Forget the Crouch Robot, Clancy can dance her way to Strictly glory!
Strictly Come Dancing waltzed back onto our screens last weekend with 15 brand new celebrities getting the chance to strut their stuff on the dance floor for the very first time.
From Coronation Street’s Natalie Gumede’s accomplished Cha Cha, to golfer Tony Jacklin being likened to ‘the hunchback of Notre Dame’ and actor Mark Benton’s well-acted Tango, the reality show was back in full force.
With first night nerves out of the way, now it’s time for the action to really hot up as the threat of the elimination hangs over the dancing stars.
Coronation Street’s Natalie Gumede and WAG Abbey Clancy were sparkling on the dance floor and should have no worries about sailing through to week three.
If Gumede’s prominence at the top of the leaderboard was unsurprising due to her stage school background and dance experience, Clancy showed none of the robotic dance moves of her footballer husband Peter Crouch.
The model glided across the floor with partner Alijaz Skorjanec to steal the show and record the highest scores of week one from Len, Bruno, Craig and Darcey.
The 27-year-old, who dances the Cha Cha on week two, could be worth a punt at 7/2 to take home this year’s Glitterball Trophy.
At the other end of the table, former Ryder Cup captain Tony Jacklin and his dance partner Aliona Vilani are under pressure. They’ll dance the Charleston this week
The golfing legend could not avoid the hazards as his initial effort missed the fairway. The two-time major winner finished joint-bottom of the leader board and is Ladbrokes’ favourite at 10/11 to miss the cut.
But more value could be found in backing Vanessa Feltz for the chop, especially if her Waltz this week is a disaster.
The broadcaster’s Cha Cha with professional dancer partner James Jordan did not go down well with the judges and the 51-year-old now finds herself in the danger zone. With her popularity with the public split, 13/8 for Feltz to be in the dance-off could be a real steal.
All Odds and Markets are correct as of the date of publishing.