Dancing With the Stars--Week 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
pygmalion said:
I thought the voting and judges scores were being weighed fifty/fifty. Is that wrong? :? Just curious, because the relative weights of the two is going to become very important to my future voting strategy.

Every vote counts, you know. :wink: :lol:
lol

Yes, except public vote is the tie breaker therefore carries more weight.

Just as a random example:

celeb...........Judge rank......public rank.........total
John............6....................1...........................7
Evander.......1....................6...........................7

Evander stays and John goes home because the tie breaker is who got the most public votes.

I doubt the above example is at all realistic, I think the public votes were as follows.

celeb.............judge.....public......totals
Joey..............4............6............10
Kelly..............1............5............6
Evander.........2............4............6
John..............6............3............9
Trista............3............2.............5
Rachel...........5...........1.............6

A lot of that is guessing, but for Trista and Rachel to be in the bottom two they had to be ranked at the bottom by the public.

For Evander to stay he had to be ranked 4th,5th, or 6th place to stay out of the bottom 2. Kelly had to be 5th or 6th. That means only one other couple could have been in the top three, either Joey or John. One of them has to be in the bottom 3 with the public. I am guessing it is John not Joey but I could be totally wrong.

Evander will probably be in the bottom two next week, but not necessarily, this week he garnered more public votes than Rachel and two other couples.

Strategy wise, if you vote to save Rachel, there is a chance John will go home rather than Evander, who may not even be in the bottom 2 next week.

Wouldn't that be a shocker :shock: :shock: :shock:
 
This week highest rank will be 5 not 6.

Judges order of ranks are easy to predict.

Jonathan...5
Rachel......4 or vice versa but I don't think so

Joey.........3

Kelly.........2
Evander....1 or vice versa but I don't think so

Keepying in mind that neither Kelly nor Evander were below a 4 rank, and Kelly had to be a 5 or a 6 with the public last week, it is safe to assume they won't both end up in the bottom two this week. Evander may, but he wasn't bottom two this week so you never know.

I predict that with the audience votes, either Rachel and Evander, or Rachel and John. Rachel and Joey is a possiblity but not likely.
 
Infosaturated said:
It has been suggested (on a message board) that the reason the judges don't like her is that they are stuck-up and prejudice against her because she is a soap-star and posed nude for Playboy so isn't good enough for "ballroom".
That doesn't make a lot of sense to me: a fairly recent (like in the past two years) US Pro/AM Standard Champion is an ex-Playboy Playmate. Her prior career didn't seem to stop her from winning the US title or a lot of other big competitions. I really think reasons the judges don't like Kelly is because her expression tends to be a bit wooden still (but she's improved a lot in just one week), and if you watch her legs/feet/ankles you'll see she's wobbling all over the place. When someone is wobbling they can't move as fluidly and as fully as someone who is much more solid in their use of their legs and feet (someone more like Rachel or John), and therefore that person does come across as tentative and brittle.
 
Laura said:
Infosaturated said:
It has been suggested (on a message board) that the reason the judges don't like her is that they are stuck-up and prejudice against her because she is a soap-star and posed nude for Playboy so isn't good enough for "ballroom".
That doesn't make a lot of sense to me: a fairly recent (like in the past two years) US Pro/AM Standard Champion is an ex-Playboy Playmate. Her prior career didn't seem to stop her from winning the US title or a lot of other big competitions. I really think reasons the judges don't like Kelly is because her expression tends to be a bit wooden still (but she's improved a lot in just one week), and if you watch her legs/feet/ankles you'll see she's wobbling all over the place. When someone is wobbling they can't move as fluidly and as fully as someone who is much more solid in their use of their legs and feet (someone more like Rachel or John), and therefore that person does come across as tentative and brittle.
The judges real reasons don't make any difference. It's what the viewers percieve the judges reasons to be. I am sure that the only people who know about the dance champion you are referring to are other ballroom dancing fans.

Furthermore, only Len is a ballroom judge. The other two aren't, not that the majority of viewers know or remember that either.
 
DancingMommy said:
And as for the 168 hours of intensive training, I *do* believe that 4 hours a day is a decent amount of time to get the *basics* down - that is of course assuming that the BASICS are even being covered.
I think your closing caveat addresses the most important point. These celebrities are asked to go from zero ballroom experience to putting on an entertaining public performance. I'm sure we would all agree that such a task is different from mastering the basics of ballroom dancing. I'm guessing that a technically perfect performance full of sound basic steps (but not much "flash") could get 10s from ballroom judges -- but wouldn't get much voting support from the public.

The pros probably decided to include just enough of the basics of each particular dance to help themselves sleep at night :) , while placing more focus on getting the celebrities comfortable with (1) general lead/follow technique and (2) executing choreography with flashy moves suitable for the celebrity's body type/level of athleticism.
 
Heather Havrilesky, Salon.com's wry and somewhat-crazy-in-a-good-way TV critic, weighs in on "Dancing with the Stars" this week (if you go to Salon. com you can get to the article by watching a short but not too annoying ad to get a day pass).

Watching this show is like traveling back in time, to a simpler era, when most of our pop culture was considered foolish and sad. Like the deformed offspring of "Solid Gold," "Match Game '75," "Battle of the Network Stars" and "Star Search," "Dancing With the Stars'" most hideous features are exactly those that pull us in deeper. It would be difficult to care about an actual star who could actually dance. But watching former supermodel Rachel Hunter try to rumba, then stand, stricken, before the judges, clearly mortified and hoping like hell for a decent score? No one else is going to say it, so I will: The whole thing was oddly touching. "Dancing With the Stars" is the mutant survivor of the summer.
I love Heather. I think she's hit the nail on the head for why some people watch. Some of us watch because it's ballroom, some of us watch because it's Kelly Monaco, some of us watch because it's light and fluffy entertainment, and some of us watch because it's oddly touching.

The important thing is that a lot of people are watching.
 
Lightspan said:
Does anyone know whether they'll be dancing the International or American style tango?
It looks like it will be International.

They list the dances on the ABC website and the only two that they talk about American Style is the Waltz and the Foxtrot.
 
So I watched my tape again after I got all the commercials removed from it, and noticed that the background announcer who calls out the judges names before they show their scores sounds exactly like the announcer at the "World Dancesport Championships" in Dance with Me when he announces Rafaeelll Innnfaantee. What do you think? Is it the same person?
 
No idea, but I must say that was a little odd. See, there's the host, Tom Bergeron, who does most of the introductions. But suddenly, when it's time for the judges' votes, there's some person with an english accent who is not visible on set saying the names. I think it's an announcer over in the production booth but we never saw him.

Oh, and another fun fact: ever that old Jon Lovitz cartoon "The Critic?" Remember his chain-smoking makeup person? The woman who counts down the time between commercials has that same kind of ancient gravelley "I've been chain smoking since 6am" kind of voice, I cracked up nearly every time I heard it.

Anyway, the Emcee from "Dance with Me" was Robert Daniel. I don't know who does it for "Dancing with the Stars."
 
Medira said:
From CNN.com

'Dancing with the Stars' tops pro basketball in ratings
-http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/TV/06/15/nielsens.ap/index.html
Rockin'!

Wow, so people would rather watch C-list celebrities try to dance than spoiled A-list pro basketball players do their thang. Interesting.

I read on Television Without Pity that DWtS has been renewed for another six-episode series. And that Anya Trebunskaya, who lost her slot on this one because her "star" wanted more money, has been promised a spot in the next series. Coolnees! She'd be so great on that show, and she's another teacher who works with beginning adults PLUS she's got titles in Standard and Latin.
 
Porfirio Landeros said:
Also, some people are just more naturally talented in certain things than others. John O'Hurley is CLEARLY more of a natural than Kelly when it comes to physical coordination, yet, for all we know, Kelly is much better at XBOX than John, so you see, the universe always evens itself out somehow.
Ohmigod that is the funniest thing I have read all day. It almost made me choke on a pretzel. :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Dance Ads