, did not deserve her 80/80.”
“But didn't Darren Gough win by totally reversing the leaderboard? I don't know I didn't watch?
Of course, it can make a mockery of the show if the leaderboard is reversed, but that, I think, is an important part of the tenet of the show. We have the power, if we so wish to ensure that the person at the bottom of the leaderboard wins.
Tom was bottom of the leaderboard and won on Sunday (it was a little more complicated because of the semi hangover). I can't think of anything that shows more clearly that we no longer trust the judges, Lisa in the eyes of nearly everyone, did not deserve her 80/80.
”
Has this event highlighted that it it the JUDGES scoring that needs to be reformed next year. Methinks the judges power will be denigrated next year and one or 2 might leave citing other prof commitments. The final was a humiliation for the judges and this just reinforces it...
What a fiasco. It seems the producers still haven't learnt their lesson from this year's semi-final.
I think that if contestants’ scores are tied, they should each get the points from the lowest tied position – not the highest, as it is currently. In this case, with four couples tied, they'd each have got three points and there would be no problem. Such a rule would also discourage the judges from giving out tied scores – and therefore might just stop their ludicrous overmarking.
I think that if contestants’ scores are tied, they should each get the points from the lowest tied position – not the highest, as it is currently. In this case, with four couples tied, they'd each have got three points and there would be no problem. Such a rule would also discourage the judges from giving out tied scores – and therefore might just stop their ludicrous overmarking.
i dont care what the judges say there is no way they are always right with there markings.
Also i dont see why sometimes we should not be allowed to forgive someone for one bad week. Eg Austin and Tom were both very consistent and although Austin have a bad week in the quaterfinals and Tom the semi finals that doesnt mean they are worse dancers then Lisa and Rachel.
The same with Gethin last year.
I do think the judges abuse there marks to get the end result they want, i know it doesnt work eventually hence Tom winning.. But Austin and (almost Tom) would have lost out on making the final just because of the judges favour towards Lisa. She was nothing special and there was at least 6 occasions where she was overmarked.
Also i dont see why sometimes we should not be allowed to forgive someone for one bad week. Eg Austin and Tom were both very consistent and although Austin have a bad week in the quaterfinals and Tom the semi finals that doesnt mean they are worse dancers then Lisa and Rachel.
The same with Gethin last year.
I do think the judges abuse there marks to get the end result they want, i know it doesnt work eventually hence Tom winning.. But Austin and (almost Tom) would have lost out on making the final just because of the judges favour towards Lisa. She was nothing special and there was at least 6 occasions where she was overmarked.
Originally Posted by boddism:
“Sounds like the judges should have their 10 paddles removed IMO....”
“Sounds like the judges should have their 10 paddles removed IMO....
”
That's what I was thinking, at least Len and Bruno should have thiers removed!
Originally Posted by Alli-F:
“And I don't think they believe that any more than I do!”
“And I don't think they believe that any more than I do!
”
Well, we'll agree to differ. I can't help what level of trust you have.
I think many fans have gone hysterical this year.
And I speak as someone who wanted Austin to win (and Gethin last year), but, hey, I got over it.
G
Originally Posted by alfie71:
“Surely just the one with the highest audience vote would have won???? If four were tied top, all they had to do was tell the audience to vote for one of those four, as the other two could not win????
As I remember there was a tie at the top last year too? There is no problem with audience votes, as they are done on slips of paper, not by phone call, so there is no cost involved, and hence no accusations of "fraud"!”
“Surely just the one with the highest audience vote would have won???? If four were tied top, all they had to do was tell the audience to vote for one of those four, as the other two could not win????
As I remember there was a tie at the top last year too? There is no problem with audience votes, as they are done on slips of paper, not by phone call, so there is no cost involved, and hence no accusations of "fraud"!”
Precisely. The studio audience are not paying to vote, there's no contract I can see yet and you can easily point out that voting for someone who starts too many points behind may be futile for anyoneone who can't work it out .
There is no problem - voting for some people has always been pretty futile.
Most worryingly it seems their cunning plan to break a tie was to use Len to split the people who were tied. His record in SCD 2008 suggest thats entirely wrong.
Even more incompetently anyone watching the BBC I news now knows how the competion fell out - just not who won.
The problem is the winner may only have won because Len heard a voice telling him they should..........two undermined winners in a week is some record.
Just saw this on the BBC News @ 1 - !! Again!!! Hello??!!!
They must all be walking away from SCD 6 with a bit of a sour taste.
Wonder will there be series editing before the broadcast on Xmas day???!!!
They must all be walking away from SCD 6 with a bit of a sour taste.
Wonder will there be series editing before the broadcast on Xmas day???!!!
Originally Posted by Zippy289:
“What a fiasco. It seems the producers still haven't learnt their lesson from this year's semi-final.
I think that if contestants’ scores are tied, they should each get the points from the lowest tied position – not the highest, as it is currently. In this case, with four couples tied, they'd each have got three points and there would be no problem. Such a rule would also discourage the judges from giving out tied scores – and therefore might just stop their ludicrous overmarking.”
“What a fiasco. It seems the producers still haven't learnt their lesson from this year's semi-final.
I think that if contestants’ scores are tied, they should each get the points from the lowest tied position – not the highest, as it is currently. In this case, with four couples tied, they'd each have got three points and there would be no problem. Such a rule would also discourage the judges from giving out tied scores – and therefore might just stop their ludicrous overmarking.”
That rewards mediocrity though. The answer is to assume that past winners and runners up will dance well and to markeveryone a bit lower to leave room.
Originally Posted by Jenni1:
“Just saw this on the BBC News @ 1 - !! Again!!! Hello??!!!
They must all be walking away from SCD 6 with a bit of a sour taste.
Wonder will there be series editing before the broadcast on Xmas day???!!!”
“Just saw this on the BBC News @ 1 - !! Again!!! Hello??!!!
They must all be walking away from SCD 6 with a bit of a sour taste.
Wonder will there be series editing before the broadcast on Xmas day???!!!”
maybe they should have just re-shot the entire thing??
Originally Posted by cobaltmale:
“Well, we'll agree to differ. I can't help what level of trust you have.
I think many fans have gone hysterical this year.
And I speak as someone who wanted Austin to win (and Gethin last year), but, hey, I got over it.
G”
“Well, we'll agree to differ. I can't help what level of trust you have.
I think many fans have gone hysterical this year.
And I speak as someone who wanted Austin to win (and Gethin last year), but, hey, I got over it.
G”
Sorry! I should have been clearer.
What I meant was, of course the public always choose the right winner, because it's "our winner", that's why the semi caused so much fuss.What I meant was that they sometimes may have to say it through gritted teeth, as obviously the person that they consistently voted top of the leaderboard, Lisa, was first out on Saturday. And the other person that they championed, Rachel, also lost out to Tom.
Originally Posted by Alli-F:
“SorryWhat I meant was that they sometimes may have to say it through gritted teeth, as obviously the person that they consistently voted top of the leaderboard, Lisa, was first out on Saturday. And the other person that they championed, Rachel, also lost out to Tom.”
“SorryWhat I meant was that they sometimes may have to say it through gritted teeth, as obviously the person that they consistently voted top of the leaderboard, Lisa, was first out on Saturday. And the other person that they championed, Rachel, also lost out to Tom.”
But they know that's all they can do, they've had their throw of the dice and - particularly in a final - it's over.
I just don't think they crawl away seething like it's some major injustice or scandal, like some people on these forums do.
Remember they still get paid, still get the TV exposure whatever way results go.
In other words, they also get over it.
G
Originally Posted by boddism:
“Do we think the judges got a serious b******king from the producers last night??
”
“Do we think the judges got a serious b******king from the producers last night??
”
Er, no.
G
4 of 6
