Thanks for the explanation. How weird -- I guess the lines must open for all couples then at the beginning, before they have danced? If that's the case, the audience is pretty much voting for the previous night's performance anyway, b/c they're voting before some couples dance. Or else, the last couple seriously gets screwed with time for the vote.

I really liked him last night, too. His jokes were actually, compared to the barrage coming from John, funny!


I'm sure he already misses her! She seems like she'd be a lot of fun.

That gave my little shipper heart hope too. After the media whirlwind, he's going to realize how much he misses her...

Eeeep! Morsels are good -- he HOPES he's the one!

Say, now we know Alec might be back in January, I think we should start giving him suggestions for hair style and choice of clothing during rehearsals for our maximum viewing comfort! Or just send someone to steal his gel.

Yeah, I think Jonathan is quite handsome, though I like Alec's look better. I might have to see him in skimpier clothes to have a better idea :)

But that guy has equal grievance as Alec's Green Lantern costume, that pirate shirt they made him wear was atrocious. The one thing about him that bugs me though, are the shocked facial expressions he gives after negative reviews. It's a little, uh, girly.

ETA I like Tom from the interview as well. I like how touched he is by the show and how he wants to start dancing too! He can stay as host for next year.

I fear for Alec and the types of submissions he'd be getting for clothing choices... hehe. Can someone who has some experience with ballroom explain to me how the orange man-tan and over-gelled look became the standard for performances? Edyta and Ashly would have looked so much less severe and, well, better, if their hair wasn't tightly slicked back.

As I said earlier, Joey said something about watching 6 or 10 people competing next time -- I wonder if he's heard of their expanding the cast and season?

I hope Alec will be with Kelly on Live with Regis/Kelly Monday! Never fear -- I'm sure the original plucky and spunky soap star Kelly will be sure to ask the really juicy and embarassing questions of Kelly/Alec. Does anyone who watches the Live! regularly know if Regis and Kelly have been following the show? If so, the interview should be a lot more intersting than the previous ones where the host obviously never watched even a tape of it.

Also, for those who missed the Leno appearance last time around, it should be replayed tomorrow night at 2:05am (or rather, early Saturday morning). I emailed ABC to see if they could tell if there are any plans to rerun DWTS on ABC or ABC Family. I don't expect a response, but it would be nice to hear back that they will rerun the shows.

Yeah. I wonder how John thinks that would be any more fair than the way it was done on ABC? If people are calling even before all the couples dance, then they're not calling in votes for that week's dance. They're calling based on who they like regardless of how they dance, or they're voting on the basis of the previous week's dance - just like happened on DWTS.

ITA. Now that all my J. Peterman fondness is fading as JOH's gabbing starts to suggest to me that grace on the dance floor doesn't necessarily translate into grace in defeat.

Kelly still hangs around with Alec. She did take him and Edyta to the Playboy Mansion for the 4th of July. I think he may even make an appearance at her fan club weekend event this Saturaday. Damn I wish I could go.

{{{SWOON}}} A late Christmas present for all of us Alec Luvahs. :) This news really made my day. I was so hoping to see Alec on the next series. And go me! I said that I thought Jan/Feb would be the perfect time to bring the show back. I was just checking out ABC's primetime schedule for 2005-2006 (see below) and I don't think that we'll be seeing DWtS back in its Wed. at 9:00 slot since Lost is the "tentpole" there.

WEDNESDAY:
8:00 p.m. “George Lopez” (new night and time)
8:30 p.m. “Freddie” (new comedy series)
9:00 p.m. “Lost” (new time)
10:00 p.m. “Invasion” (new drama series)

The George Lopez show is on its last legs and I can't see Freddie Prinz's show doing all that well, so by mid-season, that 8:00-9:00 hour may be open. But would DWtS be a good fit with Lost and Invasion? I don't think so. Monday at 9:00, after The Bachelor, might work, but ABC would have to find new slots for the Heather Graham sitcom, Emily’s Reasons Why Not, and Jake in Progress.

It seems to me that Kelly has been really good about trying to help Alec with publcity. She is mentioned quite a bit on Genesis Dancesport's new website. She's been taking Alec around with her to "celebrity" events. I don't know if she has any say in her "official" site (I assume she does), but it's cool that that site has allowed Alec and Edyta to answer fan questions in the forum. I also thought that Joey has been very good at trying to give a lot of credit and attention to Ashly, which is esp. cool of him b/c she was the youngest of the pros, and I think she felt a lot of pressure to keep up with the others. John is trying to do a Broadway thing with Charlotte. This show is not only helpful to resurrecting/enhancing the careers of the stars, but gives so much mainstream exposure to the professionals that they otherwise just would not have had. I like that the stars are showing an interest in using what cred and pull they have to give something back to their teachers.

From what I gathered from comments from Kelly's site, Alec is going to be attending Kelly's fan club event and is part of something else going on during GH's fan club weekend.

Kelly has a lot of say over her fan sites - the administrator is a close friend of Kelly's and IMO they run a really good site over there. Her admin is doing the design for Alec's new site as well. It's no shock that very soon after getting a message asking if Alec was going to come and answer questions that Alec appeared last night to provide some answers.

I'm hoping that he shows up on R&K. Kelly watched the show so I'm sure she's going to come up with some good questions. They also had Rachel and Jonathan, and Joey and Ashly on so they have some familiarity with the show and the participants.

Swayze alert: ABC family is running Dirty Dancing at 5PM Sunday, July 24th.

I think Alec needs some PR advise. He mentions Genesis Dancesport a bit on his posts directed at individual fans but failed to mention it by name when he had the chance to plug it to an entire audience. Or maybe they just don't want the school to be flooded by 'suxy' stalkers :)

I hope he does accompany her to Regis and Kelly, I love hosts who are fans of the guests' show. Some alone time in the plane, some teasing from Kelly Rippa... the 7th grade mind can have a field day. lol.

Meowwwr! I like that name.

Lucky gals! You GH fans deserve some Alec treat though, you've been great keeping us informed about Kelly and what she's like. Hope those of you who are going have great fun and tell Kelly she has won much respect and new fans from people who had no clue who the heck she was initially like myself :)

Oh yeah, tell Alec no gel, sleavelees, tight or shirtless for next season please. Much, much love to him & Kelly.

Can't explain the man-tan, but the gelled-down-slick and skinned back tight hairstyles are for a couple of reasons.

First, hair flopping around loose can fly across your face and into your eyes and mouth, leading to distraction on the part of the dancer and on the part of the audience and judges ("Damn, girl, get your hair out of your face!")

Secondly, and especially for the women, having their hair pulled back sleek and smooth lengthens and improves the overall line of shoulders-to-neck-to-jaw that they present as they dance.

Okay, they've made a sitcom out of that book? I read it last year, and it was just okay. Nothing to make a sitcom out of, in my opinion.

As for wardrobe and hair suggestions for Alec (Aleksandr), I'm just not too fond of the greased back hair. I'm sure he could do the dance sporting the "practice session" hair. It's so much more natural. I'd also suggest buttoning up. I forget which dance it was, but he looked really cheesy dancing with an unbuttoned shirt. It was just too much, in my opinion. Yes, Alec, you're a sexy mofo. The unbuttoned Larry Dallas style didn't change the sexiness.

Thanks, Rabrab. I was very surprised Kelly's hair when it was down didn't get in her way when she was dancing. I liked her pulled-back styles. I guess I don't understand why you don't see more of that in competitions, rather than the gelled updos. But I guess it's a lot easier to do fancy upsweeps when you have a hair person!

I, too, prefer Alec's non-gelled look, though for some reason, I'm ashamed to admit, sometime the performance-hair works for me.

Am I the only one who likes Alec with his hair gelled? There's a practice session interview where he is wearing an orange thermal shirt and has his hair slicked back, and it's my favorite look on him. When his hair is gelled it shows off his facial features even better (IMO).

Tradition....tradition....mmmm...tradition! (sung as in Fiddler on the Roof)

Waaaaayyyyy back when, men would dance Latin in trousers and dinner jackets, and the ladies would wear cocktail dresses. Hair and makeup were gussied up, but still natural-colored (I'm talking about the days of Bill & Bobbie Irvine here, so that's the during the 60's I think).

Somewhere along the line, people decided that Latin-American style dancers needed to look "Latin" -- forgetting that people from the Spanish-speaking world have as much a variety of looks as people from Europe itself. So everyone started dying their hair jet black, slicking it back, and tanning for that dark "Latin" look. It's such a stereotype and even though I'm a big dancesport fan I still have to laugh at it and its relative lack of originality. Alec is from Belarus, why is he trying to look like an extra from a cheezy Desi Arnaz show? Why? And it's not just him, it's pretty much everyone and it's expected.

Louis Van Amstel, Trista's partner, is a Dutch guy who kept his blonde hair and who has experimented with a variety of hairstyles over the years. He goes for the tan too (they all do, it can look nice live under the lights although it tends to photograph and film orangey).

Edyta might be naturally blonde, I don't know -- she's Polish and there are lots of blondes from Poland, but also lots of brunettes with pale skin.

A couple of years ago some Scandanavian girls were experimenting with keeping their skin its natural color and wearing black fishnets rather than going bare-legged and hyper-tan. It looked nice but hasn't displaced the "we bake in the sun all day in Acapulco" look.

It's all a little bit nutty, so I can certainly understand people's questions and even their horror :-)

I loved Rumba hair on Alec the most. His rehearsal "I just woke up look" hair is also extra yummy -- but doubt that will make it to performance. I like that he cycles between facial and no facial hair, he looks great either way. His slicked-back gelled-look only works for me when matched with a bit of stubble.


Rabrab's points on the hair is pretty much it. There's also an aesthetic sleek, debonair look they try to achieve in Standard and a suave look in Latin and this has stereotypically been associated with slicked-back hair. ETA I think ziglettospal just explained this tradition.

As for the excessive use of tanning lotion, I haven't been around the scene for too long, but this seems like a more recent excessive phenomena, esp. in Latin. I use self-tanners myself for the following reasons:

- I have to expose various skin parts, but I often have unequal coloration -- a driver's tan, a bra tan, a pale midriff... it's nice to be able to match your skin tone to other body parts without having to sunbathe before every comp especially when there is no sun, and when too much sun is bad for you. For my partner, I don't think he likes to expose his pasty white chest :)

- I always had delusions that my legs looks slimmer and more toned with a tan. :)

- Aesthetically, for some reason, I think tans have been also been stereotypically associated to being healthy and fit.

Of course, some people go overboard. I think those tanners get much darker and oranger overnight but you don't notice when you first apply it. They also look different with different lighting, so you might think you're a nice brown but you're an Oompah-Loompah orange.

There's also the garrish eye make-up and glitter that we're juiced on. Hee.

Thanks for the insights. In "Strictly Ballroom," my personal fave look was the fanned bangs with rhinestones glued in. And all the maribou. Rachel really rocked the Tina Sparkle look.

For those of you busy with the pause button, Alec also appears (briefly, blurry in the background) to be in the latin rehearsal scene in Vegas. He's the one (I think) with the partner in the orange shirt.

They could easily, fairly do the voting in one night. I looked around on the BBC site, and apparently the show aired on Saturdays at 6:30 and then 8:15. Because it's the weekend, they're not restricted to "primetime" hours, so it looks like the show aired at 6:30, some other show came on while the voting period was going on, and then at 8:15 the results show is held. So if it's an hour long, that means the phone lines are open for 45 minutes? 55 maybe, if voting continues in the first few minutes of the results show. Seems comparable to the amount of phone time we get here in the US, they just get the results much faster than we do.

I think the other big differences, besides the one time zone, are: (a) the size of the viewing audience (half that of the US version, 11.2 million vs. 22.4 for the respective finales); and (b) viewers over there have to PAY to cast a vote. So the lines may not get as flooded as they would be here in the US, where it's free and there are twice as many people trying to get through.

From barkley below:

Not quite all of it. According to the website, "Calls cost 25p [~$.44] from a landline. Mobile rates vary. At least 12p [~$.22] per call goes to Children in Need."

just to note - all the phone $$ in the BBC version went to charity.

Dang you're good. Or obssessed. Or both!

About the voting: the only thing that I think is broken about it is that the audience vote is the tie-breaker. But then, from the standpoint of producing a show with mass-market appeal, I can see why they did it that way.

One could probably argue that there are other broken bits regarding the voting, but really this is fun phluff and that one change would be more than enough to make me happy.

Heck, having a second series would be more than enough to make me happy, popularity contest and all. After all, it's not like Alec & Kelly are going to jump into a real dance competition and win it. And since, relatively speaking, no one in America really cares about real dance competitions anyway, it all comes out even in my book.

And bored -- don't forget bored! It's very entertaining. Like playing "Where's Waldo," but with a better-looking, dancing Waldo.

This post is on behalf of my friend EyesOFire49 - she's still waiting for her validation e-mail and she's just ITCHING to jump into the middle of this debate! What the Hell, so am I. ;) *LOL* So why wait?!?

EyesOFire49: I can understand where John O'Hurley is coming from on this, having been a dancer myself for the last 15 years. To compete in this arena means more than just the movement you try to produce. It's a big emotional investment as well. People that succeed with it are the ones who put everything- heart, soul, body and mind...into what they're doing. When done well, it can be a tremendous high. Having a bad dance or the perception of being low-balled for what you thought was a good one - there's no feeling worse. Sometimes, you can't help but sit and think of what could have been...

Let's see, John and Charlotte (with the exception of one week- and even then the judging panel was split...) consistantly performed well- even with that freestyle routine in the finale - none of their marks was ever below a 20. The judges were heaping high praise on them week after week to the point where Carrie Ann TWICE called them the couple to beat and Bruno labelled them "King And Queen" of the ballroom. Did they REALLY believe that- or was it more of a back-handed compliment? I wouldn't say that John is bitter. Disappointed? For sure- he himself said he was heartbroken when they didn't win. But could it be....he's hurt as well? Think about it - all that work, all that sweat...the judges who *rarely* could find fault with your performance and every week marked you at or near the top of the board...only when it matters most, to have it all mean less than nothing anyway. Would YOU want to put yourself out there if it was pre-determined that your results wouldn't mean a damn thing, regardless of you out-performing the other couple?

He's had a week to think about it, and come down from that competitive *high*. I don't blame him at all for being upset. You would be too if all you got for what should have been a winning effort amounted to little more than a slap in the face. Finally- seeing as all the talk is about *hidden* agendas, what about this? ;) Might it be that he's upset because he's been used to promote someone else and their network - at his expense?!? Just something to think about.

BestOne76- I told y'all I was going to get in on this! ;) OK...first, if ANY routine in that finale might have been worth a perfect *30* it was John and Charlotte's Quickstep. The footwork for QS is hard enough under the best of circumstances and personally, I didn't think there was a heck of a lot they could do to improve on the first attempt. Wrong....;) From my vantage point, the lines were cleaner, footwork was sharper and the execution was even BETTER than it was the first time.

Comparing the Freestyle routines...Kelly and Alec - Sloppy entries into and exits from their lifts...dropped her straight to her knees on the finish and nearly dropped her again on the other two. Even admitted that she was supposed to be SLID into that finish herself...
- Very little risk. The routine was basically a rehashing of their Samba and the pseudo paso doble, with acrobatics mixed in for a little extra spice.
- Out of time and sync. More than once, I caught Kelly pausing- or even momentarily stopping like she couldn't remember parts of the routine. Actually looked down at Alec's feet for what to do next.

John and Charlotte - Risk factor. Believe it, it was a much bigger chance that they took in doing what they did than the chance Kelly and Alec took in doing theirs. And from my point of view, they pulled it off beautifully.
- Variety. There were patterns and steps from at least 3 (possibly 4) different dances...one of which was Jive, a dance they hadn't even done in the competition at all.
- Execution. Sure, Kelly and Alec's routine had the difficulty factor all to itself. But difficulty means squat if you don't execute the routine very well. John and Charlotte's routine may have been less in the difficulty department, but the execution was much cleaner. Routines come off much better that way. Or at least, they SHOULD....
- Chemistry. John and Charlotte OWNED this factor from Day 1, and it showed in their dancing. Timing and being in sync was rarely an issue.

So, given these factors - who should have received the better marks? For me, it's a no brainer. :)

I've heard plenty of people say it was an unfair advantage for them to bring Patrick Swayze in as another teacher for John. IMO, it shows just how GOOD a teacher he had in Charlotte. She didn't have the confidence to teach him properly; and when it's an issue of safety, confidence is everything. So, I think it was not only the SMART thing to do...it was the RESPONSIBLE thing as well. Technique is paramount when it comes to lifts - better to be taught how to do them safely by someone with the skills and confidence to instruct you in proper technique. Can you imagine the weight on that man's conscience had he messed up and hurt Charlotte badly because of it? I've seen the consequences myself...my friend EyesOFire got dropped out of a lift once - to the tune of a concussion and 8 stitches. Her partner wasn't right in the head for weeks afterwards.

Oh....and before anyone says anything about the voting, I did. :) Five votes each on my home line and the cellular line too. Even voted with my e-mail address. The only problem was...even with my press-one-button-at-a-time-like-a-turtle method of dialing and making completely sure I was dialing the right number, one week 6 votes that I intended for John and Charlotte were given to other couples...Kelly/Alec or Joey/Ashly. Another, I got told that my limit for the line was reached. After only two calls.

Hey, it was a good show. I'm not saying it wasn't. I'd love to see it again - but John was right. There ARE some things that need to be worked out in order to keep things going at the same level they are now. All in all, I think he did a great job keeping his emotions in check - especially considering the fact it's obvious he's VERY disappointed with how things turned out.

Agree or disagree if you wish...good, healthy debate can only make things better, whether you are a dancer or just a fan of what turned out to be a great show!

EyesOFire49 and BestOne76 [/B]

BestOne76 and EyesOFire49: Very well said - I completely agree with your entire post and I am so glad someone who knows about dancing compared the freestyle routines so eloquently - it's what I saw when I watched the finale!

Thank you for putting my feelings in to words!

I don't think Peterman suffered at all. Many people had absolutely zero idea who this guy was before the show. After the show, he now has a LOT more name recognition. I'd say he gained immensely from this show.

I didn't like the "aw shucks" way he always reacted to Carrie Ann's "you're the couple to beat" praising. It seemed really disingenuous to me. He knew that he was good, and that Charlotte was good. And then there was his "I HAVE to win" which really turned me off. This is all for fun and publicity.

Rachel Hunter didn't care about winning, she just enjoyed the experience. When she was eliminated, she seemed more upset not that she wouldn't win, but that she couldn't continue dancing. Kelly really enjoyed her time on the show too, and she just had a "do my thing and see what happens" approach.

If he's still disappointed about not winning, then he needs to get over himself. Two months ago, he was a footnote to one of TV's funniest sitcoms. Now a lot more people know who he is. In the end, he wins on that basis alone.

So the favorite should always win? Why bother playing the game at all then?

Consistency means nothing in this competition. It's how well someone does on a particular day, otherwise we should have just judged on the first show and have been done with it.

AS far as Kelly stopping and pausing, it's been explained before that those were choreographed pauses and that Alec had actually put up his hand in a "wait and watch this" gesture. It was difficult to see because of the camera angle.

As for the rest, dancing is an art and art is subjective. I think it's not fair to judge this as a "perfect 10" because these were amateurs and therefore the top score was relative to the skill level of the performers (the celebs, not the professionals).

In any competition there are winners and losers. I'm sure that people who come in second place all the time think that they deserved to win and they put just as much heart and soul into their performance as the people who won. Such is life when you enter something competitive. How you go about accepting your loss shows character just as much as how you accept your win. John started believing his press clippings.

Kelly has been trashed right and left in the media and on the internet. She has accepted this all with absolute grace and hasn't lashed out. John keeps on with the sour grapes and talk about how the show can be great "again".

See, I told you good, healthy debate could be fun! :)

However, I have to disagree just a little bit on one point.

I LOVED John's competitive streak from Day 1. As my more experienced friend EyesOFire49 put it...

"They called this a *competition* from the word GO - even awarded a trophy to the winners. Marked them and everything. If you go into a competition EXPECTING to lose, or believing you CAN'T/WON'T win or do well..."

"Then perhaps you need to question your motivation for being there in the first place..."

Enjoyment and fun just feed off of that competitive nature for some people. I'm that way- 49 is too. Take a good look at John's face...or more importantly his eyes. It wasn't arrogance or a bad attitude that was in them. There was a genuine sense of fun and happiness. At times, it was a look of pure intensity and focused drive. That isn't cocky, much less arrogant.

It's simply desire. When you're tired, mentally drained,physically sore and frustrated to the point of breaking....

It's that pure, burning desire deep in your soul which will carry you through all the tough times and push you to a great performance. One look told me John O'Hurley had it in spades. Desire doesn't separate the arrogant from the rest of us...

It DOES however, separate the GOOD dancers from the GREAT ones.
In that vein, there was NOTHING wrong with John O'Hurley's attitude. If anything it made him even BETTER when it truly mattered.

BestOne76 and EyesOFire49

Dancing isn't "subjective" anymore than other performance sports are subjective, like ice skating.

At least, along with the subjective element there are standards. Speed, timing, being in sync, DOING THE STEPS, how much of your dance is steps and how much is tricks, how much is done in some kind of hold and how much is done doing flashy, easier stuff. There is stuff being judged that's way more cut and dried then whether one couple does it for you or not. It counts if you are doing a level of difficulty that is discipline-centric. IOW, doing difficult skating weighs a lot more than simple skating with gymnastics type tricks. Or should. Dance is the same - if you've got more gymnastics than dancing, you've got something fun to watch, but it's not great dancing. They made that point with Joey and Ashley -- Broadway show numbers instead of the Foxtrot. Now why didn't they award Joey/Ashley full marks for doing a kick ass Broadway show number? So what if it wasn't really Foxtrot.

They ignored this standard for K/A on the final night - fun acrobatics set to music instead of real dancing, and the dancing that there was was very fragile - doesn't take away from the fun of the routine, but does detract from it's worth as DANCE.

Art isn't really "I know what I like" it's more than that -- - dance isn't either, not competively. For viewers, sure, but a lot of the griping here is about the undeserved tens.

So I disagree it's that much of a subjective issue, particularly where the judges are concerned. You know your routine or you don't, your feet are on the floor or they're not, you're in sync or not, you're moving or not, and the steps conform to the technical standard for those steps - they ARE the described step - or not. And the components in your routine are easy or difficult - there are established criteria for determining that one, that these judges were using along the way.

In ice skating you can launch a mega jump but if you don't land on your back outside edge it's not as good as a jump landed on the back outside edge. Judges have to take that into account, and noticing if the jump is landed on the proper edge isn't subjective. Same with does it take OFF on the proper edge (inside or outside, and forward or back) for that particular jump. If you say you're going to do a lutz and you do a flip, you should get either deducted - or not the same points. A routine that has a lot of variety in it instead of doing a limited number of flashy things repeatedly is also preferable and shows more skill. These are observable, objective technical points and dance is full of them also.

so great to have experienced dancesporters joining this thread!

ETA - not being a K/A shipper OR a J/C shipper I LIKE debates like this. I am aware of a LOT of fans who are also disgruntled over the outcome, who enjoy discussing the whys and whats, so it's certainly not just a few soreheads raining on the K/A parade. It's not just John. There are lots of fans like me who are interested in talking about it and are interested in John's comments about it -- even ENJOY John's comments, and don't see them as sour grapes. I certainly don't want him to shut up - I enjoy his comments. I'll get over it myself when I'm bored with the topic, not before then probably.

Well,I think there is a little more to it than just "getting over yourself." I think the judges had a lot to do with the feelings we are seeing now. John and Charlotte were told over and over they were the team to beat and after awhile you start to believe that.

In my opinion, Rachel started to believe all the smoke that Bruno was blowing up her butt also and really thought she had a chance to win, and wanted to stay longer. She seemed very hurt to be eliminated. They built some of the stars up so high that it was a big hard fall when they came down.

Plus, they all worked their butt off so with all the judge praise and hard work, I can see why some are upset by the results.

My true feeling was the judges votes were for "most improved" but it was a fun show and I can't wait for the next one

Perhaps they should do as they do in figure skating - split the marks into required elements (technical merit) and artistic expression. This would only work with the judges' scores, of course, but it's a thought.

I am not an expert, but it seemed to me that J/C's "flawless" quickstep was quite slower than what I've seen in watching competitions. This is why, though it might be more boring, I'd prefer to see an all-quickstep night, or an all-samba night (like they did in Week 5), so you can compare all the couples on the same dance. If I recall correctly, I thought Joey's quickstep was much better, as it was fast and light, and captured that part of the dance better.

So I guess my point is that none of these couples really meet the competition standards, and are a far cry from them (but, they put on an entertaining show, which is all I care about). So how do you judge them? As I posted earlier, I don't even think they're holding them to the regular ballroom rules (or at least not the rules Len is familiar with). Plus, I know at least on some numbers, they are dancing to songs that require mixing in other dances to go with the music (i.e., the paso, when K/A and J/A had to try to choreograph a paso to non-paso music). The judges are often having to rate a standard dance against a latin one, which has completely different standards, mood, elements. Add on to that that they are really beginners, and can't be held to a high standard. I don't even know how you attempt to then have a consistent and clear judging standard.

And the judging standard really doesn't matter that much, at the end of the day. The judges are just there to guide the audience (and to be ignored, if the audience so wishes), and to try, with their scores, to cull out the couples least successful in performing the dances.


That's why I liked Joey's and Tom's characterizing the show as a variety show. Because the emphasis should be on working hard, learning the dances, and performing for the love and fun of it. Sure, it will help advance the professionals' careers in dancing, but the stars are not auditioning to become great ballroom talents. The stars are benefitting just from the exposure on being on TV on a highly rated show.


But on a similar show, AI, judges routinely told Bo and Clay, two of the more favored runners-up, that they were the ones to beat after certain performances. That doesn't mean you end the competition then, b/c they've had two good performances, worthy of the appellation "the ones to beat." It means they're good on those nights, and there's no guarantee what will happen the next night. In all likelihood, the cream will continue to be at the top, but that doesn't mean others will not rise and perhaps surpass. It's like the NBA finals v. the Superbowl. This show had a six-week run. It wasn't just in Week 1 a matter of "you danced the best tonight, you're the champions."


Ditto!

I just didn't see John & Charlotte's freestyle having any more dancing than Alec and Kelly's. Both had their fair share of tricks and dance steps and also their fair shre of mistakes. Both were hardly judged on the merits of just the dance steps. (because if that was the case then no way should John and Charlotte gotten 9's). In other words as Carrie Anne said they judged the freestyle for both couples on things other than just pure dancing. I agree they shouldn't have but because they did both couple got higher scores than they otherwise should have.

Just one alternative semantic observation:

If John said "the show will be great again", mightn't that possibly mean "the show was great this first time around, AND it will be great the second time around AS WELL"?

Disclaimer is that I did not see the LKL show, nor did I read the transcript, so I have no insight with respect to "tone of voice" or context issues. Just wanted to respond to the various mentions of this in posts above.

My guess is that all contestants on this show (and others) will rapidly learn the cardinal rule of interviews and press conferences, which is that "no comment" has a lot to offer in terms of personal safety.

BestOne76 I disagree on this. Kelly did not do a samba, that was salsa – which is also a new dance for her, with some cha-cha elements thrown in. John did do a combo of dances: modern Jazz and Swing (Jive-ish but not ballroom Jive) elements.

I do think both took risks though and I give them props for it. I agree on giving kudos for John for stepping out of his box. But I also think Kelly took risks in attempting pretty difficult aerials. But sometimes risks pan out, sometimes they don’t. John’s didn’t work as well for me because it did not highlight his strength and elegant style in leading those close position figures, I think the more kinetic swing elements were not his strongest suit (as I mentioned uptread he's a little flatfooted and backweighted so the more dynamic sequences would be rougher for him). So I think the risk factor is subjective depending on the audience.


I think this is rather highly subjective. I’m sure many fangirls sailing the Kelly/Alec ship will debate you on this. Though the Joey/Ashly shippers are probably too busy thinking of cute names for their future babies :)

ETA
The problem is ballroom has no such pre-existing standard for points-based scoring. We don't have standard deductions, systematic point-rewards for difficulty, execution etc. so to judge required elements ABC will have to develop a pretty significant rule book. I think it's fine that the performances are just judged as a whole, that is how it is done in ballroom, though we strictly have only ordinal ranking, no 9's, 10's etc.

Perhaps not, but it could address the "was it actually a samba"? question, generally. It wouldn't have to be so structured as to have standard deductions and all that, just the judges' rating on how good it was technically. Maybe they should address the god-awful music issue first though, because that may have a lot to do with whether they can do the required dance to music that's clearly not right.

Dancing is subjective, and even more so in this competition. There is that "intangible" element that sometimes crowns someone the winners over someone else. In figure skating, it's known as artistic scoring. In this competition, the two were rolled together, technical and artistic. I don't think that the judges ever expected the stars to equal pro technicality, because that's kind of silly to expect after a week of rehearsal with inexperienced dancers.

Carrie Ann said that the "intangible" was what they were looking for in the final dance, since there were no rules regarding what steps to use. John stood there and basically did no dancing for almost 1/3 of his performance, and what he did from then on wasn't impressive to me. The only part I really like was the side by side "jive" part. That was good, the rest? Not so much, especially that strange "worm" move somewhere in the middle.

Exactly. And those lifts aren't "all Alec," as has been said. The last lift required significant skill and strength on Kelly's part to elongate herself as straight as she did. There was some serious abwork required, and considerable practice. It's not as though Alec can just do all that stuff with a Gumby-esque partner. She has to hold herself, push/pull herself, keep time, etc. to assist him. And I don't believe that Kelly had this innate ability to do these moves owing to her being young, fit, athletic, and flexible. I don't know anything about a gymnastics background she may have, but those lifts are not anything one would have learned in gymnastics.


I'll be one of the ones that debate this. I saw Charlotte constantly giving a lot of appropriately adoring/happy looks at John, and I saw John in return doing a lot of mugging for the camera, audience, and judges. Granted, they didn't do a lot of latin stuff that required looking longingly and passionately and all that, but I still thought he could have connected more with her while dancing, and less "I'm on stage." They worked very well together as a couple, doubtlessly, and really enjoyed each other. If we had to compare chemistry while dancing, I would have to say Kelly and Alec win that. But that may owe to their doing more latin dances.

I'll debate the John and Charlotte owning the chemistry. After the second episode, Kelly and Alec were equal to them and IMO OWNED the chemistry crown.

Giving points for hitting routines and doing tricks - that's called technical merit and yes, as you said it is objective, but giving scores on artistic merit is subjective. And even the objective parts are subject to intangibles that ensure there is no way for the score to be truly objective.

If three people are really watching feet, routine, conforming to style, etc. then they should all come up with the same scores exactly and in every way. But that doesn't happen. Since it is impossible for the judges to not be seeing the same thing, it means they won't catch everything and the scores will not be exactly alike. That weakens the objectivity of judging. With hujman certain intangibles come into play. Some of them are valid (didn't see a bad landing) and some of them suck (propping favorites and saying they didn't see a bad landing).

IMO any sport that relies on judging has bias and or mistakes. Lennox Lewis beat Evander Holyfield in their first fight. He slaughtered him and it was an embarrassment. The judges? Made it a draw.

Nyree looking at John and Kelly’s freestyle on a purely technical level, I will still argue that they’re pretty close, and for me, I would still give Kelly the advantage. I don’t have time right now, but if other dancers want to break down all the dance elements and duration of each element, I would hazard a guess that you will likely find John doing flashy, easier stuff a lot more than Kelly. The first 25 seconds alone of John’s routine is all cute performance, no significant dancing (he bopped, moved side to side, and Charlotte grinded his hips). In the same amount of time Kelly had performed 2 pretty difficult lifts.

Again, as I mentioned earlier, I think their execution of the individual dance elements are both pretty good and comparative with slight bobbles in some places. Both had instances where they looked at their partners for a cue on their side by side. Kelly’s had one significant gaff in execution at the final element on her first side by side when she ends up (inadvertently) performing a different salsa figure and get ahead of Alec, so John’s routine was cleaner. They both had difficulties with their lift dismount.

I do think in general John’s execution is better than Kelly’s when he performs the Standard-ballroom dances. But he’s free-style did not really incorporate any significant close-position Standard figures. Since his freestyle had more kinetic swing-type elements which are not his strong suit, it brought his level of execution down.


LOL. I just originally came to post how nicely Alec has filled out nicely compared to his earlier skinnier competitive physique. Mmmm, Alec mus-cles. But the fun here is always buzzing :)

True, but considering the considerable difficulty Kelly seemed to have keeping up with Alec in previous performances, I think the choreography was specifically designed to hide Kelly's inability to remember the steps/keep in step with Alec. Therefore, it was more a matter of covering up one of Kelly's big problems rather than clever or innovative choreography, IMO. I'd have been more impressed if they'd actually worked harder at remaining in unison and used their freedance to show off their progress as John and Charlotte used theirs to demonstrate that he was working on his problem areas such as the 'hip action'.

Nope. Here's the link or URL to a great article clearing up that misconception:
http://cbs.sportsline.com/u/women/skating/...semore12298.htm

It's written by somebody who actually read the rule book, understands them, and how judges are supposed to be guided by them. She also quotes common published misconceptions - author Christine Brennan and skater Scott Hamilton have spread a LOT of them. Here's an excerpt:
____
* In her book Edge of Glory, Christine Brennan discusses Michelle Kwan as the pre-Olympic favorite: "That's what judges for years had been saying to her through their marks," Brennan wrote. "Artistry breaks the tie in the long program, especially at the Olympics."
* Reporting on 1998 Olympics in The New York Times, Jere Longman wrote: "Six of the nine judges placed Lipinski first. She received all 5.8s and 5.9s both for technical merit and artistry. Lipinski outdid Kwan in technical marks from eight judges and matched her in artistry in the eyes of four judges."
* During the broadcast of the men's short program in Nagano, Scott Hamilton describes the judges' second mark: "That's where opinion comes in. ... That's artistry. That's, in your opinion, what you think the program was worth."

There's only one problem with these statements: They are all false.

Olympic-eligible skating is not judged on "artistry." The official terminology
"presentation," not "artistry," and in fact the words "artistry" or "artistic impression" do not appear anywhere in the rulebook.

Instead, the presentation mark is effectively a second technical mark encompassing several specific criteria explicitly listed in the rules. It's not just opinion or a measure of how much the judges like a skater's performance (or even peripheral matters such as music, costume, or hairstyle, as some sports writers have asserted). While it is possible for skaters to achieve art through their sport, that is not what the judges are considering.

What these judges are looking for in their presentation marks, as specified in the rules, is:

1. Harmonious composition of the program as a whole and its conformity with the music chosen
2. Variation of speed
3. Utilization of the ice surface
4. Easy movement and sureness in time to the music
5. Carriage and style
6. Originality
7. Expression of the character of the music
8. Unison (in the case of pairs skating only)

It's important to consider some of these criteria in more detail:
'Harmonious composition' and music
The issues of "harmonious composition of the program as a whole and its conformity with the music chosen" and "expression of the character of the music" are in fact measures of the choreographer's skill as much as those of the skater's.

For example, if a skater is skating to tango music, the steps and movements selected by their choreographer ought to shout "tango," not "funky chicken" or Swan Lake. Or, if a skater did a program consisting of a medley of a tango, funky chicken, and Swan Lake, this would demonstrate a lack of "harmonious composition of the program as a whole."
***
Speed and the ice surface
"Variation of speed" and "utilization of the ice surface" also has to do with how the program is constructed. Judges want to see skaters demonstrate the ability to skate fast and slow sections, and to cover all parts of the ice surface. Placing all of the elements in the middle of the rink directly in front of the judges would indicate poor utilization of the ice surface. The same is true for placing jumps so close to the corners of the rink that the skater has to pull up to avoid hitting the boards.
Movement and sureness
"Easy movement and sureness in time to the music" concerns the skater's technical ability to perform the movements rather than the construction of a particular program. Are the skaters' arm movements controlled, assured and chosen for deliberate choreographic effect, or are the skaters simply flailing their arms to keep their balance or check their rotation? Are the skaters able to execute footwork with a rhythm and timing to match the music, or does it all seem forced?
Carriage and style
Along with "movement and sureness," the "carriage and style" refer to technical qualities of the skater's basic technique. Judges value good posture -- a straight back and upright carriage, instead of hunched shoulders or breaking forward at the waist -- and an ability to fully extend the free leg with the toe pointed. They also want to see smooth basic skating without the back, shoulders, and arms jerking or flopping about on each stroke.

While some skaters grumble that this amounts to a supposed bias toward "classical," "balletic," or even "unmanly" skating, pointed toes and extended free legs are, in fact, simply indicative of good technique.

For example, in ordinary stroking, if the skaters don't extend fully on each stroke, they aren't getting the full power from the push. In jumps, pointing the toes in the air is necessary to get a soft landing on the toe pick instead of thumping down on the flat of the blade. In addition, crisp positions with good stretch and extension demonstrate control, strength, and athleticism. These positions are more difficult and should get more credit in the judging.

The simple truth is that none of the aforementioned topics has much to do with supposed "artistry." Nor do these criteria have much to do with whether skaters "feel the music" or judges "like" the skaters, their programs or their music. Members of the media who cover the sport do nothing but confuse the public when they persist in using such terms to describe judging.

Why can't sportswriters and television commentators at least get the terminology correct and refer to the presentation mark by its proper name? If reporters made similar errors in other sports -- failing to understand the purpose of a first down in football, or using the wrong terminology when describing baseball or hockey -- they would be laughed out of the business.

Moreover, when the media keeps saying that judging in figure skating is based on "opinion" and "artistry" rather than specific rules, it leads to a public perception that skating is not a "real" sport. This is an insult to all the athletes and also to the officials, who must invest a significant amount of their own time and money to train before qualifying for a high-level judging appointment.

Sandra Loosemore is CBS SportsLine's figure skating writer.[B]

As others have said, appearing on DwtS didn't cost John O'Hurley anything, except perhaps some measure of anonymity. And "used to promote someone else" (asusming you mean Kelly Monaco) has yet to be proven true.

And I agree with those who felt JO'H's constant need to crack jokes and mug for the camera started off funny but grew very tiresome. If I were Alec or Joey on LKL, I would have gagged him.

I just wanted to point that a lot of Alec & Kelly's side-by-sides have pretty tricky sequences and transitions at pretty good tempo. Even more experienced dancers will have difficulty keeping up with Alec's dynamics on those passes. I think all of the celebs would pale and look more labored right next to Alec during these side-by-sides.

I wonder sometimes why he does put them in? They are pretty exciting to watch, creates great visual dynamics and has good build up... I'm sure he knows he looks damn good doing them :)

I mean Joey also sometimes have difficulty keeping up with Ashly, and it might not be obvious to the casual viewer, but a big reason for this is that Ashly peppers her choreography with much more difficult footwork. So I tend not to hold that against him. I think her sequences are probably consistently at a higher syllabus level than what say Charlotte has John do. There are pros and cons to each choreography approach depending on what appeals to the audience or judges.

1) Well then, good for Alec for choreographing to his dancer's strengths, rather than choreographing a freestyle that diverged from them, and for choreographing to disguise her weaknesses. John's freestyle was not about his strengths, it was about doing what Joey's routines were criticized for -- too much concerned with a gimmick or storytelling/acting, and not about dancing. The gimmick of the teacher "unfusing" his hips was cute, but wasn't difficult or dancing. Highlighting his difficulty in doing the latin hip-action in the routine was cutesy and funny, but I don't think it served him well. It would have been like Alec choreographing the beginning of Kelly's by smacking her to stand up straight and hold her arms tautly, or whatever her standard weaknesses are. That would have been good for a chuckle, but not much of a showcase of what she has learned to be good at.
2) And I don't think John's hip action problem was ever really solved. Charlotte's straddling him didn't exactly have anything to do with moving his own hips -- it was just his walking around with her legs wrapped around his waist.
3) Honestly, what stands out to me in the freestyle choreography are the cha-cha turns Kelly did in the middle of her routine. Not the lifts. That was clearly a dance move, not some flashy/acrobatic/free movement/shimmying thing. She had never performed the cha-cha before, so good for her. The only thing that I remember from John's routine is the non-dancing intro, and his walking with Charlotte around his waist. Given that, I wouldn't consider Alec's choreography less clever or innovative.

I think there is a difference between "giving it your best effort" and "expecting to lose". Of course everyone wants to win. But realistically, there is only one winner. Kelly took the attitude that she was going to try her best and do as well as she could. John's attitude all along seemed to be "everyone said I was the best, so I MUST win."

In the end, it's all for fun. Some of these people were big name celebrities who are or once were at the pinnacle of their chosen field (Rachel Hunter, Evander Holyfield). Some of them were has-beens trying to revive or prolong a career (Joey Mac, Trista). And some of them were relative unknowns who stood to lose nothing except gain more exposure (Kelly, John).

It was all for fun. There was no money involved, not even for charity. It's all for the joy of dancing. It's nice to know that you were the best, as judged by the judges and America, but isn't it enough to make it to the finals and have the thrill of performing? Kelly was thrilled to make it to the finals and continue practicing and performing. John absolutely had to win. It was if he thought he had to win in order to validate all of the time he had put into it, and anything less than a win was not good enough and a huge disappointment. What is he up to these days anyhow? Perhaps he felt like he had spent six weeks of time that could have been better spent clipping coupons or sitting at home on the couch.

He got to perform, he was in the competition for the maximum amount of time possible, and he's gotten more exposure than he's ever had in his career. It's disappointing to me if he's still bitter.

Again, I would point out that ABC has not exactly been having Kelly and Alec do a whirlwind publicity tour. As far as I know, there was a taped GMA interview that has never aired, an appearance on Leno, LKL with John et al., and Regis/Kelly Monday. John got a long (lasted over several breaks -- interviewed, then danced, then danced more, then judged the GMA dance contest) GMA appearance, and was on LKL. John got more airtime than Kelly or Alec on LKL. It's pretty odd that the winners of the highest-rated new summer show (on par with Richard of Survivor and Kelly of AI) haven't been feted more. Not even an appearance on that SoapTalk show on SoapNet. Given the very limited press attention given to Kelly and Alec, I don't think ABC was planning on her winning, or planning on rigging it for her to win so they could promote her or ABC.

Blackwing:

And I have to wonder if Kelly wouldn't have rather just lost and been able to go out being happy to have made it to the finals, rather than have every interview she does question the validity of her winning, of how bad she was in the beginning, of how she screwed up and fell on her knees, etc. I think a significant amount of the fun of it all has probably been sucked out of her win thanks to comments made either as talking points by hosts or by guests on talk shows that seem to suggest the voting was flawed since she was the winner. I hope not. She's probably glad she won for Alec's sake, since he can promote himself as being the champion.

Wow, there's a really nasty, anti-Kelly piece written in this week's Entertainment Weekly. I truly don't understand all of the rancor being directed at Kelly just because she won a cheesy trophy. She worked just as hard as everyone else on that show and whether she deserved to win or not (personally, I thought she did), her efforts, along with Alec's and all of the other stars' and their partners', should be celebrated, not maligned and held up for censure. I find the whole tone of this commentary offensive and mean-spirited.

Here's the article:

He Wuz Robbed!

Words? There are none. Wait, maybe there are: We were smitten with the duo at the heart of Dancing With the Stars' wide appeal - Seinfeld silly man John O'Hurley and classy Charlotte Jorgensen - so it's hard to feel anything but outrage at Kelly Monaco and Alec Mazo's victory. (It seems O'Hurley agrees; sources say that he threw a fit backstage.) The feisty (and that's putting it nicely) General Hospital star improved vastly during Stars' run, but her final-night platitudes ("This was about me stepping outside of my comfort zone.") left us cold, as did the judges' boneheaded decision to award her perfect 10s. There's no denying that Monaco's fan base - maniacal GH fans - aided her win, but things got fishy when the ABC daytime starlet announced she'd be celebrating at Disneyland, a theme park owned by her bosses. Something is seriously wrong in the state of televised dance-offs.

The series: B+ The finale: C

- Nicholas Fonseca

I think Kelly would have been totally happy as runner up.

And I think John would have been happ -IER as runner up - if Kelly won the contest via the popular vote and the judges hadn't abandoned all previous criteria and hid behind "intangibles" (intangibles like "She won the popular vote so let's legitimize this").

I think DWTs miscalculated about how well viewers would react to a judging/popularity disparity. None of that hurt the show when Rachel got the boot. Fans knew the judges were all about Rachel and were like - screw it - we like other contestents better. In fact -- this is fun! You think so and so should win? Hah! We think it should be THESE two instead!

I think the problem was DWTs was operating under its own cute internal logic and then threw those rules out when the judges handed out the tens and called it the best dance of the series. *I* think fans liked it the way it was - outmaneuvering the judges sometimes, in line with them at other times, but when the judges threw in, the fun soured a little bit -- not for all - but for enough people.

They should have left it alone, not switched up the judging standards for the finale, and let the outcome play out the way it had been playing out. Then I think everybody would be happy. It would be FUN to have the judges crown J&C King and Queen of the ballroom while viewers said - nah, we prefer K/A.

The judges tried to pander and IMO for a lot of people that backfired. Nobody would like it if Simon Cowell had been a panderer at the end of the first AI.

Nyree do you have an excerpt for what Christine and Scott has to say about:

I'm a big skating fan and for me this is the one intangible that can elevate a performance to pure art. I think they might as well call this element artistry.

I think it would be pretty hard to have specific rules how to judge this element, yet it has likely one of the strongest impact on judging a skater's performance.

I understand the need to delineate, quantify and categorize perception into hard objective facts but I don't think there is a way to escape that visceral feeling you get in your gut when you watch a moving performance -- how do you quantify that into numbers? Should you have to?

To me, using the word artistry does not detract or mar my appreciation for figure skating as a "real" sport. There is no question in my mind about the physical skill necessary to achieve the levels skaters have, it merely allows me to recognize those incredible athletes who also at the same time are able to produce touching artistry -- or expression of the character of the music -- however they may want to call it.

That EW article is out of line and Nicholas Fonseca needs to stop watching dancing shows and start watching more sports if he doesn't recognize that the 'Disneyland" comment was supposed to be echoing the famous Super Bowl spots, not a sign of some huge conspiracy.

Once again, someone who is supposedly sticking up for John makes him look way worse than ever. Throwing a fit backstage? Nice.

As for John being happier as runner up with the judges votes behind him? I'm sure he would have been, but that's not the way it happened and that's not the way the judges saw it.