See I don't buy that the judges are over marking to give the better dancers a chance against the public vote - the couple with the poorest judges mark scores 1, the 2nd lowest 2, etc. It doesn't matter whether there is a differential in actual marks of 1 or 21, they'll still score 1 and 2 from the judges.
I can't decide whether the judges are marking against a constant standard, the standard they expect for a given week or the standard they expect for a specific celebrity in a given week. I completely agree that Craig is the only judge who seems to score transparently. I wonder if part of the problem was that such high marks were awarded in the first week - IIRC nearly everyone was over 20 at that point. Most of the judges effectively lost half their range of marks before the Series even started.
I'm also getting fed up that Craig (and Len to a lesser extent) gets booed nearly every time he opens his mouth and is critical however mildly he phrases it - he may not be the most tactful, but at least he's usually clear and has a valid point - whereas because Bruno makes a joke of it all he seems to get away with making comments that are just downright nasty.
Re. scoring for Matt's American Smooth, I think what's being seen is a weakness/inexperience in Aliona's choreography. It was a beautiful dance performed to foxtrot music - but that doesn't make it an American Smooth. There was the bare minimum of foxtrot and lots of flash. What really suprises me is that Len really marked someone down for doing exactly the same thing a few weeks back (and its really bugging me I can't remember who now!) - so why is she repeating mistakes? Quite why Scott scored so highly I haven't got a clue, though.
I think Gavin should have gone ahead of Patsy, though. He's come a long way and does seem to be getting into a bit more now, but he still doesn't give the impression of really enjoying it that much. To me it makes it boring to watch.
And rant over 