Contact us

A fair voting system?

midnightsun

Veteran
Joined
February 26, 2016
Posts
3,927
Location
Germany
Let’s discuss the voting system!

Thoughts on how to improve it?

100 % televote, 100% juries or in between?

How can unfairness in televote and juryvote be prevented?

How can influences, like betting odds, manipulation and other stuff be prevented?

Let your thoughts flow!
 

ESCConor

Active member
Joined
September 26, 2018
Posts
383
Here is what I personally think.

I would keep the 50:50 split between the juries and the public as it ensures balance, however I would do the following -:

1. I would keep the number of jurors at five, however instead of each juror ranking their songs from 1-26 and them disrupting 58 points based on how they voted, they would each song out of 10, with 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest, each of their scores would then be added up to give an overall total from that jury collectively, so the highest a country could score would be 50, and the lowest would be a score of 5.

2. I would also keep the number of votes a person is allowed at 20, however they can only vote once for each country, this would ensure a far fairer spread of televotes in general and make it fairer too.

Whilst no system is perfect, these two changes would go a long way to addressing everyone's concerns and it could easily be implemented without any fuss.
 
Last edited:

Ferryman

Active member
Joined
April 9, 2023
Posts
80
Location
Stuggi (for April), Liverpool/Stockport (for May)
The points system is arguably very unfair at a very basic fundamental level.

Points are only awarded to a country when they're placed in a top ten position.

I have done some statistical analysis of this years televoting, and have been a bit surprised by how this 'top ten' method can affect a country's final placing in the televoting.

Germany were placed 24th by this method. When you calculate the average position across all countries televoting, then the mean German position would be 16th. (Germany maybe would not have finished last in the contest using alternative methods.)

Conversely Albania were ranked by the 'top ten' method in televoting position 10. When you calculate their average position, it is actually 20th!

It's all to do with standard deviations of voting patterns for a country, and the 'top ten' method.

I'm currently trying to find the best way to present this data and finding to the forum.
 

ESCConor

Active member
Joined
September 26, 2018
Posts
383
The points system is arguably very unfair at a very basic fundamental level.

Points are only awarded to a country when they're placed in a top ten position.

I have done some statistical analysis of this years televoting, and have been a bit surprised by how this 'top ten' method can affect a country's final placing in the televoting.

Germany were placed 24th by this method. When you calculate the average position across all countries televoting, then the mean German position would be 16th. (Germany maybe would not have finished last in the contest using alternative methods.)

Conversely Albania were ranked by the 'top ten' method in televoting position 10. When you calculate their average position, it is actually 20th!

It's all to do with standard deviations of voting patterns for a country, and the 'top ten' method.

I'm currently trying to find the best way to present this data and finding to the forum.

ditto
 

Maia

Well-known member
Joined
March 8, 2019
Posts
129
I really hope the voting system gets radically overhauled soon, because it's clear it hasn't been working for a long time.

It shouldn't be a top 10 only system. All songs should receive the points they've been given, weighted by the full ranking from each country. There shouldn't be anything left off the table. If Germany was 16th on average across the board, this should be reflected in the scoreboard. No ifs, no buts.

I think viewers should also have the ability to submit their full rankings, similar to how we do via the fan apps. Otherwise the votes can end up being pretty lopsided.

I also wonder if having a field of 26 songs in the final is just far too many in the first place. So many songs get overlooked or forgotten, not because they're bad songs, but because there's just far too much choice. This is where you end up with random and shocking scores which also isn't reflective of song/performance quality. I'd say this is slightly less of an issue in the semi-finals where the field is smaller.

I don't want to see juries eliminated entirely and I understand the need for them, but it should never be possible that a song can receive 376 points in the televotes and still lose, especially when the winner didn't receive any 12 points in the televotes. I don't understand why you would even have a public vote and charge people money when their voice can so easily be invalidated by the opinion of 185 people.

I'd like to see the studio audience incorporated into the vote in some way. They could rank the songs 1st-26th via an app. The juries could then be aggregated with them so that it would be 25% juries, 25% studio (which could be presented as "how the arena voted"), and then 50% televote. This would obviously need to be ironed out to ensure each country was represented equally in the studio, which may not always be possible, but it certainly would be cool if it was. The main thing is just ensuring the contest is more democratic than it feels right now, while also ensuring it doesn't totally revert back to the chaos of the 2000s.
 

midnightsun

Veteran
Joined
February 26, 2016
Posts
3,927
Location
Germany
Thanks for the input everybody!

Trying to formulate my thoughts.

I wrote 'abolish the juries' instinctively some days ago, but thinking about I would actually like to keep the juries but only as a king of 'balancer'. Like an editor who is proofreading. It’s immensely difficult to implement but let’s see if I find a solution.


1. Take measurements before the contest even starts

a) no betting odds before ESC (won’t happen but this is kinda my wish list here ;))

b) no predetermined running order (I‘ll come to this later)

c) have more producers on the show, I‘d say three main. Two of them of neutral countries not participating. (Remember - my wish list, plausibility left aside)

2. Televoting

a) calls should definitely be possible for more than one country because we have countries which wouldn’t get a single call that way probably

b) I like the idea of 1 vote per country limit though

c) raise the prices for one call/sms in countries where it’s cheap (I don’t know whether that’s possible at all because I think it depends on the countries‘ law?)

3. juries

a) more than 5 jurors, no experts unless they are really familiar with ESC. Let it be all kinds of random people. Brief them well before the voting.

b) should rate the country based on different criteria (I‘ll come to them in a different post)

c) should not vote in the current way by distributing points (12-10-8-7…) but rather add extra points to the points in the televote (also coming to it at a later time) - depending on whether the score of juries is higher than the televote or not.

d) should balance out irregularities in televote like diaspora or neighbour voting (for example: Denmark‘s song is last in any televote other than in Sweden, Norway and Iceland where it got 12 points). In this case, jury vote should count more than the televote. If different juries had ranked the song also high the televote is valid as it is. If not a complicated system which I haven’t elaborated yet will do the math how many points are subtracted :ROFLMAO:

4. presentation

a) televoting first in the usual way they are presenting the jury vote currently. In the meanwhile notaries (preferably also from neutral countries) are watching the irregularities and then add the jury vote which also has to be monitored by notaries beforehand (before the GF). Same rules apply to them. If a song is 26th in the average rank but Greece‘s song got 12 points in Cyprus' jury vote than that song should get a small value of points substracted from any other jury vote.

Sounds complicated … which it is … :LOL: haven’t thought it through till the end but these were my first thoughts.
 

Decayingbooks

Well-known member
Joined
March 4, 2019
Posts
1,286
Location
Portugal
The only way to make the televote fairer is make it free and instead of 20 votes, each person has to send their top 10, I would say that maybe they should send their top 26, but raking 26 songs would be a lot of work for casuals, so make it a top 10 and it would probably be easy to implement by using the eurovision app.

The judges things are more complicated. I don't believe that a broadcarter will tell their judges who they should vote, but if the favorites to win are from diferent music genres the broadcaster can invite judges that would favor one genre over the other, a musician with a background classical music most likely won't vote for a heavy metal song and vice versa.
So to prevent this increase the number of jurors to 10 or 15 and make it diverse, diferent ages, diferent professions and diferent music backgrounds.

Biases regarding countries voting one another every year I don't see it necessarily as unfair, because many countries share the same music industry and have similar tastes in music.
 

HayashiM

Veteran
Joined
January 26, 2019
Posts
4,174
Location
Prague, Czech Republic
My ideas in general (not limited to improving the scoring system)
  • Keep the juries' points as they are, ":12: points for country xyz" is Eurovision's trademark we can't really get rid of. Alternative methods of calculating their points could be considered.
  • On the other hand, either expand every jury to 10 members, or make it 5 actual professionals. In my books stage directors, former HoDs, spokespersons or DJs should not be judges - they are music salespeople and can be in fact completely clueless (one example for all: Jan Bors' youtube videos). If you don't know how to write, sing or play a song, you have no place to be in a jury that's called professional.
  • Double the televote's weight by rewarding a country's top 15 instead of top 10, with the total of one country's points equal to 116 (2×58) points and its winner getting something like 18 points. In that way, the televote gets more power that gets however spread out more. The advantages are 1) basically eliminating zero pointers 2) the juries are still relevant - the televote winner's cap is only 50% higher than the juryvote winner's 3) the televote gets a bit more power, meaning less public backlash
  • How would things go if everyone decided to bring a humongous prop - would we be having a 5 hours long show with a short interview before every act? ;) if you can't install your prop within the time alloted for a postcard, you should not be allowed to have it (just as you can't opt to sing for 4 minutes instead of 3, just because your song is from Sanremo).
  • As I have mentionned elsewhere, I'd love to see a drafted running order starting with the worst long term placed country. Each country could still draw their half / third / quarter if the producers are too afraid of this meaning the "best acts" would all go at the beginning. Schedule-wise, if you give every country's representative 3 minutes to draft after the second semi, you will still be done earlier than the current system. Plus you have another exciting event you can broadcast to the masses.
  • Should we still have something like 37 countries in the longer term, only make advance 9 countries per semi.
  • Start an hour earlier - most participating countries don't appreciate ending at 1 in the morning. And after all, this is a family show.
 
Last edited:

heke1988

Well-known member
Joined
March 4, 2018
Posts
3,726
Location
Finland
Juries power to 25-35% - Televote power 75-65% (Juries vote only in GF like in this year)

More jury members (for exampel 10) and they should ranking songs by every four criteria

Running order should be decided as random (Semifinals and GF). Austria was screwed by performing first in GF, like Finland in 2011.
 

HarryUK

Veteran
Joined
April 12, 2014
Posts
3,996
Location
London / Kent, UK
I actually really like the old Melfest style system where they translated number of votes into points and allocated it
 

rasmuslights

Veteran
Joined
November 15, 2020
Posts
2,465
Juries power to 25-35% - Televote power 75-65% (Juries vote only in GF like in this year)

More jury members (for exampel 10) and they should ranking songs by every four criteria

Running order should be decided as random (Semifinals and GF). Austria was screwed by performing first in GF, like Finland in 2011.

I'm afraid I have to disagree 25 % is basically nothing. Look at Finland where there's no way anyone beats the televote winner. It's pointless.

Imagine Moldova coming 2nd last year. Imagine Croatia and Poland finishing in the top 10 this year and Blanca last.

Be serious for one second.
 

Realest

Well-known member
Joined
May 23, 2017
Posts
7,769
Location
Germany
Probably the most fair (only TV) Results..


Fwb0AvmWcAQ37Zp
 

Ausar Vandermark

Active member
Joined
May 21, 2023
Posts
14
Location
Halidom of the High Elysian Gardens
The idea to limit televote to only one vote per country is simply unrealistic. I don't know about you guys out there, but around here it isn't uncommon that Eurovision brings together a large crowd of family members or friends that do watch together. Often the voting is done using the landline, with the various family members / friends all voting their respective favorites. Which can (and will) happen to overlap.

Simply expecting that everyone and their dog will use a personal device exclusively for themselves and not share the 20 votes with a spouse/kid/friend isn't lining up with existing behaviour and traditions. And forcing people to do that will most likely cause a loss of interest in - and revenue for - the voting, so I don't see them going that way.

I think the juries need some serious rework. Personally, I'd like them to be bigger than 5 people and also commited to pick their members from different criteria, like professions, walks of life and age groups. I certainly don't want to see a continuation of repurposing last year's contestants as jury members.
 

AndroZeus

Well-known member
Joined
March 28, 2023
Posts
626
The idea to limit televote to only one vote per country is simply unrealistic. I don't know about you guys out there, but around here it isn't uncommon that Eurovision brings together a large crowd of family members or friends that do watch together. Often the voting is done using the landline, with the various family members / friends all voting their respective favorites. Which can (and will) happen to overlap.
I had no idea that people did this. Thanks for the information!
 

EscGeek

Veteran
Joined
December 12, 2011
Posts
12,156
Location
Milky Way
Imagine Moldova coming 2nd last year. Imagine Croatia and Poland finishing in the top 10 this year and Blanca last.

Be serious for one second.
Sometimes the fiction is better than reality :cool:

But in all seriousness, i'm glad Estonia, Australia and to some extend Austria got saved by the juries, which is why i'm on the fence about this.

Basically what AndroZeus said in post #15, I'll support whatever sytem that makes my faves shine. :p
 

heke1988

Well-known member
Joined
March 4, 2018
Posts
3,726
Location
Finland
Ysterday I came up with this idea for voting system:

Televote: 15/14-12-10-8-7-6-5-4-3-2

Jury: 12-10-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1

This system televotes has a little bit over 55% value and juries a little bit under 45%.
 

HerrWaschbär

Active member
Joined
May 25, 2023
Posts
2
Location
Germany
I think the voting system should be completely in televoting, the European public should decide the winner and not be outvoted by like 160 people. You can't rate music objectively anyway. The juries tend to reward a specific formula instead of creative and unique entries quite often. But there are obviously problems with televoting as well, as there are countries, like e.g. Serbia, which get a lot of automatic points, because a lot of Serbians live abroad. However, we can alternate the televoting system to give cases like this less influence on the results. Completely eliminating any influence is not possible, of course.

Here, I did make an alternative televoting ranking giving 25 to the first place in every country down to one point for the 25th place. In the case of San Marino, I've used the jury results, because the televoting results are completely made up anyway.



There are some very significant differences. Albania fell from 10th to 21st, Armenia fell from 13th to 20th, Lithuania fell from 15th to 19th. All these countries are countries that usually benefit from very high points from only a few countries due to a lot of people with this nationality living in the other country and maybe also a few other reasons. Serbia stays at 24th, but they have placed very low in the final this year anyway. Unfortunately, we do not have the full semifinal televoting results, but I would guess that Serbia would have been replaced by Latvia in the final with this system and this might've been the only qualifier that would've changed. Other countries like Czechia, Germany and France improved their placements as a consequence, of course.
 

rasmuslights

Veteran
Joined
November 15, 2020
Posts
2,465
I think the voting system should be completely in televoting, the European public should decide the winner and not be outvoted by like 160 people. You can't rate music objectively anyway. The juries tend to reward a specific formula instead of creative and unique entries quite often. But there are obviously problems with televoting as well, as there are countries, like e.g. Serbia, which get a lot of automatic points, because a lot of Serbians live abroad. However, we can alternate the televoting system to give cases like this less influence on the results. Completely eliminating any influence is not possible, of course.

Here, I did make an alternative televoting ranking giving 25 to the first place in every country down to one point for the 25th place. In the case of San Marino, I've used the jury results, because the televoting results are completely made up anyway.



There are some very significant differences. Albania fell from 10th to 21st, Armenia fell from 13th to 20th, Lithuania fell from 15th to 19th. All these countries are countries that usually benefit from very high points from only a few countries due to a lot of people with this nationality living in the other country and maybe also a few other reasons. Serbia stays at 24th, but they have placed very low in the final this year anyway. Unfortunately, we do not have the full semifinal televoting results, but I would guess that Serbia would have been replaced by Latvia in the final with this system and this might've been the only qualifier that would've changed. Other countries like Czechia, Germany and France improved their placements as a consequence, of course.

I still think we need the jury. Portugal and Spain in the bottom 3 is a crime when acts like Poland, Croatia and Moldova finishing in the top 10.

But I don't hate this point distribution since it does prevent countries with diaspora from being overrated.
 
Top Bottom