It's not that surprising if the jury & televoting winner doesn't even rank in top 5 overall, with North Macedonia being 7th and Norway being 6th. It was the year where the juries and the public had the most different opinions on each other.
Imagine the controversy that will be after that. Fake fans of eurovision made a big fuss this year over Loreen, who was 1st and 2nd. Imagine what they would do if an entry wins by not winning any of the votes.
Well, I think one of the reasons why 2016 and 2019 has lots of those was most likely being there's disagreements with either juries and televotes (Australia, Russia, Israel, Malta and Poland in 2016 and Sweden, Norway and North Macedonia in 2019) And I think, while 2014 is more likely being imbalance ranking (which is 50/50 and not split juries/televotes).
2013-2015 also used a different system from 2009-2012 that helped entries that placed similarly in the jury and the televote, while entries that flopped in the other vote but did great in the other flopped greatly (like Poland 2014, which was 5th in the televote but was ranked 14th overall. Meanwhile if the current system was used it would’ve ranked 8th.)
@@vem9583also if 2014 used the current system, Malta would also benefitted, at the expense with likes of UK and Italy (both would ended up bottom 5 that year.) Edit: I would also include Azerbaijan
Lot of personal favorites of mine--unsure what that says about me! I think the jury and televote do a good job of checking each other's worst instincts and, in the new system where one can't kill the other, letting their best instincts shine.
@@horilaw424 more tele appeal than Malta, Italy and Bulgaria and people wouldn’t have wanted the same winner type twice in a row, more jury appeal than Russia, Lithuania and my ideal winner Armenia (yes that was too offbeat but still…)
I do sometimes our own Eurovision Song Contest with my friends as juries and televotes. The voting looks like they were really about 40 countries competing etc. And last time when we did that, the winner was 9th in jury and 3rd with televote. It won with 340 points and runner up had one point less - being 5th in televote and 5th in jury 😅
Also Italy 2022 wouldn't make it to that list if they've won the tiebreaker against Greece with the juries (greece ended up 6th with the juries thanks of having more voting countries voted against italy)
We need juries in the semi final right now This doesn't work very well Please No 100% televoting just like 50%/50% jury and Telelvoters like 2016-2022 because it so hard for Telelvoters and Televoters can loose their FAVOURITES if they won't reach to the final
Now I'm wondering what the most extreme possible case of this would be in the 2016-present system. In 2013-2015 (as I stated in my other comment), it could even be possible for a country to place last with both the jury and the public, but still place 1st overall. (Of course, this didn't actually happen, but it would have been theoretically possible.) In the current system, this obviously wouldn't work since a country placing last in both votes would also place last overall now that the overall score is literally just the sum of both individual scores. Basically what would be needed is extremely disagreeing juries and public. Now I think that the lowest average placement would be 13.5th (i.e. we get 25 if we add up the number of countries ranking above them in each of the votes), since any lower and there's at least one country that placed above them in both votes. If a country was 13th in one vote and 14th in the other (assuming a 26-country final), could they still win overall? This would mean that each of the countries would rank above them in one the votes and rank below them in the others. But we could do this by making both the jury votes and the televotes as close to a 13-way or 14-way tie as possible, while the remaining countries all get 0/low points in one of the votes. This would leave the one country that is involved in both near-ties as the only one to get significant points from both votes, boosting them first overall. So yeah, 2016-present system, the lowest a country can place in the vote where they had the higher placement and still win overall is 13th. So I have concluded the most extreme theoretically possible cases for winners: 2013-2015: 26th/27th both votes, 1st overall 2016-present: 13th in both votes (25-country final)/13th in one vote 14th in the other (26-country final), 1st overall
Of course, a country ranking 13th in one vote and 14th in the other and still winning overall would require levels of disagreements between juries and televoters that we've never seen in the entire history of the contest.
Interestingly, this video has no Finnish entries, unlike the video of entries placing lower than BOTH their Jury & Televote rankings - talk about being unlucky (or screwed over) in Eurovision ;) But the one here I'm not the slightest upset about is Ukraine 2016, one of my all-time favourite winners... It truly deserved the win!!!
Idk if this is really accurate, but from what I understand, in the 2013-2015 system, a country could have theoretically placed last with 0 points in both the jury and the public, but still won with the max score overall. Basically each country (except the country itself, of course) would have them ranked 11th in both the jury and the public (putting them just short of receiving any points with the current system), but if the juries and the televotes of each country completely disgareed on the top 10 to the point that the jury's top 10 was the public's bottom 10 and vice versa (with the public's first place being the jury's last place) then each of the 20 countries that would get points with the new system would average at around 13th place for the country, whereas the one placing 11th in both votes would obviously average 11th, giving them the highest average rank in that country and as such, the 12 points from that country. Now assume the same applies to every country, with the same country being 11th in both votes in all of them (except, of course, the one country that is 11th in those votes, since you can't vote for your own country).
In fact, the country doesn't even have to place 11th in each vote (could be 11th and 12th or even 12th and 12th as long as their average ranking remains the highest and, in case of a tie, they are ranked higher in the televote) and/or the bottom 10 of one vote and top 10 of the other (for one country) don't have to line up exactly, as long as none of them have the highest average. Though the 11th place in both votes and exactly lining up top/bottom 10 is one way to ensure this. You could even have the top 2 of a year (with the 2013-2015 system) get nearly all the 12 and 10 point votes (all except the 10-point votes of the 2 countries in question) and have both of them get 0 points with the current system. Both of them would average around 11th-12th in each country (except for their own) while the rest average around 13th or lower.
Well, I guess it wouldn't entirely work because afaik San Marino's points were given as 100% jury. But even then, a song falling only 12 points short of the maximum would still be the winner. Or the country in question theoretically winning could be San Marino, resolving this issue.
I agree That Silent Storm was underrated by Televoting but It doesn't mean Televoting must be banned just because of a good song being "Bad" in Televoting
@@vavah2071 In a way, the televotes had slightly more power in 2023 because the Rest of the World was televoting only. There wasn’t an International Jury.
@@QuaintMelissaK yes but I mean, it would be more logical for each country to have more power in Televoting as people pay to vote while Juries are probably paid to vote lol But, juries are needed and have something That is better, it's That they rank each country while people often vote for only one country and, That's why Televoting winner is often far from the 2nd place when jury voting is more rarely far away from 2nd place
Funny enough, I did a study, looking at the results to see how many countries finished in the same place as their jury, televote, and overall ranking in both the semis and the grand final: Eurovision entries in the same place as jury, televote and overall: Norway-1st (2009) GF Latvia-17th (2010) SF1 Bulgaria-15th (2010) SF2 Germany-1st (2010) GF United Kingdom-25th (2010) GF Azerbaijan-2nd (2011) SF1 Finland-12th (2012) SF1 Sweden-1st (2012) SF2 and GF Serbia-2nd (2012) SF2 Lithuania-14th (2012) GF Denmark-1st (2013) SF1 and GF Russia-2nd (2013) SF1 Slovenia-16th (2013) SF1 Netherlands-1st (2014) SF1 Armenia-4th (2014) SF1 Austria-1st (2014) SF2 and GF Lithuania-11th (2014) SF2 France-26th (2014) GF Russia- 1st (2015) SF1 Georgia-4th (2015) SF1 Sweden-1st (2015) SF2 Norway-13th (2016) SF2 Portugal-1st (2017) SF1 and GF Bulgaria-1st (2017) SF 2 Bulgaria-2nd (2017) GF North Macedonia-18th (2018) SF1 Iceland-19th (2018) SF1 Azerbaijan-5th (2019) SF2 Albania-17th (2019) GF Greece-10th (2021) GF Spain-24th (2021) GF Germany-25th (2021) GF Sweden-1st (2022) SF2 Spain-3rd (2022) GF
On the opposite, we have Croatia 2021when juries awarded her the 10th place. Televoting also 10th place. Overall 11th place and disqualification. Croatia 2021 was unlucky
Interesting if You're The Only One and Scream respectively had represented another country.....whether they would have fared better with juries and finished even higher
@@clarinetmoonesc OK but I think the televote result was a more accurate reflection of the merit of those songs. Juries definitely had it in for Russia in 2016; was it something like 0 points from 13 of them?
In my opinion Russia 2016 had almost no merit at all and was just a cheesy attempt to replicate Heroes' success with even flashier staging- the televote fell for it and in my eyes the jury should've penalised it more
It's even possible with points under the system used at the time but way less likely, the most likely thing that happened was everyone hating spain apart from albania which was enough to give them more points over ireland who probably scored midtable everywhere
@@clarinetmoonesc yeah I kind of got that right after writing this comment 😂 that getting like 12x 23th and 12x 24th would give you higher average tgan 1x 1st and 24x 25th but less points. Still it looks so weird
![All Winners of Eurovision Song Contest [1956-2023]](/img/n.gif)
2 of the songs had to get muted for copyright reasons, apologies!
I'm not a huge fan of that song so it's all good
The fact that all top 4 of 2019 appears in this video is absolutely insane
All because juries & televoting REALLY couldn't agree on what to think about Norway & North Macedonia
@@AgnessaMoAnd Sweden.
@@AgnessaMoyes, they had very different opinions and whoever was Top 6 with both landed in the Top 4.
It's not that surprising if the jury & televoting winner doesn't even rank in top 5 overall, with North Macedonia being 7th and Norway being 6th. It was the year where the juries and the public had the most different opinions on each other.
Jury: Aaaaw, Norway sucks but NM is a Masterpiece!!!
Televote: North Macedonia? Naaaaa, W KEINO!!!
My aesthetic is the juries putting Lithuania 2011 first in the semis and 20th in the final
shame we never got a song that failed to qualify in both systems but qualified anyways through math
I think it couldve happened in 2023 if it had juries
The other way around has happened tho
kinda manifesting 2024 to have a winner that worked out like 2016 and 19.
And a winning country that hasn't won yet or in a long time.
I would rather manifest for the 2024 winner to be agreed between juries and televoters, it hasn't been like that since 2017.
@@dimidrugg9592 Ye but you gotta admit that was pretty boring (No offense)
@@ElainaArcher4 At least there would be no controversy that way.
Imagine the controversy that will be after that. Fake fans of eurovision made a big fuss this year over Loreen, who was 1st and 2nd. Imagine what they would do if an entry wins by not winning any of the votes.
Well, I think one of the reasons why 2016 and 2019 has lots of those was most likely being there's disagreements with either juries and televotes (Australia, Russia, Israel, Malta and Poland in 2016 and Sweden, Norway and North Macedonia in 2019)
And I think, while 2014 is more likely being imbalance ranking (which is 50/50 and not split juries/televotes).
2013-2015 also used a different system from 2009-2012 that helped entries that placed similarly in the jury and the televote, while entries that flopped in the other vote but did great in the other flopped greatly (like Poland 2014, which was 5th in the televote but was ranked 14th overall. Meanwhile if the current system was used it would’ve ranked 8th.)
@@vem9583also if 2014 used the current system, Malta would also benefitted, at the expense with likes of UK and Italy (both would ended up bottom 5 that year.)
Edit: I would also include Azerbaijan
Portugal 2009 my beloved
Mahmood two times lucky
Yes, although he was only 7th with the juries, because he lost a tie break against Greece.
Lot of personal favorites of mine--unsure what that says about me! I think the jury and televote do a good job of checking each other's worst instincts and, in the new system where one can't kill the other, letting their best instincts shine.
Pleased for Carl Espen - Silent Storm, I liked it. wow Duncan Laurence and Mahmood
Interesting to note BOTH Mahmood's songs appeared here.
And let’s not forget Dadi could have done this with Think About Things too, maybe even winning when 3rd both lists!
I'm 100% convinced he would have won
Such a shame :c
@@horilaw424 more tele appeal than Malta, Italy and Bulgaria and people wouldn’t have wanted the same winner type twice in a row, more jury appeal than Russia, Lithuania and my ideal winner Armenia (yes that was too offbeat but still…)
Is it possible for there to be a winner one day who will get third in both but still win? Just wonder if Duncan's "record" can be broken.
If there's around 4 entries getting disagreed between the juries and televoters?, That might sounds possible.
I do sometimes our own Eurovision Song Contest with my friends as juries and televotes. The voting looks like they were really about 40 countries competing etc. And last time when we did that, the winner was 9th in jury and 3rd with televote. It won with 340 points and runner up had one point less - being 5th in televote and 5th in jury 😅
Also Italy 2022 wouldn't make it to that list if they've won the tiebreaker against Greece with the juries (greece ended up 6th with the juries thanks of having more voting countries voted against italy)
I didn't know there were enough of them to make up for a 9 minutes video. 😮
Are you planning to do the same thing but the reverse way?
Of course
We need juries in the semi final right now
This doesn't work very well
Please No 100% televoting just like 50%/50% jury and Telelvoters like 2016-2022 because it so hard for Telelvoters and Televoters can loose their FAVOURITES if they won't reach to the final
I saw the title and immediately thought UA2016.
why do all these songs slap so hard
Now I'm wondering what the most extreme possible case of this would be in the 2016-present system.
In 2013-2015 (as I stated in my other comment), it could even be possible for a country to place last with both the jury and the public, but still place 1st overall. (Of course, this didn't actually happen, but it would have been theoretically possible.)
In the current system, this obviously wouldn't work since a country placing last in both votes would also place last overall now that the overall score is literally just the sum of both individual scores. Basically what would be needed is extremely disagreeing juries and public. Now I think that the lowest average placement would be 13.5th (i.e. we get 25 if we add up the number of countries ranking above them in each of the votes), since any lower and there's at least one country that placed above them in both votes. If a country was 13th in one vote and 14th in the other (assuming a 26-country final), could they still win overall? This would mean that each of the countries would rank above them in one the votes and rank below them in the others. But we could do this by making both the jury votes and the televotes as close to a 13-way or 14-way tie as possible, while the remaining countries all get 0/low points in one of the votes. This would leave the one country that is involved in both near-ties as the only one to get significant points from both votes, boosting them first overall. So yeah, 2016-present system, the lowest a country can place in the vote where they had the higher placement and still win overall is 13th.
So I have concluded the most extreme theoretically possible cases for winners:
2013-2015: 26th/27th both votes, 1st overall
2016-present: 13th in both votes (25-country final)/13th in one vote 14th in the other (26-country final), 1st overall
Of course, a country ranking 13th in one vote and 14th in the other and still winning overall would require levels of disagreements between juries and televoters that we've never seen in the entire history of the contest.
2:47 2nd best ESC song from Ukraine after 2016, why place is so low? 😢
Interestingly, this video has no Finnish entries, unlike the video of entries placing lower than BOTH their Jury & Televote rankings - talk about being unlucky (or screwed over) in Eurovision ;) But the one here I'm not the slightest upset about is Ukraine 2016, one of my all-time favourite winners... It truly deserved the win!!!
Still dont know why dancing in the rain (ESP 14) got so low (in everything, jury, televote and overall)
Idk if this is really accurate, but from what I understand, in the 2013-2015 system, a country could have theoretically placed last with 0 points in both the jury and the public, but still won with the max score overall.
Basically each country (except the country itself, of course) would have them ranked 11th in both the jury and the public (putting them just short of receiving any points with the current system), but if the juries and the televotes of each country completely disgareed on the top 10 to the point that the jury's top 10 was the public's bottom 10 and vice versa (with the public's first place being the jury's last place) then each of the 20 countries that would get points with the new system would average at around 13th place for the country, whereas the one placing 11th in both votes would obviously average 11th, giving them the highest average rank in that country and as such, the 12 points from that country. Now assume the same applies to every country, with the same country being 11th in both votes in all of them (except, of course, the one country that is 11th in those votes, since you can't vote for your own country).
In fact, the country doesn't even have to place 11th in each vote (could be 11th and 12th or even 12th and 12th as long as their average ranking remains the highest and, in case of a tie, they are ranked higher in the televote) and/or the bottom 10 of one vote and top 10 of the other (for one country) don't have to line up exactly, as long as none of them have the highest average. Though the 11th place in both votes and exactly lining up top/bottom 10 is one way to ensure this.
You could even have the top 2 of a year (with the 2013-2015 system) get nearly all the 12 and 10 point votes (all except the 10-point votes of the 2 countries in question) and have both of them get 0 points with the current system. Both of them would average around 11th-12th in each country (except for their own) while the rest average around 13th or lower.
Well, I guess it wouldn't entirely work because afaik San Marino's points were given as 100% jury. But even then, a song falling only 12 points short of the maximum would still be the winner. Or the country in question theoretically winning could be San Marino, resolving this issue.
3:10 Ban the televoting already
I agree That Silent Storm was underrated by Televoting but It doesn't mean Televoting must be banned just because of a good song being "Bad" in Televoting
The televotes balances out the jury…leave it in.
@@QuaintMelissaK Actually, we should keep both voting but with a slightly more power for Televoting like something between 52 and 55% power
@@vavah2071 In a way, the televotes had slightly more power in 2023 because the Rest of the World was televoting only. There wasn’t an International Jury.
@@QuaintMelissaK yes but I mean, it would be more logical for each country to have more power in Televoting as people pay to vote while Juries are probably paid to vote lol
But, juries are needed and have something That is better, it's That they rank each country while people often vote for only one country and, That's why Televoting winner is often far from the 2nd place when jury voting is more rarely far away from 2nd place
Funny enough, I did a study, looking at the results to see how many countries finished in the same place as their jury, televote, and overall ranking in both the semis and the grand final:
Eurovision entries in the same place as jury, televote and overall:
Norway-1st (2009) GF
Latvia-17th (2010) SF1
Bulgaria-15th (2010) SF2
Germany-1st (2010) GF
United Kingdom-25th (2010) GF
Azerbaijan-2nd (2011) SF1
Finland-12th (2012) SF1
Sweden-1st (2012) SF2 and GF
Serbia-2nd (2012) SF2
Lithuania-14th (2012) GF
Denmark-1st (2013) SF1 and GF
Russia-2nd (2013) SF1
Slovenia-16th (2013) SF1
Netherlands-1st (2014) SF1
Armenia-4th (2014) SF1
Austria-1st (2014) SF2 and GF
Lithuania-11th (2014) SF2
France-26th (2014) GF
Russia- 1st (2015) SF1
Georgia-4th (2015) SF1
Sweden-1st (2015) SF2
Norway-13th (2016) SF2
Portugal-1st (2017) SF1 and GF
Bulgaria-1st (2017) SF 2
Bulgaria-2nd (2017) GF
North Macedonia-18th (2018) SF1
Iceland-19th (2018) SF1
Azerbaijan-5th (2019) SF2
Albania-17th (2019) GF
Greece-10th (2021) GF
Spain-24th (2021) GF
Germany-25th (2021) GF
Sweden-1st (2022) SF2
Spain-3rd (2022) GF
On the opposite, we have Croatia 2021when juries awarded her the 10th place. Televoting also 10th place. Overall 11th place and disqualification. Croatia 2021 was unlucky
Samo mi se spava got robbed big time, 24th worth a 4th place
Italy, still in 2023, makes me have a migraine when I listen to the 2022 live version. they absolutely sing better than me, but gah my ears!
Interesting if You're The Only One and Scream respectively had represented another country.....whether they would have fared better with juries and finished even higher
The juries weren't biased against Russia it's the fact that the televote was towards
@@clarinetmoonesc OK but I think the televote result was a more accurate reflection of the merit of those songs. Juries definitely had it in for Russia in 2016; was it something like 0 points from 13 of them?
In my opinion Russia 2016 had almost no merit at all and was just a cheesy attempt to replicate Heroes' success with even flashier staging- the televote fell for it and in my eyes the jury should've penalised it more
the averages seem kinda bullshit cause how someone placing last in both jury and tele could not place last overall omg
It's even possible with points under the system used at the time but way less likely, the most likely thing that happened was everyone hating spain apart from albania which was enough to give them more points over ireland who probably scored midtable everywhere
@@clarinetmoonesc yeah I kind of got that right after writing this comment 😂 that getting like 12x 23th and 12x 24th would give you higher average tgan 1x 1st and 24x 25th but less points. Still it looks so weird
@@clarinetmoonescbased albania
😃
side opinion: why not mute italy 2022 and claim it because of copyright?
i do not like it at all 😂
3:44 Spain should be thankful of the old voting system, as with the new one it would've been another (of a long streak of) flop