YEARLY JURY HATE THREAD

[Sammy]

Yes! I was just about to say exactly the same thing

There's undeniably a correlation between results and the odds, but odds are specifically trying from the outset to reflect the final results as accurately as possible. And what's more likely: a) a prediction metric being vaguely predictive, or b) 215 jurors from around Europe secretly conspiring to copy the odds rather than just rank a few songs, with the final purpose of this being...?

It could also be that both jurors AND odds are influenced in the same way by a so called third factor, in a way that their results correlate. In that case, Jurors do not vote BECAUSE of the odds but the third factor makes them vote SIMILAR to the odds.
Let‘ ssee what this third factor could be..... the weather? The rotation of the earth?...... difficult quetsion. The songs maybe? ....... Naaaah, that seems unlikely!

Btw: has anyone up to now ractually calculated the correlation? I rather doubt there is a real significant one, cause to get a valid result the data sample of about 60 (which would be the last 30 years) would be rather small and I doubt that we have all the odds from the last 30 years or even longer. Just comparing the last, lets say five years produces no reliable (statistical) result.

 

[Lupus]

sour grapes? you smell an entire vat of sulphuric acid henny

Sulphuric acid isn't actually that pungent. Try trifluoroacetic acid - it's like vinegar on steroids. I caught a whiff once and it basically ran up my nostrils and started beating up my brain I think that's what he smelling and this is coming from someone who had Israel 41st for the year

 

[LalehForWD]

It could also be that both jurors AND odds are influenced in the same way by a so called third factor, in a way that their results correlate. In that case, Jurors do not vote BECAUSE of the odds but the third factor makes them vote SIMILAR to the odds.
Let‘ ssee what this third factor could be..... the weather? The rotation of the earth?...... difficult quetsion. The songs maybe? ....... Naaaah, that seems unlikely!

Btw: has anyone up to now ractually calculated the correlation? I rather doubt there is a real significant one, cause to get a valid result the data sample of about 60 (which would be the last 30 years) would be rather small and I doubt that we have all the odds from the last 30 years or even longer. Just comparing the last, lets say five years produces no reliable (statistical) result.

As music industry professionals, juries vote from instructions and rules in a current professional context. With similar knowledge it should be possible, maybe even easy to predict their votes. Which is probably done. If and in that case in what extent, jurors glance at odds would of course be impossible to know and would probably work in contradictable ways, an unknown factor. As far as I know, there's no odds on the jury vote, the predictions are made on both tele vote and jury vote. So there's definitly more than two variables to consider. I'm no statistician and I wouldn't have a clue how to even begin calculate this.

 

[midnightsun]

The lastest numbers published by realest show that juries voted for songs that were (mostly) songs in the top 10, 15 odds since 2013. Before, it wasn’t the case that much.

All I‘m saying is I BELIEVE juries try to be close to the public favs (in that case the odds - which are influenced mostly by Eurovision fans and voting patterns and not the random viewer of the final). Most times it will work because some songs are outstanding and public and juries will both vote for them. Nobody will notice the jury voting pattern. This year it was obvious because the general public taste was very different. Neither Eurovision fans (who bet) nor juries could see this happen. This didn’t affect the winner nor a few other songs but especially songs in the bottom after the jury vote. So how comes jury ranked Michael Szpak that low? Or Ukraine? Denmark? Italy? When obvious half of Europe loved those songs? It‘s really not probable (to me) ALL jury members from all of Europe are so much different in their opinion from ALL viewers. Could it be because those songs were low in the odds?

I say yes, you say no...

(... you say stop and I say go go go... no, just kidding *lol*).

Okay, that’s all for now, folks. Won’t participate in this topic (at least concerning jury influenced by odds? topic) any more because I‘d repeat myself. It‘s ok if nobody shares my thought. In the end it doesn’t matter anyway because we never had an overall winner who wasn‘t at least in both top 3, jury and public. Which means both parties agreed on the winner, somehow.

 

[Realest]

Juries can only give Points to 10 Countries is what most People forget and if I was Jurymember I couldnt see a Possibility to put Ukraine or Denmark in my Top10, although at least Denmark was very strong. Also I have to mention that DYO went Platin in Sweden and that the Video looks like from the MTV VMAs, so it makes Sense that Juries saw the Appeal in it. I doubt this has anything to do with the Odds.

 

[Alaska49]

once again, the argument is brilliant. "if i were a jury member i would not give points to ukraine and denmark, so i doubt odds were a factor". i don't know why there is discussion when one is so obviously right.

odds are so obviously a self-fulfilling prophecy and a factor in jury results that alexander rybak himself called it out years ago. until he came back, got really high in the odds and they suddenly stopped being a problem, that is. they are not the only factor - or cesar wouldn't have fallen ass backwards into a jury victory this year - but they are bad for the contest in general and ebu should do something about it.

 

[Realest]

once again, the argument is brilliant. "if i were a jury member i would not give points to ukraine and denmark, so i doubt odds were a factor". i don't know why there is discussion when one is so obviously right.

odds are so obviously a self-fulfilling prophecy and a factor in jury results that alexander rybak himself called it out years ago. until he came back, got really high in the odds and they suddenly stopped being a problem, that is. they are not the only factor - or cesar wouldn't have fallen ass backwards into a jury victory this year - but they are bad for the contest in general and ebu should do something about it.

No, I just want to make clear that its difficult in general to put certain Entries in the Top10 although theyre good and in the End this leads to such a huge gap between the TV and the JV.
Regarding the Odds, I agree. I also wished that this would be forbidden.

 

[Sammy]

As music industry professionals, juries vote from instructions and rules in a current professional context. With similar knowledge it should be possible, maybe even easy to predict their votes. Which is probably done. If and in that case in what extent, jurors glance at odds would of course be impossible to know and would probably work in contradictable ways, an unknown factor. As far as I know, there's no odds on the jury vote, the predictions are made on both tele vote and jury vote. So there's definitly more than two variables to consider. I'm no statistician and I wouldn't have a clue how to even begin calculate this.

Exactly. When I reconsidered it, you can only correlate 2 variables to each other so actually, you could only correlate one countries odds with the same country's jury vote in the same year..... You can imagine the number of correlations this would produce.....

 

[Realest]

My Ranking for the Juryvotings of the last 10 years:

01. 2018
02. 2010
03. 2012
04. 2014
05. 2013
06. 2015
07. 2009
08. 2017
09. 2016
10. 2011

 

[midnightsun]

Regarding the Odds, I agree. I also wished that this would be forbidden.

Agreed, but odds are there since I don't know... even at the beginning of Eurovision there were the bookies' favourites. It's just that people are really aware of the odds since the 2000s. I am very curious how also a (tele) voting would go without people knowing the odds.

Or would you vote for a country that's very low in the odds (mostly talking about underdogs in the semis)? It's rather not very likely, one would think it's a waste of money as those countries can't stand a chance. And so a doom loop starts. Songs that are at the bottom odds from the very beginning won't make it to the top, that's for sure.

Bookies in the 80s and 90s (I don't know about the 50-70s) often predicted countries as winners who landed at the bottom in the end. This wouldn't and couldn't happen these days.

But that's also a different topic.

 

[Alaska49]

i can't resist a ranking lmao #loser

RANKING OF JURY COMPETENCE (low ranking means they were in my opinion contradictory or insidious or just redundant)
1- 2010
2- 2009
3- 2012
4- 2016
5- 2011
6- 2017
7- 2013
8- 2014
9- 2018
10- 2015

only the first three i have only the same amount of issues i normally have with the televote. the other six are all stupid in some capacity.

 

[Realest]

Most Hated Songs by the Professional Jurymembers from Semi1:

FYROM 23
Belarus 18
Azerbaijan 13
Iceland 13
Armenia 9
Czech Rep. 7
Estonia 6
Lithuania 5
Greece 4
Cyprus 3
Ireland 2
Kroatia 1
Bulgaria 1
Belgium 1
Israel 1
Switzerland 1
Albania 1
Finland 1
Austria 0

Most Liked by the Professional Jurymembers from Semi 1:

Austria 18
Israel 16
Cyprus 14
Belgium 8
Albania 7
Lithuania 7
Estonia 6
Czech 6
Azerbaijan 6
Switzerland 4
Ireland 4
Belarus 3
Greece 3
Kroatia 3
Bulgaria 3
Armenia 1
FYROM 1
Iceland 0
Finland 0

 

[Realest]

Most hated Songs by the Professional Jurymembers of Semi 2:

San Marino 23
Poland 15
Montenegro 13
Russia 13
Georgia 13
Moldova 7
Hungary 4
Denmark 4
Malta 2
Serbia 2
Slovenia 2
Netherlands 2
Ukraine 2
Romania 1
Sweden 1
Australia 1
Norway 0
Latvia 0


Most Liked Songs by the Professional Jurymembers of Semi2:

Sweden 42
Moldova 12
Australia 10
Norway 7
Romania 6
Slovenia 5
Netherlands 5
Denmark 4
Ukraine 4
Latvia 4
Serbia 3
Malta 1
Montenegro 1
Georgia 1
San Marino 0
Russia 0
Hungary 0
Poland 0

 

[Chorizo]

I smell sour grapes.

Apparently you don't know what this expression means. If I had said "Good we didn't win. Third place is much better than that first place up there", it would have been sour grapes.

 

[Chorizo]

Please don’t answer my questions with questions, I at least have the respect to answer yours. Popularity doesn’t equal quality, but I still enknowledge that a piece of art fills a function when it appeals to a mass (or even a small group). I’m not saying anything subjective about the Israelian entry, but if it was 3rd in the jury vote and 1st in the televote out of 43 entries, why should I state it has zero quality? Because only my opinion is essential?

I didn't say that it has zero quality but it's far from being a decent winner.

 

[BernadetteCydonia]

- Can the song be a radiohit and also work outisde ESC

Well that's a bullshit criteria to judge on, I tell you what. If this factored in any of judges decision then how come Ukraine only finished with 11 points?! Is the specific English diction automatically makes the song not a potential hit?! The stage show was also "creative" enough and yet still the slander...

As well as if this criteria mattered more, Salvador wouldn't have won the jury votes tbh. APD is not a radiohit yet juries still supported it and then forgot to support the rest of non-radio hits when necessary the year after Salvador's.

 

[BernadetteCydonia]

Stolen from Reddit

yep it does look like jury hurt Hungary quite so much. but damn didn't expect them to punch Czech Republic in the guts too. So if you're from North or West (and Germanic), your pop is acceptable but if you're Slavic then your attempt at radiofriendliness is automatically atrocious?! :? Delete the Slavic anti-bias fat.

 

[Storm]

Juries are supposed to get a different result than the televote, otherwise there would be no need for juries.

 

[BernadetteCydonia]

Juries are supposed to get a different result than the televote, otherwise there would be no need for juries.

yea but not outright slander/praise some songs based on their geography 0_0

 

[Hele.]

Every year I'm saying the same. Jury has way too much impact! How 215 people in total can have same impact as millions of televotes? I think jury improved quality of contest but resulted as well in countries now going "too safe" which limit them to try to send some more risky entries, songs, choreographic but almost everyone is now trying to find that balanced average. I think jury made its role to prevent joke entries but same outcome could be done if they have 33% or 25% of impact and not 50%! It is obvious that some countries lobby is too strong and when we look jury path in previous years, despite all those years different professionals very giving their rankings, sum of countries that is every year awarded and favored by jury is always same. When we speak every year "who profited most from jury" few countries always will be offered as answer. Others do not have such strong lobbies and is not fair that they can impress millions of viewers but few groups of "5 expert professionals" ruin their chances. This is something, generally speaking, that doesn't feel fair.
Such small group of people can be easily manipulated and it is obvious many of votes could be set before.

Anyway, this is Mladen from Balkanika. He openly speaks how he heard jury lobbying-trade talks. People that were openly talking about votes setting up didn't realize it was him as he was "camouflaged". He starts to speak about it at 2:57 in video.