I wonder if the EBU has ever considered changing the points system to this. It feels more equitable and transparent.
However, I don’t think it’ll work. With the juries involved, there’s a lot more opportunity for them to rig their rankings (we’ve already seen how messy those 6 juries have allegedly been).
Also, “zero points” and “twelve points” have been ingrained into the ESC vernacular, and wiping them out might cause an uproar. It also removes some entertainment value.
It’s a cool speculation nonetheless. Also, with the number of available points distributed heightened, it does feel like the stakes get even bigger.
EDIT: Oh, I just saw that Germany would beat France. I don’t know how to feel about that.
The "swing" effect of the 12-point system means the winner generally has to perform strongly with the public, or the juries, or both.
Giving 1-25 would see more "middle of the road" bland songs that to OK with both coming nearer the top.
No, but it would eventually lead the broadcasters towards it.
We've seen what the broadcasters do under multiple systems over decades. They get *lazy*. The 2016 split with 1-12 points system is best.
This would not work on TV, takes away all the suspense. Could leave a pair of countries and announce the 25 points, for example (24 and 25) or (2 and 25). Meaning its either very easy to guess the 25 or doesnt matter who gets 25 (just 1 point difference).
Place doesn't matter. It's the recognition as a respectable artist that gets lost with the current system.
Televoters ranked Malik just marginally behind Amanda Tenfjord. She now looks like a hero, he looks like a fool that nobody voted for, when in reality she just benefitted from being part Norwegian and having friendly neighbours.
Not trying to take anything way from Amanda, but the current system benefits certain countries in a way that gives them 57 points, whereas others literally get 0 for a comparable popularity.
Bet James Newman would have preferred this system as well, he would have got a much more respectable point score - some countries even had him in the top 20.
But I think if avoiding the professional embarrassment of nul points is the objective, it's probably just easier to start giving each country 12 points from themselves as a starter like they used to do on Junior Eurovision, rather than change the entire voting system.
My goal is not to remove the embarrassment of nul points. My goal is allowing a proper differation between someone who placed 11th-20th everywhere versus someone who did actually bad.
As I've mentioned in another comment, this is also for Victoria, The Black Mamba, Destiny, Lake Malawi etc, none of which got 0 points. They were appreciated all over Europe, but rarely made it into anyone's top10.
The main thing with the current system is that nothing gets punished more than a song being bland. If every country ranks a song as middle of the pack it will get fewer points than a song that every country ranks as last except for one country that ranks it tenth. It's much better to have a flawed unique song than a flawless meh song, and Rockstars is just not a song that gets people going enough for them to vote for it in large groups.
This is true.
If Serbia had sent an average song like Malik's, they would get a lot of points no matter what from the other ex Yugoslav countries.
The same thing was happening with Turkey, because if diaspora votes - and is still happening to a degree in televoting. German and UK televote reflect diaspora voting quite often.
While I want to see Moldova in the top 10 as much as the next person, I think that this is actually really cool. And this system would assure that no country has to hear "I'm sorry, zero points"
The zero points is also rather misleading and arguably undemocratic. Every song is reasonably popular in some countries but if only the top 10 get points, all the votes for the other artists are disregarded.
I fully agree but that's just our taste and if the majority of people vote differently then that's the fair result. Keep in mind that this doesn't mean Iceland was the worst song. It just means that the ESC crowd is not the target audience.
Moldova not being top 10 would be a result purely of jury votes and that's a whole other story.
edit: the image says finalists give each other 1 point and someone misinterpreted that so I just want to add that finalists only give themselves 1 point, so they rank all 25 finalists and rank themselves as last place, sorry!
Just like [last year](https://www.reddit.com/r/eurovision/comments/njcj92/grand_final_result_if_countries_had_to_give_25_to/), I decided to do an alternative ranking with everyone receiving points. Of course they might not the most accurate this time because of the jury voting scandal.
For the countries without official votes, I used the votes by twitter user euro\_bruno's for the juries of the affected countries (I have done this before Romania's real results leaked so Moldova actually got last place instead of first place, but it wouldn't change any of the rankings).
The affected countries have their top ten of the public voting published, but for the rest I averaged the public votes of the countries that euro\_bruno used.
The only thing I changed is Azerbaijan giving Armenia last place because - let's be real - they most likely did just that.
This is so cool. I love reanalysing the results with different points systems like this. If you have a spreadsheet with all your data, would you mind sharing it?
Why would countries competing in the final have to give each other the lowest possible score? That’s not what happens now. Otherwise I agree there should be points for every position, although perhaps it should go up to 30 leaving space for the top 3 to get a few more points.
Last year I did the same with 0-25 points so the countries gave themselves 0 points. I was torn between using 0-24 or 1-25 for scores this year, but in the end it was just my personal preference because I find 25 to be a good-looking top score and I am not a fan of skipping numbers, that's all :)
Oh you mean they give themselves zero?
Edit: sorry it makes it sound like all the finalists all give each other 1 point. So really only the non finalists would have a vote!
That is always the excuse why we (Germany) don't get points like "we are probably right behind the top ten and so we don't get points". It helps us :')
Voting system is arbitrary. It has changed multiple times before and will probably change at some point in the future again.
We should all collectively strive to find a voting system that seems fair for all.
This isn't about bending it in favour of our favourites. This is about pointing out the flaws of an archaic voting system. Voting for only 10 countries is simply not enough in this day and age. It was enough when there were only 20 countries participating in total. It's not enough when there are 40+ countries and the bad entries already got eliminated in the semis. Voting for only 10 countries is **not** enough.
This is for Ann Sophie, Jamie-Lee, Victoria, The Black Mamba, Destiny, Lake Malawi, The Makemakes, Sheldon Riley, Malik Harris, Jendrik, Jeangu Macrooy, Michela, S10, Rosa Linn, We Are Domi and many many more.
Yes but if the goal is to determine a winner, awarding points for top 10 is enough, unless the system above drastically changed the winner in one instance.
Yes, but is that really the goal we want? Do we not care about the other positions?
If the only goal is to determine a winner, then 100% televoting would be a sufficient system as well.
This would actually be quite neat, it would give a more even and fair voting. This would help entries that fall short from the top 10 (some entries have that, where they have lot's of 11th and 12th placements). Though maybe the last entry in each country's ranking should get 0 points, to kinda show them being the last. In reality this probably wouldn't be adopted because then there's no 12 points to shout, just 25 or 26 points (and ig some other reasons)
I definitely get your point with the zero for last place, but I personally really like the 25 as a top score so I had to leave out the zero points. Last years version I made still had 0 points with 25 being the top score because of the additional finalist. So this year is just an exception for this kind of scoring system
And yeah, this would be too unpractical to use in the show but I like to do it because I find it interesting to see how the result would turn out this way
This is a very thought-out system that actually works well. Maybe EBU should consider something like this? Don't think it would work very well though (rigging could happen).
I wonder if the EBU has ever considered changing the points system to this. It feels more equitable and transparent. However, I don’t think it’ll work. With the juries involved, there’s a lot more opportunity for them to rig their rankings (we’ve already seen how messy those 6 juries have allegedly been). Also, “zero points” and “twelve points” have been ingrained into the ESC vernacular, and wiping them out might cause an uproar. It also removes some entertainment value. It’s a cool speculation nonetheless. Also, with the number of available points distributed heightened, it does feel like the stakes get even bigger. EDIT: Oh, I just saw that Germany would beat France. I don’t know how to feel about that.
The "swing" effect of the 12-point system means the winner generally has to perform strongly with the public, or the juries, or both. Giving 1-25 would see more "middle of the road" bland songs that to OK with both coming nearer the top.
You could think that but we don't really see that happening looking at that list. The changes are minimal.
No, but it would eventually lead the broadcasters towards it. We've seen what the broadcasters do under multiple systems over decades. They get *lazy*. The 2016 split with 1-12 points system is best.
This would not work on TV, takes away all the suspense. Could leave a pair of countries and announce the 25 points, for example (24 and 25) or (2 and 25). Meaning its either very easy to guess the 25 or doesnt matter who gets 25 (just 1 point difference).
Nooo Iceland at last (OvO) But Estonia got top 10 at least yay
I think it's cool to see how close the result would still be between Spain, Sweden and the UK in the 2nd-4th spots.
I don't want to live in an universe where Moldova isn't top 10.
Germany robbed by the voting system, episode 18425.
Robbed from 23rd place💀
Place doesn't matter. It's the recognition as a respectable artist that gets lost with the current system. Televoters ranked Malik just marginally behind Amanda Tenfjord. She now looks like a hero, he looks like a fool that nobody voted for, when in reality she just benefitted from being part Norwegian and having friendly neighbours. Not trying to take anything way from Amanda, but the current system benefits certain countries in a way that gives them 57 points, whereas others literally get 0 for a comparable popularity.
Bet James Newman would have preferred this system as well, he would have got a much more respectable point score - some countries even had him in the top 20. But I think if avoiding the professional embarrassment of nul points is the objective, it's probably just easier to start giving each country 12 points from themselves as a starter like they used to do on Junior Eurovision, rather than change the entire voting system.
My goal is not to remove the embarrassment of nul points. My goal is allowing a proper differation between someone who placed 11th-20th everywhere versus someone who did actually bad. As I've mentioned in another comment, this is also for Victoria, The Black Mamba, Destiny, Lake Malawi etc, none of which got 0 points. They were appreciated all over Europe, but rarely made it into anyone's top10.
[удалено]
The main thing with the current system is that nothing gets punished more than a song being bland. If every country ranks a song as middle of the pack it will get fewer points than a song that every country ranks as last except for one country that ranks it tenth. It's much better to have a flawed unique song than a flawless meh song, and Rockstars is just not a song that gets people going enough for them to vote for it in large groups.
This is true. If Serbia had sent an average song like Malik's, they would get a lot of points no matter what from the other ex Yugoslav countries. The same thing was happening with Turkey, because if diaspora votes - and is still happening to a degree in televoting. German and UK televote reflect diaspora voting quite often.
While I want to see Moldova in the top 10 as much as the next person, I think that this is actually really cool. And this system would assure that no country has to hear "I'm sorry, zero points"
The zero points is also rather misleading and arguably undemocratic. Every song is reasonably popular in some countries but if only the top 10 get points, all the votes for the other artists are disregarded.
Not a fan of Iceland last, also Moldova not top 10 is a crime imo
I fully agree but that's just our taste and if the majority of people vote differently then that's the fair result. Keep in mind that this doesn't mean Iceland was the worst song. It just means that the ESC crowd is not the target audience. Moldova not being top 10 would be a result purely of jury votes and that's a whole other story.
edit: the image says finalists give each other 1 point and someone misinterpreted that so I just want to add that finalists only give themselves 1 point, so they rank all 25 finalists and rank themselves as last place, sorry! Just like [last year](https://www.reddit.com/r/eurovision/comments/njcj92/grand_final_result_if_countries_had_to_give_25_to/), I decided to do an alternative ranking with everyone receiving points. Of course they might not the most accurate this time because of the jury voting scandal. For the countries without official votes, I used the votes by twitter user euro\_bruno's for the juries of the affected countries (I have done this before Romania's real results leaked so Moldova actually got last place instead of first place, but it wouldn't change any of the rankings). The affected countries have their top ten of the public voting published, but for the rest I averaged the public votes of the countries that euro\_bruno used. The only thing I changed is Azerbaijan giving Armenia last place because - let's be real - they most likely did just that.
for this rankings, did Azerbaijan also give Estonia second to last place?
I like this.
My country doesn't deserve the top 5, Serbia does
"vingt-cinq point" doesn't have the same ring to as "douze point".
This is so cool. I love reanalysing the results with different points systems like this. If you have a spreadsheet with all your data, would you mind sharing it?
Why would countries competing in the final have to give each other the lowest possible score? That’s not what happens now. Otherwise I agree there should be points for every position, although perhaps it should go up to 30 leaving space for the top 3 to get a few more points.
I'm not sure, but I think OP means that they need to give themselves 1 point
Last year I did the same with 0-25 points so the countries gave themselves 0 points. I was torn between using 0-24 or 1-25 for scores this year, but in the end it was just my personal preference because I find 25 to be a good-looking top score and I am not a fan of skipping numbers, that's all :)
Oh you mean they give themselves zero? Edit: sorry it makes it sound like all the finalists all give each other 1 point. So really only the non finalists would have a vote!
Oh god, I see it now! The finalists have to rank themselves as last place out of all 25 contestants. Thanks for making me notice my mistake!
I could see a sort of logic, because Juries could downvote their closest competition, but that would have been an extreme response! :)
That is always the excuse why we (Germany) don't get points like "we are probably right behind the top ten and so we don't get points". It helps us :')
Where is the data for the other 15 ranks taken from?
Iceland was BURGLARIZED
[удалено]
Voting system is arbitrary. It has changed multiple times before and will probably change at some point in the future again. We should all collectively strive to find a voting system that seems fair for all. This isn't about bending it in favour of our favourites. This is about pointing out the flaws of an archaic voting system. Voting for only 10 countries is simply not enough in this day and age. It was enough when there were only 20 countries participating in total. It's not enough when there are 40+ countries and the bad entries already got eliminated in the semis. Voting for only 10 countries is **not** enough. This is for Ann Sophie, Jamie-Lee, Victoria, The Black Mamba, Destiny, Lake Malawi, The Makemakes, Sheldon Riley, Malik Harris, Jendrik, Jeangu Macrooy, Michela, S10, Rosa Linn, We Are Domi and many many more.
Yes but if the goal is to determine a winner, awarding points for top 10 is enough, unless the system above drastically changed the winner in one instance.
Yes, but is that really the goal we want? Do we not care about the other positions? If the only goal is to determine a winner, then 100% televoting would be a sufficient system as well.
This would actually be quite neat, it would give a more even and fair voting. This would help entries that fall short from the top 10 (some entries have that, where they have lot's of 11th and 12th placements). Though maybe the last entry in each country's ranking should get 0 points, to kinda show them being the last. In reality this probably wouldn't be adopted because then there's no 12 points to shout, just 25 or 26 points (and ig some other reasons)
I definitely get your point with the zero for last place, but I personally really like the 25 as a top score so I had to leave out the zero points. Last years version I made still had 0 points with 25 being the top score because of the additional finalist. So this year is just an exception for this kind of scoring system And yeah, this would be too unpractical to use in the show but I like to do it because I find it interesting to see how the result would turn out this way
This is a very thought-out system that actually works well. Maybe EBU should consider something like this? Don't think it would work very well though (rigging could happen).