Post by cheaptrick on May 21, 2006 5:47:28 GMT -5
Good Morning!
When I was watching the voting last night I did notice something a bit odd. Yes, we know certain countries will always vote for each other even if they entered a farting dog, but I felt that the voting was a bit more random than usual for some countries. Given the choice this morning between doing what I should have been doing ( ie marking and preparing next weeks work) and doing some statistical analysis on the scoring, I chose the latter and I've come up with ba few interesting ( well to me anyway) conclusions.
I decided that the best way to start to take a look at it would be to see who gave who what. As I was looking at this I noticed that the top four, even the top 7 had been pretty unanimous as even with the country that had the lowest number of seperate votes, they had received votes from over 78% of the voting countries (rising to 95% for one country!). I then noticed from 8th place onwards that this was where (possibly) the regional bias in voting was coming in, and from what I found you can put countries into one of two catergories:
1. Countries that recieved lots of votes ( but not necessarily high scoring votes)
2. Countries that recieve a few high scoring votes from a few countries.
From doing an average by dividing the total points received by the number of countries who voted for them and then by ranking them in order, you can see which countries fall into catergory 1 or 2 ( and there are a few statistical anomallies which I will come onto later).
___ Voting averages ___ Number of votes
1(21) Spain ___ 9 (a) ___ 2
2(1) Finland ___ 8.6 ___ 34
3(8) Armenia ___ 8.1 ___ 16
4(2) Russia ___ 7.1 ___ 35
4(3) Bosnia ___ 7.1 ___ 32
6(12) FYROM ___ 7 ___ 8
6(13) Croatia ____ 7 ___ 8
8(9) Greece ___ 5.6 ___ 23
9(5) Sweden ___ 5.5 ___ 31
10 (6) Lithuania ___ 5.4 ___ 30
11(18) Denmark ___ 5.2 ___ 5
12(4) Romania ___ 5.1 ___ 34
13(17) Switzerland ___ 5 ___ 6
13(7) Ukraine ___ 5 ___ 29
15(11) Turkey ___ 4.6 (b) ___ 20
16(16) Latvia ___ 4.3 ___ 7
17(10) Ireland ___ 4 ___ 23
17(23) Israel ___ 4 ___ 1
19(20) Moldova ___ 3.7 ___ 6
20(15) Germany ___ 3.6 ___ 10
21(14) Norway ___ 3 ___ 12
22(19) UK ____ 2.5 ___ 10
22(22) France ___ 2.5 ___ 2
24(24) Malta ___ 1 ___ 1
Notes: The median number of votes a country gives is 5.8, so any country receiving a 5.8 average or over is receiving a higer number of 'big' votes.
The countries that have finished above their final position are generally the countries that have benefitted from 'local' voting. The countries that have finished below their final postion are generally countries that have picked up more votes but smaller points scores from a wider variety of countries.
(a) Spain - if it wasn't for Andorra's 12 they would be down near the bottom
(b) Turkey - Turkey recieved 3 12's (from France, Germany and the Netherlands. If you were to remove these three scores they would have an average of 3. Turkey either recieved high scores or low scores - hardly anything in the middle whcih makes them and their position unusual.
Conclusions
To come top 5 in Eurovision you have to pick up votes from over 80% of the voting countries.
A country cannot win with the sole support of it's neighbours/ allies / political block.
Political / friendly voting only affects the middle order. It doesn't affect the result.
The further near the bottom you finish, the more likely it is you have only recieved votes from you neigbours /allies/ political block.
So will this end the debate that Eurovision is decided by politics? I doubt it but we now know differently!
When I was watching the voting last night I did notice something a bit odd. Yes, we know certain countries will always vote for each other even if they entered a farting dog, but I felt that the voting was a bit more random than usual for some countries. Given the choice this morning between doing what I should have been doing ( ie marking and preparing next weeks work) and doing some statistical analysis on the scoring, I chose the latter and I've come up with ba few interesting ( well to me anyway) conclusions.
I decided that the best way to start to take a look at it would be to see who gave who what. As I was looking at this I noticed that the top four, even the top 7 had been pretty unanimous as even with the country that had the lowest number of seperate votes, they had received votes from over 78% of the voting countries (rising to 95% for one country!). I then noticed from 8th place onwards that this was where (possibly) the regional bias in voting was coming in, and from what I found you can put countries into one of two catergories:
1. Countries that recieved lots of votes ( but not necessarily high scoring votes)
2. Countries that recieve a few high scoring votes from a few countries.
From doing an average by dividing the total points received by the number of countries who voted for them and then by ranking them in order, you can see which countries fall into catergory 1 or 2 ( and there are a few statistical anomallies which I will come onto later).
___ Voting averages ___ Number of votes
1(21) Spain ___ 9 (a) ___ 2
2(1) Finland ___ 8.6 ___ 34
3(8) Armenia ___ 8.1 ___ 16
4(2) Russia ___ 7.1 ___ 35
4(3) Bosnia ___ 7.1 ___ 32
6(12) FYROM ___ 7 ___ 8
6(13) Croatia ____ 7 ___ 8
8(9) Greece ___ 5.6 ___ 23
9(5) Sweden ___ 5.5 ___ 31
10 (6) Lithuania ___ 5.4 ___ 30
11(18) Denmark ___ 5.2 ___ 5
12(4) Romania ___ 5.1 ___ 34
13(17) Switzerland ___ 5 ___ 6
13(7) Ukraine ___ 5 ___ 29
15(11) Turkey ___ 4.6 (b) ___ 20
16(16) Latvia ___ 4.3 ___ 7
17(10) Ireland ___ 4 ___ 23
17(23) Israel ___ 4 ___ 1
19(20) Moldova ___ 3.7 ___ 6
20(15) Germany ___ 3.6 ___ 10
21(14) Norway ___ 3 ___ 12
22(19) UK ____ 2.5 ___ 10
22(22) France ___ 2.5 ___ 2
24(24) Malta ___ 1 ___ 1
Notes: The median number of votes a country gives is 5.8, so any country receiving a 5.8 average or over is receiving a higer number of 'big' votes.
The countries that have finished above their final position are generally the countries that have benefitted from 'local' voting. The countries that have finished below their final postion are generally countries that have picked up more votes but smaller points scores from a wider variety of countries.
(a) Spain - if it wasn't for Andorra's 12 they would be down near the bottom
(b) Turkey - Turkey recieved 3 12's (from France, Germany and the Netherlands. If you were to remove these three scores they would have an average of 3. Turkey either recieved high scores or low scores - hardly anything in the middle whcih makes them and their position unusual.
Conclusions
To come top 5 in Eurovision you have to pick up votes from over 80% of the voting countries.
A country cannot win with the sole support of it's neighbours/ allies / political block.
Political / friendly voting only affects the middle order. It doesn't affect the result.
The further near the bottom you finish, the more likely it is you have only recieved votes from you neigbours /allies/ political block.
So will this end the debate that Eurovision is decided by politics? I doubt it but we now know differently!
