Paul the Octopus (God rest his soul) would be ashamed of me. Yes, the Strictly Come Dancing formula may still have predicted the correct bottom two last week- but it didn’t get the result right. Personally it’s nice to see that Audley survived as he’s a bag of fun, but from the formula’s (and my reputation’s) point of view it’s not. So, like any scientist working on a theory we’re going to need revisions. This is where the learning comes in.
So. Here you have it, the new model of the Strictly Come Dancing formula.
S = j + (p-n) + [[c(t + 1) + f ]- b]
I know, squared brackets. We know we mean business now. The old formula (in case you want to see what’s changed) looks like this:
S = j + (p-n) + c(1 + b + f + t)
The only variable that’s changed is that of b. The others remain the same and look like this.
S = Safety score.
j = number of score points awarded from judges marks (so, 1 to n rather than 4 to 40)
n = number of people in the competition that week
p = the number order that they danced
b = the amount of times the couple have appeared in the bottom two before
f = variable added if contestant danced first (If yes, f = n/3. If no, f = 0)
t = number of 10s awarded from Bruno, Craig and Len that week (Other judges don't count)
Not much has changed, because it’s doing pretty well, and I think that means (I’ve done some quick checking but nothing substantial I’m afraid) it works for previous weeks too- which is obviously important. So, who’s leaving this week I hear you ask? Well according to my maths AUDLEY & NATALIE and LULU & BRENDAN will be in the bottom two, and AUDLEY will be eliminated. Let’s see.
I find Strictly Come Dancing a lot more fun when there’s more riding on it. In this case, it is the respect of my Strictly Come Dancing Formula. This week it predicts that Audley and Nancy will be in the bottom two of Strictly Come Dancing and Audley will leave. My gut says that it’s Nancy that’ll be having her last dance however. But to sit on both sides of the fence is hardly entertaining, so I should probably back my formula, and will.
If you’re new to my silly maths, it uses judges’s scores, order of dance and a couple more variables to predict a “safety score” for each Strictly Come Dancing pair. The higher the score, the safer the couple. On its first outing, it managed to predict Rory and Erin’s departure as well as their bottom two survivor. It made me very happy (and in most people’s minds, very jammy)
Rory and Erin left on a safety score of -3 last week. This week Nancy scores -3 points, but Audley’s way down on -5. Spare a thought for Russell and Flavia too, with a score of -2.4 they’re not sitting pretty either. In case you’re interested, everyone else was 0 or higher. But if Jason leaves this week (with a safety score of 12) it will be such bad news for my fledgling theory that I will personally apologise to anyone who’s come across it, as well as eating my own hat and any other hats that you deem appropriate.
In a surprising turn of events it seems that, so far, my Strictly Come Dancing Formula actually works. For the past three weeks I’ve managed to guess who’ll be eliminated from the world of Strictly and since developing a formula last week- I managed to predict who else was in the bottom two. Rory and Erin’s uncontroversial, low-scoring and early-placed dance scored the lowest of all the dancers when put through the mathematical paces. So this week I’ll post what the theory predicts after Saturday’s show again, and we’ll see if there’s some bite in it, or if this is just Paul the Octopus stuff we’re playing with here.
But if we are to believe in the idea that dance position is almost as important as judge’s rankings, maybe we can not only predict who’s eliminated, but also try to guess the reason why James Jordan was so angry this week. Now I think it’s safe to say that he doesn’t strike you as the cleverest man on the planet, but he’s been around long enough to know how Strictly works. So what’s his reaction going to be when he finds out he’s dancing second this week? Staying in the competition is VERY important for the professionals. It’s not only being taken out of a fun experience that they’re scared of, but low positions mean low TV exposure. Low TV exposure means their private lessons aren’t as well advertised and consistent low exposure means that you’ll be the first pro booted off the show to make way for the next new dancer.
He knew they were in danger this week, so he did what he could do. He caused a fuss, and he did it in two ways. The first is the blue catsuit Alex was wearing, a very clever way for the viewers to remember the dance. It’s not only tremendously sexy, but it’s a visible reference. Then, intentionally or not, he caused a fuss with the judges on two occasions. Think back to the show last Saturday; can you remember any part of their rumba? I can remember three things. I can remember a blue catsuit, a big argument and (because I’m a dance bitch) a total lack of hip action from Alex. What can you remember of Rory and Erin? Squat all. Sitting here now I can’t remember whether they danced a Cha Cha or a Samba. Erin did nothing interesting in her choreography and danced completely averagely. People tend to vote for things they remember.
Never mind Rory, someone had to be partnered with Erin. (Image: Beacon Radio)
So will this set a precedent for future weeks? Which professionals, when chosen to dance second, will change the choreography, costume or just start arguing in a bid to stay in? The BBC are clearly encouraging the show to become more dynamic with the increased amount of themed weeks included within this season. Last week was broadway week, next week is Halloween and more will come, so they’ll welcome the added controversy. But it’s about striking the balance. If everyone else is kicking and screaming, then the honest hard-working couples will shine. As with every competition in life, it’s about manoeuvring yourself to be in the best position. It’s all about the game and how you play it. So James is wrong is when he called for the judges to ignore marking on choreography. The pros are in this as much as the famous novices are, not only as dancers but as their PR executives.
Personally I find their battle as interesting as the ones from the celebrities.
You don’t need to be Russell Grant in order to predict who’s going out of Strictly Come Dancing each week. Instead, you can turn the whole process into a second-guessing game with the world and predict who’s going to be leaving if you’re looking for added entertainment to a television format that’s hardly changed since series one. Strictly Come Dancing is flawed as a level-competition. Last week, Edwina Currie danced second and was voted off. This week Dan Lobb danced second and was voted off; it’s no coincidence. For a TV producer, it makes more sense to put the best and most entertaining dancers in the competition at the end of each show, rather than risk viewers changing channel after they’ve seen their favourites. Couples at the end of the show have the added bonus of being fresh in the minds of telephone voters when they make their decision.
So, I decided I’d write a formula to work out who’s leaving Strictly Come Dancing each week. Like any theory, it’s probably going to need refining as the show goes on, but it’s a start. And here it is.
S = j + (p-n) + c(1 + b + f + t)
And here’s an explanation of terms:
S = Safety score.
j = number of score points awarded from judges marks (so, 1 to n rather than 4 to 40)
n = number of people in the competition that week
p = the number order that they danced
b = variable added if contestant appeared in the bottom two last week (If yes, b = 1. If no, b = 0) (applies once only)
f = variable added if contestant danced first (If yes, f = n/3. If no, f = 0)
t = number of 10s awarded from Bruno, Craig and Len that week
c = variable added for controversial action (If regular Dance, c=1. If remarkable dance (ie. addition of a giant shell/contestant becomes injured/someone falls over), c=2. Inescapably remarkable (ie. media attention of Anne Widdecome), c = 3.
Basically, your favourite couple is looking for a safety score as high as possible. I predict getting over 0 at this stage of the competition is probably safe. There’s a few variables you have to work out yourself, such as a controversy score, but the rest should be straightforward. I’ll be using it to predict who will be leaving the competition each week, and refining the formulae if it’s going wrong. For the mathematically minded, any suggestion to incorporate popular dance styles within the formula without disturbing the balance between the judges score and the rest of the variables is appreciated.
It’s worth noting that, like my Ballroom vs. Latin activity that worked out your suitablility for ballroom and latin dance styles, this is a bit of fun- and probably proves nothing. But that attitude never won a nobel prize, did it?
Over the past week and a half, during my fantasy moments where I pretend I’m an F1 journalist, I picture myself asking Lewis Hamilton if, right now, he considers himself to be a good role model. It’s hardly breaking news that he’s having a very poor season, but when you’re down it’s what you learn from losing that’ll make the most difference to you if you want to win again.
Where Hamilton thrives is as a half-chance hero, however his edge was stripped away with the introduction of DRS. He’s instinctive and he’s always looking for ways to pass the driver ahead of him. These traits made him an ideal driver before the introduction of DRS simply because opportunistic aggression was the best way to overtake your opponent. Now, DRS and Kers introduce more chances to the art of overtaking so it’s no longer the half-opportunity that a driver should take but, more often than not, it should be the first viable one.
A great example of this was in Singapore. Hamilton was behind Massa and catching fast. Soon he was looking for the overtake, but instead of biding his time, Hamilton commits to what was barely even a half-chance and we know what followed. He loses his front wing on Massa’s right rear ruining his (and Massa’s) race. If he’d have waited even just a lap, his fresher tyres and a sensible use of DRS and Kers would have more than likely have seen him through.
This is the funny thing about heroes, they tend to fall a lot quicker than everyone else. The collection of penalties and collisions amassed by Hamilton over this year is downright embarrassing. How he’s handled them is shameful. If Hamilton wants to survive as a championship competitor in Formula One he has to adapt to the rule changes.
There’s no more precious a leaf than the one in Jenson Button’s book right now. Jenson’s earned a lot of respect and developed vastly as a driver now the regulation tide once again favours a calculated approach. For me, he’s the number one driver at McClaren at present and it shows in the championship standings. With a slower car, like Fernando Alonso, he’s getting his head down and getting the job done. They’re both beating Mark Webber, another man admittedly on a bad season, but still- he’s driving the best car in the field.
Hamilton just doesn’t know how to lose, but I can’t really blame him though. He simply lacks the experience. Though he often complains about not having a competitive car in Formula One, he’s never driven anything but a McClaren who, apart from half a season in 2009, has been in the top two teams consistently since Lewis arrived. Again compare him with Button, who’s climbed up the F1 ladder with lower and mid-rank teams. Button understands what losing’s like, in fact it took him 113 races before he won an F1 race, but it’s paying dividends now. So Lewis, it’s a hard pill to swallow I’m sure, but I don’t think you’re going to survive if you don’t start learning. In the meantime, don’t be surprised if you’re overlooked for sports personality of the year.
Both being in a show, and being around so many other shows is a unique experience and it’ s been brilliant to meet so many great people and be around friends. Sure, the Royal Mile isn’t always sunny (even in August), but there’s still a lot to smile about. As it’s my first (and hopefully not last) fringe, I wanted to see as many shows as I could while here. After about a week into the festival I thought 50 sounded like a good target and I’m pleased to say I hit it.
Something you may already know about me is that I like ranking things and making lists. I don’t like fringe reviews and this isn’t aiming to be one (though I’ll be sending congratulatory tweets to the top 10 on great shows), it’s purely a bit of fun. It would also be silly to assume that as I’ve seen so many shows with friends in them that I can claim that I don’t have a conflict of interest here, but I’ve tried to rule this out. Then of course, there’s the question of do I rate the show or the experience?
These are no doubt, complications. But I hope that by bringing them up prior to the list i’ve at least acknowledged that my Edinburgh Top 50 is of a lot more use to me than it is to you. If that’s going to be an issue, sorry about that.
Dinner with the Dinner Ladies (Theatre: Dark Comedy)
Vinegar Knickers: Sketchy Beast (Comedy: Sketch)
Lullabies of Broadmoor: The Murder Club (Theatre: Historical/Drama)
Life Still (Theatre: Sci-fi Puppetry)
Some Small Love Story (Musical: Romance)
Tales of Edgar Allan Poe (Theatre: Adaptations)
Lullabies of Broadmoor: Venus of Broadmoor (Theatre: Historical/Drama)
Titus Andronicus (Theatre: Horror)
One Man Show (Theatre: Solo, Multimedia)
The Star Child (Theatre: Storytelling)
Clockheart Boy (Theatre: Storytelling)
Lullabies of Broadmoor: The Demon Box (Theatre: Historical/Drama)
*Beef (Theatre: Drama/Comedy)
Lullabies of Broadmoor: Wilderness (Theatre: Historical/Drama)
Lewis Gray & Friend (Comedy: Standup)
Fantasmagoriana (Theatre: Historical/Drama)
Bepo&Co (Theatre: Historical)
Images (Theatre/Dance: Physical)
Secret Window, Secret Garden (Theatre: Suspense)
Comedy Slappers (Comedy: Standup)
Full Mind/Intelligent Life (Comedy: Standup)
Battleacts (Comedy: Improvised)
Shaggers (Comedy: Standup)
What Goes Up (Theatre: Comedy)
The Antics: Premature Ejokeulation (Comedy: Improvised)
Sweet Charity (Musical)
*Theseus is Dead (Theatre: Drama)
Recursion (Theatre)
So there you have it, a list. The eagle-eyed (or probably just eyed) of you will have realised that there are 51 shows on this list. I felt I had to see another because I fell asleep for reasonable amounts of shows marked with a *. In Beef’s case, this was more because of being tired than of a bad performance. In Theseus is Dead’s case, it wasn’t. (You’d think the light they shine into your eyes at the beginning would rouse you if anything). Recursion bottoms (can I use that as a word?) the list due to me wishing I was asleep throughout the whole thing. But what do I know, that show got 5*s in a review.
In honesty I would say that the top 40 of those shows were all worth watching, in case any aficionados are offended. Not even numbers 41 to 45 should take insult really. Anything below “Shaggers” though should take note that one of the stand-ups playing that night, when interrupted by an audience member, took to violent, chauvinist threats; creating the most awkward room I can remember being in, before he threw down his microphone and left. I refuse to find his name and publicise him in any way here.
…
But on a brighter note, anything in the Top 20 was something really special, congratulations, you gave me a great impression! They’re the shows that made up my first Edinburgh. If you’re reading this and saw any of these shows (high or low), then feel free to post below and we’ll strike some conversation.
Howling Moon (#7) - Search Flickr for Patrick_Down for more from this photographer
I’ve been thinking of writing this blog post for a while, but when my friend Hugh sent me this link it tipped the balance. Formula One has a great way of not taking itself too seriously at times. It’s the sign of a sport that still is, at its essence, a sport.
It’s certainly the best commercial that comes to my mind since that John West advert where the man fights the bear. Just when you think it won’t get any better, along comes Mika Häkkinen. He’s been used as the punchline to a competition-based advert for McClaren in the past when Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso competed with each other all the way to the sauna, but here’s even better. Mika’s not just a double-world champion, but the funniest man in Formula One, and in case you don’t believe me…
I don’t really understand Cee Lo Green. It’s not that i’m mistaking him from the similarly named 90′s WWF wrestler D Lo Brown, it’s just I can’t understand how he fits. His music videos seem to overcompensate an air of confidence to make up for what isn’t there. But I like his music, I honestly do. I feel I need to say this before I continue with this post. I’ve no shame accumulated from secretly dancing alone to Forget You at 3am while mopping a Travelodge barfloor. His latest effort, Bright Lights Bigger City, is a grower with subtle twinges to the classic “You Only Live Twice” Bond theme. It was doubtlessly the reason why the video follows the story of espionage.
But here’s the looming kicker for him. When I browsed through this week’s Later with Jools Holland, a show I always wish I watched more often, I spotted what was either a statement about modern music from its producers, or just a simple coincidence.
Click this link, and go to 23:30 (or watch the whole thing, preferably) and just ease into your chair while your jaw drops as you listen to Gregory Porter. I’ve never heard of him before, but it’s a stunning performance. It’s a master holding a paintbrush. Each note is planned, held and planted. Frankly, i’m in awe. I’d be overjoyed to have a voice even holding half his quality.
But if you want to see the point, then have a look at what happens next. Cee Lo Green’s next song happens to start with an introduction ballad and you just get a point blank showcase of two men in the same profession but in different leagues.
Where do you even begin when you come to review a race as good as China 2011? Just outside the most populated city in the world, inside the most populated country in the world; 24 men, their crews and F1 organisers just pulled together some of the best sports entertainment I’ve ever seen.
There are just so many stories, each worth their own paragraph. You could almost feel the exhaustion from everyone involved; it must have been a nightmare and a dream of a day for the producers as they leapt from overtake to overtake on all parts of the track. Excitement even began before the race. Eventual winner Lewis Hamilton nearly didn’t make it to the grid with fuel drowning the engine. The overwhelming story for me there though was how calm Lewis stayed as he sat while his surgeons crowded around the rear of his McClaren with six minutes to go. How pumped up must he have been for the race. The hours of planning and physical motivation, qualifying- it could have been fading away but he didn’t show it. That’s the mental confidence of a great world champion and honestly- I couldn’t shake the feeling that he looked like Senna.
This wasn’t a Grand Prix that was to impress just once with one spectacular move though, it just kept hitting you. Hamilton passed his way through Rosberg, Massa, Button and Vettel on his way to first. Webber past almost everyone on his second half march through the field from 18th on the grid to 3rd in the race. Great performances from Massa and Rosberg outdoing their championship-winning team-mates provided pleasant surprises. It also gave this Rosberg fan a great sense of joy to see him lead the grand prix at one stage.
You could tell how much it meant to Hamilton to win and his smile could only be surpassed by ones on the bosses of the Pirelli tyres. They were asked to create races by manufacturing fragile tyres and they hit the specification completely. To win a Grand Prix in 2011 you have to work strategy correctly, and this means there are more periods of the race where there’s an overtaking overlap. It’s good for the sport, it’s good for the drivers, it’s good for the teams and good for the fans. Basically, it’s very very good and well worth waking up for on a Sunday morning.
In honesty, there’s no point me even trying to write a blog/review about a race as good as this, to experience it you just have to watch it. All you can really take from these few words is that the enjoyment it gave me was enough that I had to write it down somewhere. So I did.
Oh, and good luck to the team having to make a highlights reel that’s shorter than the race itself.
Fame is real and fame is fame. The masses (you and I) aren’t stupid and we know that the world isn’t just the disneyland that we used to be told it was. That’s why the music industry needs to be representative to sell songs, so for every Taylor Swift there’s also a P!nk. Taylor Swift will sing about how the first time you kissed your crush it is was romantic bliss. P!nk will sing about how the first time he broke your heart you felt unworthy and angry.
But not all pop machines are as well oiled as these two. There’s Chris Brown. Now it was either gross forgiveness or gross ignorance that even allowed Chris Brown’s name to be heard and taken seriously in pop music boardrooms again. But it’s not ignorance. It’s a little more confusing. As ridiculous as it sounds, and as much as he hates it to the point of breaking windows and throwing tantrums, it’s now his angle. Even he says it. His lyric in Champion, “I used to watch my mother getting beat down, is that the real definition of me now?” is exactly true. He’s an idiot if he thinks that in the 21st century people are ever going to let thoughts of him stray from being, “that troubled guy who beat up Rihanna”.
But that’s exactly the reason his music career’s been allowed to survive. The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about, right? It’s fame, it’s real and it’s fame. So his puppet-masters are onto something. Yeah, I probably could have written a blog about “Yeah 3x” in a parallel universe where Chris Brown wasn’t a Rudeboy to RiRi but let’s face it, I probably wouldn’t have. And this applies from my grass-routes amateur blogging to the top echelons of music journalism. It’s just more interesting now. The rule used to be, “if you’re a star, you have to be a role model” but now, whether you like it or not, it’s “if you’re a star, you can do whatever you want as long as we have access to it.”
In general, it’s too difficult to say what you believe in in the entertainment industry because it’s too easy to offend people and anything a network shows, they want to be able to sell in a global market. That’s why most songs in the charts can be summed up into, “I want to have a good time in this club tonight and to do that the music needs to be of a high volume”- because that’s the only thing the world has deemed globally acceptable. You aren’t allowed to speak, but you are allowed to live how you want to live, because no-one can really stop you from doing that. Overheard is the new said. The pay-off is seemingly that if we (the world) have privy to it- we can cast our judgements on these vagabonds from the comfort of our own homes, and it’s neither good or bad unless we decide it is.
So Chris Brown is allowed to breathe again and release songs. But, Yeah 3x is a very interesting and confused little outing for 3x reasons. The first is the ridiculous pink jacket/white shorts/black glove combination. But that’s obvious, it’s basically a case in point and I’m trying to be poignant here in a hope you keep reading.
The second reason is the small child they recruited to point as if the sun were in his eyes and announce “hey it’s Chris Brown”. For what better way do you announce your return to music after an assault charge than getting the most innocent, ginger, spectacle-donned thing you can find to introduce you? Don’t worry, world. Chris Brown is no longer someone to be feared. He’s allowed around children now! This concept would work better if he actually interacted with the children though. All he does (pause at 0:36 on that video) is look down on them with contempt as his curly-haired compere cutely struggles to descend a set of stairs. Oh, television what have you come to?
Chris Brown, just like he’s a dancer and a singer, is also a violent-natured aggressor. Just listen to his lyrics, it’s all “fetch me this”, “I want this”, “do this”, “come here” and “follow me”. You just wouldn’t want to party with this guy. You can concieve that Will I AM would spend some time mingling with the crowd and hooking people up with friends, Bruno Mars would be relaxed and having a good time while calmly smiling at the droves of women wanting him to write them ballads. Chris Brown would expect you to meet him at his, wait while he got ready, drive him there, leave you outside, go missing and return later to bitch and moan to you about how someone disrespected him and get a lift home. The only other place you’d hear this many imperative sentences in quick succession is from a creative toddler improvising an invisible obstacle course.
So yeah, yeah, yeah, Chris Brown- would you be interested in being a guest on the next season of Never Mind the Buzzcocks?
Sparky and Noops is ran by Tristram Malkin. For more about the author and other creative projects that I get involved in (like film and music), have a look at www.lukemalkin.wordpress.com
Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
Little Note
Please note that the views expressed on this blog are entirely my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of employers, colleagues or anyone else for that matter.
Also: I've made what I would describe as a reasonable, but medicore effort attributing images. If i'm accidentally stealing credit, or incorrectly labelling the images on this site- contact me.
