However, as I say, it's too easy to feel aggrieved. However my solution in these circumstances is to look at where the money went if possible. The betting market reveals all. Though before going any further I have to point out that bookmakers regard events like Strictly Come Dancing as 'Specials' and limit the size of bets so as to reduce their risk level should any kind of insider knowledge or fix influence results.
Jay started out as second favourite around 7/2 behind Peter André at 5/2. But this soon reversed to a situation where Jay became odds on in which he remained for most of the series in spite of numerous errors and a complete lack of any ability to portray a character fully. This puzzled me somewhat as the betting market reflects the amount of money being placed on a contender. So most money was going on Jay but who would have been placing it?
McGuiness is not an obvious candidate for the attentions of young girl fans - he's neither particularly talented, floppy haired nor even very manly in appearance (you might even say that he's slightly effeminate). I can only assume that he appealed to the maternal instincts of the more mature female viewing demographic. But they are not the kind of people who naturally inhabit bookmakers establishments or even indulge in online gambling. So who then?
My only conclusion can be that the bets were placed by people 'in the know' Maybe people at the BBC who reckoned that he would be a big draw for the Strictly live tour manipulated the viewers voting figures to get a more favourable result. Maybe they also manipulated the press into insinuating that he is having an affair with his partner Aliona Vilani.
Okay perhaps a bit fanciful but how else can you explain a winner of a so-called popularity contest who is not really that popular.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments will be moderated