Specials
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
First participant = Jeremy Vine
Show More
Hoping Kellie is booked for 4th so she won't be reprising her SW-themed Charleston 
Couples' Fav Dance Choices
Jay & Aliona - PD to It's My Life 8 9 8 8 on 24th Oct
KK - Star Wars Charleston 8 8 8 8 on 10th Oct
GG - Chicago Charleston 8 10 10 10 on 14th Nov
Katie & Anton - VW to If I Can Dream 8 9 8 8 on 17th Oct
Jay & Aliona - PD to It's My Life 8 9 8 8 on 24th Oct
KK - Star Wars Charleston 8 8 8 8 on 10th Oct
GG - Chicago Charleston 8 10 10 10 on 14th Nov
Katie & Anton - VW to If I Can Dream 8 9 8 8 on 17th Oct
Lol, JR.
I didn't like their Star Wars theme.
I've never seen a Star Wars film.
I didn't like their Star Wars theme.
I've never seen a Star Wars film.
I might not be here much tomorrow. Pre Christmas family get together again
I have a new twitter system too
I have a new twitter system too
Kellie is sly - banging on about 'learning a new dance' for her showdance like she's better than the others for learning a new dance. Along with the Star Wars choice, it's all a desperate attempt to win the audience over, as has been the case series-long. The pair of them are a couple of try-hards.
If they make her wear heels she's fooked. That was the difference between last nights training clip and the previous one
OT...did you ever watch that programme I mentioned sq about Shane Lynch (and therfore the DOD story ?)
Did they have a red button after show thing for last year's final?
no I didn't hems, totally forgot what the programme was called 
. Is it the sort of thing that will be repeated?
. Is it the sort of thing that will be repeated?
It seems that way. I see she was training in flat shoes again in the clip they showed tonight. Last night the training was a shambles
hideous panel
bring back Mark Benton, Aled Jones and whoever the woman was that week.
bring back Mark Benton, Aled Jones and whoever the woman was that week.
It was a Ferne Briton programme Iirc....ill post the story in a mo to save you looking it up.
Welcome to tonight's panel, 'squares, hemsby and five leaves left'. Now that would be an ITT panel 
We would end up having a punch up Fig when I predict she will be out first
probs wouldn't get a word in edgeways with hems there - it's part of his profession 
I'd expect you all to tear into the likes of K&K - would be great viewing
Dec 18, 2015 -- 6:47PM, hemsby wrote:
We would end up having a punch up Fig when I predict she will be out first
I'd get the audience booing you hems
I'd still be going on about how Gethin was robbed
Miranda being on all that time that was, not that bl00dy dreary Gethin
saw Jake on some TV show earlier in the week - You Saw Them Here First - or something similar, showing all his early TV roles when he had a shock of ginger hair
You'd all go into the intricacies of leaderboard ordering and the blatant ramping/deramping, and managing of the public vote. Zoe's head would explode and Beeb viewers would be up in arms. It would be brilliant
you need to be on the panel to get all gobby about all the controversy
....and then I'd put the meter on driving you back to HQ 
It's why they stick to these safe, populist tedious celeb bores to give their views and sit on the fence. 'You want the truth, you can't handle the truth' is the reality of anyone exposing the dark arts on one of these shows.
I didn't even like Gethin. I just liked my green until the semi final
Not sure I'm too happy seeing Jay and Aliona mucking around dancing in the background. Get back to the training room God damn it 
It is the best of these shows. The jungle one was good with Flackers and BOTS with Brand, but both have gone downhill now
Impression there was of a Georgia ramp and a Jay deramp. Probably just book talking.
The DOD story I mentioned sq...
Shane Lynch was recalling the funeral of Stephen Gately.The band members met up on the day before when there was a ceremony of sorts at the church.Stephen's mum thanks them for coming and they all talk......turns out Stephen's mum is concerned about Stephen laying in the coffin overnight in the church,as he was always afraid of the dark.
All the band members agree that they will buy sleeping bags and some booze and spend their last night with Stephen sleeping on the floor of the church next to the coffin.It gets to late evening and they are all quite emotional,but also quite hungry as they have forgotten to bring any food.
At that point there is a knock on the church door,and in walks DOD carrying some Fish and Chips for everyone !
They spend the next couple of hours with DOD celebrating Stephen's life eating Fish and Chips and boozing in the church next to his coffin .
Shane Lynch was recalling the funeral of Stephen Gately.The band members met up on the day before when there was a ceremony of sorts at the church.Stephen's mum thanks them for coming and they all talk......turns out Stephen's mum is concerned about Stephen laying in the coffin overnight in the church,as he was always afraid of the dark.
All the band members agree that they will buy sleeping bags and some booze and spend their last night with Stephen sleeping on the floor of the church next to the coffin.It gets to late evening and they are all quite emotional,but also quite hungry as they have forgotten to bring any food.
At that point there is a knock on the church door,and in walks DOD carrying some Fish and Chips for everyone !
They spend the next couple of hours with DOD celebrating Stephen's life eating Fish and Chips and boozing in the church next to his coffin .
Dec 18, 2015 -- 7:02PM, five leaves left wrote:
Book talking? I thought Jay wins with 50%+?
Yup but Georgia a big red so I see ramping for her
I hope so too. Double the green, hoping to lay at half the price
I can see a price crash in running with more ramping...better scores for her...flip side is I suspect most have made their mind up this time and consensus is Jay consistently undermarked so GG ramping factored in. Georgia likable and it might have been interesting.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/maths/2015/12/18/norman-biggs-strictly-not-dancing/
George interesting link. Reading quickly through it I realise that it would take me too long to check his maths (any mathematicians here?). But, assuming a maths prof has got it right, his conclusions reached seem ignorant. You could put the following to him:
"It is to maximise the number of people who watch the show."
If the BBC really were as pure and simple as that they’d create transparency so that a professor of maths wouldn’t need to spend hours merely in order to scratch the surface.
"As we shall see, in the later stages of the competition, when the number is small (and the public tends to put less weight on the judges’ comments), significant conclusions can be made."
I think what he means in his brackets is and the public vote is less in line with the judges marks which, if so, is completely different.
"It follows that the judges would have been more likely to prevail if their scores had been converted into points in the more usual way."
I think he’s trying to say that if it was scored so that the judges were unable to create a tie the judges wishes would be more fairly matched against the public wishes and therefore more likely to prevail. (Simple to stop ties: an overall tie would then lead to eg grading on the most individual top marks, another tie in which would lead to grading on something else etc, so that an overall tie was impossible). And that seems to be his final conclusion. However he assumes that the judges marks are straight, simple and honest when in fact they can, and probably do, create ties on purpose.
George interesting link. Reading quickly through it I realise that it would take me too long to check his maths (any mathematicians here?). But, assuming a maths prof has got it right, his conclusions reached seem ignorant. You could put the following to him:
"It is to maximise the number of people who watch the show."
If the BBC really were as pure and simple as that they’d create transparency so that a professor of maths wouldn’t need to spend hours merely in order to scratch the surface.
"As we shall see, in the later stages of the competition, when the number is small (and the public tends to put less weight on the judges’ comments), significant conclusions can be made."
I think what he means in his brackets is and the public vote is less in line with the judges marks which, if so, is completely different.
"It follows that the judges would have been more likely to prevail if their scores had been converted into points in the more usual way."
I think he’s trying to say that if it was scored so that the judges were unable to create a tie the judges wishes would be more fairly matched against the public wishes and therefore more likely to prevail. (Simple to stop ties: an overall tie would then lead to eg grading on the most individual top marks, another tie in which would lead to grading on something else etc, so that an overall tie was impossible). And that seems to be his final conclusion. However he assumes that the judges marks are straight, simple and honest when in fact they can, and probably do, create ties on purpose.
Can someone explain Henry's explanatory post? Thanks.....only joking Henry 
It's basically a complicated way of saying that it's easier for those at the bottom of the LB escaping the dance-off if there are ties. Ever since they changed the system after the Chambers fiasco
Got that bit....delicious irony of Len confirming the judge's role is to get the "right" people to the final but having a format that mitigates against that
The real question is should taxpayer's money fund academic bolllocks?
I did a degree in Specials Betting and my thesis was "the role of MEMS in deciding specials winners pre and post app voting" so yes it should fund something as useful as that.
http://www.tellymix.co.uk/reality-tv/strictly-come-dancing/245187-aliona-vil...
How many regular posters on here? We`ll call it 30
How many irregular posters on here? We`ll call it 30, too
How many post, but very rarely, on here? We`ll call it 50
How many lurkers? Plenty
So, at a very rough guess, 110 readers, and plenty of lurkers on this mighty fine forum, and YOU are one of them. 110 people who selflessly share their information and (in some cases, at least!) highly informed views. Indeed, as a whole, this select group is probably, pound for pound, amongst the very most successful groups of punters in the world. And YOU are able to benefit from all of this. FOR PHUCKING FREE!!!
Instead of being a selfish and ungrateful bast@rd, how about showing just the smallest bit of appreciation for their efforts?
We are currently in the `Judging Stage` of the `Specials Forumite Of The Year 2015` So far, only a handful of posters have voted. With voting being suspended tomorrow night, that`s a pitiful number. We all spent hundreds, even thousands of hours on here during 2015, yet YOU can`t think of one good post/thread/train/poster that doesn`t deserve even something as simple as your vote? Come on, play the game!
No `reg` can get away without voting, the very absence of your post will be a highly visible slap in the face to all of your friends on here. As you will notice, I`ve posted this on numerous threads, so no `I didn`t know` bollox, thank you very much! 30-odd regs equals 30+ votes, a reasonable sample. So do it. NOW! Yes, and you non-regs. Yes, and you lurkers. DO IT NOW!!!
OK, if you can`t do it now, you want to ponder it all, to give due consideration to this weighty decision, vote before tomorrow night, at least!
If you can`t be bothered to spend a few minutes to pay for what you received in 2015, you can rev up and PHUCK RIGHT OFF!!!!!
Bullet point;
Voters = Decent humans .
Non-voters = UNGRATEFUL SELFISH BAST@RDS!!!!!
How many irregular posters on here? We`ll call it 30, too
How many post, but very rarely, on here? We`ll call it 50
How many lurkers? Plenty
So, at a very rough guess, 110 readers, and plenty of lurkers on this mighty fine forum, and YOU are one of them. 110 people who selflessly share their information and (in some cases, at least!) highly informed views. Indeed, as a whole, this select group is probably, pound for pound, amongst the very most successful groups of punters in the world. And YOU are able to benefit from all of this. FOR PHUCKING FREE!!!
Instead of being a selfish and ungrateful bast@rd, how about showing just the smallest bit of appreciation for their efforts?
We are currently in the `Judging Stage` of the `Specials Forumite Of The Year 2015` So far, only a handful of posters have voted. With voting being suspended tomorrow night, that`s a pitiful number. We all spent hundreds, even thousands of hours on here during 2015, yet YOU can`t think of one good post/thread/train/poster that doesn`t deserve even something as simple as your vote? Come on, play the game!
No `reg` can get away without voting, the very absence of your post will be a highly visible slap in the face to all of your friends on here. As you will notice, I`ve posted this on numerous threads, so no `I didn`t know` bollox, thank you very much! 30-odd regs equals 30+ votes, a reasonable sample. So do it. NOW! Yes, and you non-regs. Yes, and you lurkers. DO IT NOW!!!
OK, if you can`t do it now, you want to ponder it all, to give due consideration to this weighty decision, vote before tomorrow night, at least!
If you can`t be bothered to spend a few minutes to pay for what you received in 2015, you can rev up and PHUCK RIGHT OFF!!!!!
Bullet point;
Voters = Decent humans .
Non-voters = UNGRATEFUL SELFISH BAST@RDS!!!!!
Pro-dancer Tristan won't be returning.
No doubt KfG and all the other relatives will be :(
No doubt KfG and all the other relatives will be :(
Time for a new thread, squares?
Steve Allen on LBC reporting Judge Rinder is in, and probably Yvette Fielding.
Steve Allen on LBC reporting Judge Rinder is in, and probably Yvette Fielding.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539