Final Running Order revealed

[greece]

Yeah, but what a coincidence if you ask me!

Sweden could have been the opener, but that's not how it works.

I know, how could get bad spot? Especially when Denmark organizes the Contest :?

 

[Leydan]

This, sir, is extremely rude and disrespectful. No song deserves a bashing like this just because it's not a "favorite".

You partly qoute what I say to make it look 10x worse than it is. Don't take the moral high ground with me. The fact of the matter is, People will be bothered if Austria was put first, but They wouldn't be bothered if it was Belarus. I never bashed any singular song or targeted anyone so stop being over dramatic, just stated what is true.

 

[tuorem]

I know, how could get bad spot? Especially when Denmark organizes the Contest :?

That's why deciding the draw is unfair. Otherwise, it's nice not to have songs of the same type right after the other, but unfortunately, the country host favors its closest friends.

 

[greece]

That's why deciding the draw is unfair. Otherwise, it's nice not to have songs of the same type right after the other, but unfortunately, the country host favors its closest friends.

Believe me thus is just the excuse for this new system. Maybe next year and in which half the songs will be, will be decided but the organizers

 

[Leydan]

That's why deciding the draw is unfair. Otherwise, it's nice not to have songs of the same type right after the other, but unfortunately, the country host favors its closest friends.

It has its pro's & con's. While it stops similar songs being grouped together, it is deeply unfair and not "fix" proof. I really thought it would be gone this year, but it wasn't. I expect to go next year for sure.

 

[Mickey]

And why do the producers have to care who is the favorite and who is not? And I ask once again - why would you put a non-favorite in the 1st spot? Just to kill it faster?

The producers shouldn't put the favourite first, they shouldn't put a non-favourite first. It should be a random draw.

 

[LalehForWD]

There's one aspect of this discussion which really bothers me and is truly annoying for both my intellect and my views on society. It is the central assumption behind all of these questions:

1) Why would the host broadcaster favour another broadcaster in an unfair way? What is the motive for such risky action? Since the choices are done in cooperation with EBU, how to justify any unfairness?

Just guess what is to understand behind the lines and judge the plausibility.

And then the reasonable question what are really the indisputable facts regarding the issue:
2) What proof are there that the running order and individual slots actually have a significance? Isn't the nature of surrounding songs even more important?

 

[tuorem]

There's one aspect of this discussion which really bothers me and is truly annoying for both my intellect and my views on society. It is the central assumption behind all of these questions:

1) Why would the host broadcaster favour another broadcaster in an unfair way? What is the motive for such risky action? Since the choices are done in cooperation with EBU, how to justify any unfairness?

Just guess what is to understand behind the lines and judge the plausibility.

And then the reasonable question what are really the indisputable facts regarding the issue:
2) What proof are there that the running order and individual slots actually have a significance? Isn't the nature of surrounding songs even more important?

1) First, because the broadcaster is made up of people like you and me who have a subjective opinion about each songs (and countries). They would be stupid not to use this opportunity to try to guide the votes towards some songs. No one cares about Belarus performing 2nd, but hey you can't mess up with Sweden for example. Even last year, except for Iceland, didn't you find strange that all the Scandinavian countries were to perform just before a commercial break? What about Latvia and Estonia performing so early twice in a row with this system? If that's not unfairness, well imo that's not what I call fairness either.

2) Both are important, statistically your chances aren't the same if you perform 3rd or 19th. I'm really looking forward to a winner performing early these days. If you perform before the host country, or after an entry that gets a lot of attention, of course it will have an impact. Only hardcore fans think it's not important, but for a casual viewer, maybe not.

 

[Mannone]

Way to go Laleh. And I guess we argued in denial of this "effect" last year too.

Why couldn't it be the other way around? If favourites are in some way other than pure chance assigned late starting positions, does that really make the positions, per se, advantageous?

Recall Filips list (below). How many of those winners wasn't already huge favourites before they were assigned starting positions? I would say half of them would have definitely won, by some huge margin indeed, from opening position 1. Molitva, Fairytale, Satellite, Euphoria, Only Teardrops, Wild Dances - they would have all won from any spot. Guarantee. And that is 6 of 10.

There might though be something going on in secret, because the line-up below is clearly significant. But it's likewise clear, at least to me, that it is rather the other way around. Some of the big favourites may have been assigned (or the assigning of positions been manipulated) some more late positions only for cliffhanging reasons. Viewers must have something to wait for. And late favourites secures television ratings for a longer time. Simple as that.

What I think matters the most, significantly during the evening, is the surrounding songs (see Lalehs post above) or especially the song before. Peoples memories are highly momentary. But they are able to judge if one entry is more powerful and/or better held together than the next one. That is what is still.... obvious.

I don't think Sweden wins this year. We won two years ago and this is not our year. In any case I don't think the big favourites would earn anything from starting almost next to each other - if for favourites we take Austria and Sweden. However, according to the list below, 11 and 13 is clearly not perfect positions. 17-21 would be hot spots. Why not Spain? We haven't seen them live yet.

2013: #18
2012: #17
2011: #19
2010: #22
2009: #20
2008: #24
2007: #17
2006: #17
2005: #19
2004: #10 (thumbs up)

Edit: I must also recognize the fact that some feedback effect is always expected. That equals: people have come to believed that late starting positions are advantageous, and accordingly they may be more focused (or somehow expects better songs) during the seemingly hot positions. But again - the positions were not assigned before the favourites became favourites. But after! In sum - the effect is a wholly epiphenomenal feedback illusion (which of course is the same thing as weakly acknowledging it, though still not saying that it actually have some decisive weight for who finally stand as the winner).

 

[tuorem]

Recall Filips list (below). How many of those winners wasn't already huge favourites before they were assigned starting positions? I would say half of them would have definitely won, by some huge margin indeed, from opening position 1. Molitva, Fairytale, Satellite, Euphoria, Only Teardrops, Wild Dances - they would have all won from any spot. Guarantee. And that is 6 of 10.

You refered to years when there was one hot favourite. This year is more open like 2011. Hungary, Estonia, Ireland, Sweden were the favourites but they didn't won since they performed early and next to each other, while Azerbaijan was 19th and won it all.

 

[LalehForWD]

It's obviously the assumption that cheating is a sure thing and that corruption is just a natural part of any event that bothers me. I would personally never assume these things and I pity those who do. Instead there should be a great deal of trust involved and focus on cooperation instead of suspicion. After all, it is a game for fun. And no, it's not naive to trust people in circumstances like this, it's the natural thing to do.

I'm actually not arguing against or for random order or order decided by the producers. My view has always been either slightly curious about the possible factors or indifferent thinking it really doesn't matter at all. Anyone can understand that it's indeed beneficial for the show to let the producer order the songs for maximum entertainment. I doubt a random order would be more "fair" if the song contest part of the show would be put into focus. The eventual advantages or disadvantages of a slot are still there and determined by "luck". A random order will have all the additional disadvantages the producer tried to avoid.

Just sayin - have a nice ESC night!

 

[Mannone]

You refered to years when there was one hot favourite. This year is more open like 2011. Hungary, Estonia, Ireland, Sweden were the favourites but they didn't won since they performed early and next to each other, while Azerbaijan was 19th and won it all.

Azerbaijan was ranked number 4 by the odds-setters. I remember clearly because I did bet for them to win, and it was my favourite song. They were often mentioned as a top candidate before the final. So yes it was a tight year, but we don't have anything suggesting that the starting position had anything to do with it. Look away the winners I mentioned - like you suggest - and we have nothing significant left. Not sufficient data to claim anything significant. We are left with one tight year when starting position 19 won, and maybe - also as you suggest - because the other favourites were surrounded by each other. Your reasoning simply don't hold.

Again, I admit that starting position may have some effect, but looking away the winners I mentioned nothing is left significant, or even interesting.

Honestly, I think Netherlands may have got the perfect position, if any entry. My thinking here is: slow songs may benefit from a late starting position, because people are starting to get tired and a slow song is a better match for the mood at that point. Slow songs starting early, when expectations are high and adrenaline pumping, may be foredoomed to failure. And this is very interesting. A song doesn't have quality in itself, but relative to other songs. In a live contest like this, hormones high and reason low, this is even more important. A song stand out relative to the entry just finished, and relative to hormonal levels. That if anything may be the explananda to why early positions are worse - it's simply harder to match expectations.

AND - if like you suggest - Azerbaijan won because the other entries gathered early, then the gathering of Austria and Sweden likewise wont favour those. That is - the surrounding songs are probably more important than starting position.

Anyway, we are all excited now. Let the show begin!