The Strictly Come Dancing 2025 champion will finally be crowned on Saturday night – and with the Glitterball Trophy within touching distance, the bookies have shared the latest odds and had their say on who they think will win it.

George Clarke, Karen Carney and Amber Davies will go head-to-head in the live final on Saturday (December 21), after Balvinder Sopal’s journey came to an end at the semi-final stage.

So, as the countdown to the ballroom showdown begins, who’s leading the race for Strictly glory?
Karen and Carlos’ Show Dance will be to Texas’ Inner Smile (Credit: BBC)

Strictly odds – bookies name their Glitterball favourite

With all three finalists preparing to perform a trio of routines in the final, the latest odds paint a clear picture of who’s out in front.

Former Lioness Karen Carney is currently the favourite to lift the Glitterball, priced at 8/13. Close behind her is George Clarke at 6/4, while Amber Davies finds herself the outsider, sitting at 28/1.

SportsCasting spokesperson Shane Orton said the final line-up makes for a compelling finale.

“With Balvinder Sopal and Julian Caillon falling at the semi-final stage, we’re left with a fascinating final three,” he explained.

“Karen Carney and Carlos Gu have surged back into favouritism after delivering two outstanding performances, showing the consistency and control you’d expect at this stage of the competition.”
Alexis made it to the final with George in her first year as a pro (Credit: BBC)

George closes the gap as Amber faces uphill battle

Shane added that George Clarke is far from out of the running.

“George Clarke and Alexis Warr continue to close the gap, with their chemistry growing week by week and George’s confidence now clearly visible on the dance floor,” he said. “He’s always had strong viewer support, but the quality of the performances is finally matching that popularity.”

However, despite her talent, Amber Davies faces a tougher road to victory.

“Amber Davies and Nikita Kuzmin have been exceptional throughout,” Shane continued. “On pure ability, Amber is one of the strongest celebrity dancers the show has ever seen. However, a lack of audience connection and her extensive professional training background leave her facing a tough task in the final, despite her talent.”

Our exclusive poll reflects those odds, with 50% of readers backing Karen to win. George and Alexis follow closely with 43% of the vote, while just 7% are rooting for Amber and Nikita.
Amber and Nikita are outsiders to win in the latest Strictly odds (Credit: BBC)

Songs and dances confirmed for the Strictly final

All three couples will take on three routines in Saturday night’s final – including the much-anticipated Show Dance, where rules go out the window and creativity takes centre stage.

Karen and Carlos have revealed their Show Dance will be set to Inner Smile by Texas. Speaking to Claudia Winkleman, Carlos said: “It’s a celebration. It will be everything Kaz is good at and throwing into it and having fun. Our song is actually a perfect match for her.”

George and Alexis will perform their Show Dance to Human by The Killers, with Alexis promising it will chart George’s “evolution” throughout the competition. Amber and Nikita, meanwhile, are keeping their Show Dance details under wraps – for now.

Alongside the Show Dance, each couple will also perform their favourite routine from the series, as well as a judges’ pick.

The race for the Glitterball Trophy has taken a dramatic turn as bookmakers update their odds, placing one Strictly Come Dancing star firmly back at the top of the leaderboard. After weeks of fluctuating predictions, surprise eliminations, and shifting public opinion, this latest surge into favouritism signals a significant change in how the competition is being read both inside the ballroom and beyond it. What once felt like an open contest is now beginning to narrow, as momentum, narrative, and performance collide at the most crucial stage of the series.

Bookmakers’ odds are rarely based on dance ability alone. They reflect a complex blend of factors: judges’ scores, public voting trends, social media engagement, and the all-important storyline arc that Strictly thrives on. The fact that one star has “surged back” into favouritism suggests not only technical improvement, but a recalibration of how audiences and insiders perceive their journey. This is not just about who dances best, but about who feels destined to win.

Earlier in the competition, this same star had seen their odds drift. In some weeks, they were overtaken by rivals who appeared more consistent, more surprising, or more emotionally resonant. At that stage, talk of a clear winner felt premature. The field looked crowded, with several contestants capable of delivering standout performances and capturing public affection. But Strictly has a way of sharpening focus as the weeks progress, and narratives that once seemed evenly balanced begin to tip.

The recent surge in favouritism has been driven by a combination of strong performances and strategic timing. A standout routine at the right moment can be more influential than steady competence across multiple weeks. This contestant’s latest dances have not just been technically sound; they have been memorable. They have sparked conversation, drawn praise from judges, and generated buzz online — all key indicators that bookmakers monitor closely.

Judges’ comments have played a crucial role in this shift. Where earlier feedback may have been cautious or mixed, recent critiques have been glowing, often framed in language associated with finalists and winners. Phrases like “this is what winning looks like” or “you’ve peaked at exactly the right time” are not just compliments; they are signals. When judges begin to speak in these terms, it shapes audience perception and influences voting behaviour.

Equally important is the emotional arc of the contestant’s journey. Strictly audiences respond powerfully to transformation — not just in dance ability, but in confidence, vulnerability, and self-belief. This star’s resurgence has coincided with a visible emotional breakthrough. Viewers have seen nerves soften into assurance, self-doubt give way to joy. That shift matters. It creates a sense that the contestant has earned their place, that their success is the result of growth rather than privilege.

Public reaction has mirrored this change. Social media sentiment, another key metric in modern odds-setting, has swung decisively. Where earlier weeks produced divided opinions, recent performances have united viewers in praise. Fan-made clips, viral reactions, and trending hashtags all contribute to the impression that momentum is building. Bookmakers are acutely aware that when a contestant captures the public imagination, votes often follow.

The timing of this surge is also significant. As the competition moves closer to its final stages, undecided viewers begin to align themselves with favourites. Early in the series, votes are often scattered, driven by novelty or sympathy. Later on, voting becomes more strategic. Viewers start thinking in terms of “deserving winners” rather than weekly entertainment. A contestant who peaks too early risks fading from memory; one who peaks too late may run out of time. Surging now is ideal.

Rival contestants have not necessarily faltered, but in a competition like Strictly, excellence is relative. A strong performance can feel less impactful if someone else delivers something extraordinary in the same week. The shift in odds does not mean others are underperforming; it means that this particular star is currently outperforming expectations in a way that feels decisive.

Another factor influencing bookmakers’ confidence is consistency under pressure. As routines become more demanding and expectations rise, some contestants struggle to maintain form. This star’s recent performances suggest resilience rather than fragility. They appear comfortable with the spotlight, capable of handling high-stakes routines without visible strain. That reliability is attractive to both voters and oddsmakers.

The partnership dynamic has also come into sharper focus. Strictly is as much about chemistry as choreography, and this pairing has hit its stride at exactly the right moment. The connection between celebrity and professional dancer feels natural, supportive, and balanced. Viewers sense mutual trust rather than dominance, and that emotional authenticity enhances the impact of each routine.

Bookmakers are also influenced by historical patterns. Winners often share certain traits: a late surge in form, a compelling personal narrative, strong public appeal, and judges’ endorsement. This contestant now fits that profile more neatly than anyone else in the field. The odds reflect not just current performance, but perceived inevitability — the sense that everything is aligning.

However, favouritism is not destiny. Strictly has a long history of shocks, and odds can change quickly. A misstep, a less successful routine, or a rival’s breakthrough performance could still disrupt the narrative. Bookmakers adjust constantly, responding to new information in real time. Today’s favourite can become tomorrow’s underdog.

That uncertainty is part of what keeps viewers engaged. Even as odds shorten, the competition remains live and emotionally charged. Fans of other contestants are quick to point out that Strictly is decided by public vote, not betting markets. Passionate fanbases can mobilise quickly, and emotional connection can outweigh technical superiority.

There is also the question of overexposure. As a contestant becomes more visible and praised, some viewers may react against the perceived inevitability of their win. Strictly audiences sometimes favour the underdog, particularly if they feel the narrative is becoming too predictable. Maintaining warmth and humility in the face of favouritism is crucial.

The star at the centre of this surge appears aware of that risk. Their on-screen demeanour remains grounded, often emphasising gratitude and surprise rather than entitlement. This tone matters. Viewers are more likely to support someone who seems genuinely moved by their success rather than someone who appears to expect it.

Behind the scenes, production choices may also influence perception. Song selection, choreography style, and staging all shape how a performance lands. Recent routines have played to this contestant’s strengths while still pushing boundaries. That balance suggests careful planning and a deep understanding of what resonates with both judges and viewers.

The Glitterball Trophy itself carries symbolic weight. Winning Strictly is not just about dance; it is about cultural impact. Past winners often go on to redefine public perception, launch new careers, or cement their status in British popular culture. Bookmakers consider this broader appeal when assessing likelihood. This star’s recent surge suggests they are being seen not just as a dancer, but as a fitting ambassador for the show.

As the odds shorten, media coverage inevitably intensifies. Headlines reinforce perception, creating a feedback loop where favouritism becomes self-sustaining. Each article, segment, or social media post contributes to the sense that this contestant is the one to beat. That visibility can attract casual voters who align themselves with the apparent frontrunner.

At the same time, pressure mounts. Being favourite brings scrutiny. Every performance is judged not just on its own merits, but against the expectation of excellence. Minor flaws that might have been overlooked earlier now stand out. How this star handles that pressure will be crucial in the coming weeks.

Strictly’s format ensures that no one can coast. With multiple dances, themed weeks, and unpredictable public voting, the path to the final is rarely smooth. Even favourites must continually reassert their claim. The surge in odds is a snapshot, not a guarantee.

What is undeniable is that momentum has shifted. The conversation has changed from “could they win?” to “can anyone stop them?” That shift matters psychologically, both for the contestant and for their rivals. Confidence can be contagious, just as doubt can be disruptive.

For viewers, the evolving odds add another layer of engagement. Watching with the knowledge that one star has surged into favouritism heightens anticipation. Every routine becomes a test of whether they can justify that position, or whether the narrative will fracture under pressure.

As the competition heads toward its climax, the gap between contenders may narrow again, or it may widen further. Much depends on the next few performances, the emotional resonance of upcoming routines, and the unpredictable alchemy of public vote and judges’ scores.

In the end, bookmakers’ odds tell a story, but they do not write the ending. They reflect collective belief at a given moment — belief that this Strictly star has found their rhythm, captured hearts, and timed their peak to perfection. Whether that belief translates into a Glitterball victory remains to be seen.

For now, though, the message from the betting markets is clear: the race has a frontrunner once again, and all eyes are on whether this resurgent favourite can carry their momentum all the way to the final dance.

As the competition edges closer to its finale, the emotional temperature surrounding this resurgent favourite continues to rise, not just within the ballroom but across living rooms, social feeds, and conversations up and down the country. The shift in the odds has done more than reshuffle betting tables; it has reframed how audiences are watching the show. Every step, every lift, every smile now carries added weight, because expectation has entered the room. And expectation, on Strictly Come Dancing, is a powerful and often unforgiving force.

For the contestant at the centre of this surge, the change is both affirming and daunting. To be favourite is to be validated, to feel that weeks of effort, pain, doubt, and persistence have finally aligned in the public eye. But it is also to become a target of scrutiny. The journey subtly changes shape. Where once improvement was celebrated, now perfection is anticipated. Where nerves were endearing, now composure is demanded. The emotional landscape becomes steeper, more exposed.

What viewers often forget is how quickly that shift happens. One week you are the underdog, grateful to survive another vote. The next, you are the presumed winner, carrying not just your own hopes but the projections of millions. The Glitterball ceases to be a distant dream and becomes a looming possibility, one that can inspire confidence or quietly erode joy if not carefully managed.

Emotionally, this is where Strictly becomes most compelling. The show has always thrived on vulnerability, on watching people navigate pressure in real time. A surge in favouritism intensifies that vulnerability. The contestant must now balance belief in themselves with humility, ambition with gratitude. Too much confidence risks alienating voters; too much self-doubt risks undermining performance. It is a narrow path, and walking it requires emotional intelligence as much as technical skill.

The audience, too, undergoes a shift. Viewers who once watched casually now invest more deeply, defending their favourite in comment threads, analysing judges’ comments frame by frame, debating whether the odds are justified. Support becomes more vocal, but so does resistance. As one star rises, others inevitably fall from the spotlight, and fans of rival contestants may push back against the emerging narrative of inevitability.

This push and pull is part of Strictly’s emotional engine. The show does not simply crown the best dancer; it stages a collective negotiation between talent, storytelling, and public feeling. Bookmakers’ odds reflect one version of that negotiation, but they do not resolve it. They add tension, not closure.

For the resurgent favourite, the next performances are psychologically crucial. Momentum can be intoxicating, but it is also fragile. One routine that feels safe rather than inspired, one emotional misfire, and the narrative can wobble. Viewers are quick to sense when someone is dancing to protect a lead rather than to express something genuine. Authenticity, at this stage, matters more than ever.

This is where the emotional arc of the contestant’s journey becomes decisive. Those who win Strictly often do so not because they are flawless, but because they remain open. They continue to take risks, to show nerves, to be moved by the experience even when they are technically accomplished. The audience wants to feel included in the journey, not positioned as spectators to a foregone conclusion.

Judges, too, play a subtle role in shaping the emotional climate. Their praise can lift a contestant, but it can also burden them. When judges speak of “winner’s energy” or “final-level performance,” they raise the stakes. The contestant must absorb that affirmation without letting it calcify into pressure. How they respond to judges’ critiques in the coming weeks will influence not just scores, but perception.

Behind the scenes, the emotional toll intensifies. Rehearsals grow longer and more demanding. Injuries become more likely. Fatigue sets in. The body and mind are both stretched to their limits. In this context, a surge in favouritism can feel less like a reward and more like an added responsibility. The contestant is no longer dancing just to survive; they are dancing to justify belief.

There is also the quiet fear of peaking too soon. Strictly history is littered with contestants who dominated headlines one week only to fade the next. Sustaining excellence is harder than achieving it. The emotional discipline required to stay grounded, to treat each performance as a fresh challenge rather than a defence of status, is immense.

For viewers, this stage of the competition often provokes reflection on fairness and desire. Do they want the “best” dancer to win, or the one whose journey has moved them most? These criteria do not always align. The resurgent favourite appears, at least for now, to satisfy both, but that balance can shift quickly. One emotional breakthrough from a rival, one unexpected moment of vulnerability, can redraw loyalties overnight.

The betting odds, in this sense, are less about prediction and more about mood. They capture a collective feeling that something is coming together for this contestant. That feeling can be powerful, but it is not permanent. It must be renewed each week through performance and connection.

Emotionally, the contestant’s relationship with their professional partner becomes even more significant. Trust deepens under pressure. Communication becomes more instinctive. But so does the risk of strain. When expectations rise, small frustrations can feel magnified. Navigating this partnership with care, humour, and mutual respect is essential to sustaining momentum.

The Glitterball itself looms as both symbol and temptation. It represents validation, achievement, and a place in Strictly history. But focusing too much on the end can hollow out the present. Winners often speak afterward of trying to stay “in the moment,” of reminding themselves why they started. That mindset is not a cliché; it is a survival strategy.

For the audience, watching a favourite emerge triggers its own emotional responses. Some feel excitement, others anxiety. There is pleasure in backing a winner, but also fear of disappointment. Viewers invest emotionally, imagining the joy of victory or the sting of loss alongside the contestant. That shared emotional risk is part of the show’s enduring appeal.

Media coverage amplifies this effect. Headlines declaring a “surge into favouritism” create a narrative of ascent that can be thrilling or suffocating. The contestant becomes a story as much as a dancer. Managing that narrative—neither resisting it nor surrendering to it—is another emotional challenge.

As the final weeks approach, the atmosphere inside the ballroom often shifts. The camaraderie remains, but competition sharpens. Contestants are acutely aware that time is running out. Every dance feels like a statement. For the favourite, this awareness is doubled. They are not just competing against others, but against expectation itself.

What ultimately determines whether a surge in odds becomes a Glitterball victory is not inevitability, but resilience. The ability to absorb pressure without losing joy. To hear praise without becoming complacent. To face criticism without collapsing into doubt. These are emotional skills, not technical ones, and they are often decisive.

Strictly’s most beloved winners are rarely those who appeared invincible. They are those who remained human under pressure. Who allowed themselves to be moved, surprised, even shaken. Who danced not as favourites, but as people still discovering what they could do.

As viewers watch this resurgent favourite step onto the floor in the coming weeks, they will be watching for more than footwork. They will be watching for heart. For risk. For sincerity. The odds may suggest a frontrunner, but the audience will decide whether that frontrunner feels worthy of the moment.

In the end, the Glitterball Trophy is not awarded by bookmakers or headlines. It is awarded by millions of individual choices, made in living rooms, shaped by emotion as much as evaluation. A surge in favouritism is a powerful moment, but it is also a fragile one.

For now, the contestant stands at the centre of belief, buoyed by momentum and expectation. Whether that belief carries them all the way depends on what they do with it—whether they let it harden into pressure or transform it into freedom.

Strictly Come Dancing has always been about timing, and this surge suggests timing is finally on their side. But the dance is not over yet. The music is still playing. And in the emotional theatre of the ballroom, the final act is always the hardest—and the most revealing—of all.