Tag Archive for: qualification

From 2013 onwards, field experts, and being approved by the EBU, determine the running order both in the semifinals and the final.

Christen Bjorkman, the key man for the major changes that have been made to Eurovision in recent years – including defining the running order – states that the strongest factors allocating the countries is the genre of the song and its tempo, as well as the colours of the act, whether it is a male/female/band/solo/etc., even the language of the song, the emotion of each song, as well as the time it takes to prepare the props on stage used by the participants.

In this article, we will deal extensively with the Grand Final’s running order and our aim is to answer the question of whether the semi-final qualifying place of the countries is a decisive factor to allocate the countries in the Final.

At the same time, we will try to see if the running order can help countries succeed or fail in the final (excluding the BIG-5 countries and the host country) by combining the running order and the final place, and whether this is taken into account when allocating countries, but also which position has been the most successful in recent years.

---

How does the qualifying place in the semi-final correlate with the Final’s Running Order decision?

While the semi-final qualifying place at the Grand Final is unknown to us, the team knows the results in detail. When announcing which 20 countries qualify for the Grand Final (10 from each semi-final), the team is asked to allocate the countries how they will appear in the Grand Final.

By studying more closely the distribution of the countries in the Grand Final, we see that there is some correlation with their qualifying place. For a better understanding of the research, it is important to separate the running order. Specifically, we held both halves as the organisers (the first half positions 1-13 and the second half positions 14-26).

Based on the above image, we see that there is a uniformity in the running order along with each country’s qualification place. That is, the first 4 places are countries that finished mainly in 3rd to 9th place in their semifinals.

At positions 5, 6 and 7 there are countries that have finished in the top five of the semifinals. It is worth noting that no semifinal winner appeared in the first 6 positions of the Grand Final.

In the 8th, 9th and 10th positions, countries finished from 7th to 10th, while positions 11 to 13 are the countries that finished either in the first two places of the semifinals or in places 6th to 8th.

For the second half, in the places 14-17 there are countries that finished in the semifinals between 4th and 10th, while from positions 18th to 22nd are countries that finished in the top5 of the semi-finals.

In the 23rd place, there are countries that finished outside the top3, while in the 24th and 25th positions are also countries that finished in the top5. Bad news for the countries that appear at the 26th and last position, as 2 out of the 3 countries have marginally passed the semi-finals (8th-10th place).

In the table below (Table 1) one can see the running order per year and the average qualifying place of each position.

Running Order	2018	2017	2016	2015	2014	2013	Average Qualifying Place
1	6	3	3	5	5	–	4.4
2	–	9	9	–	5	9	8
3	8	9	5	3	9	4	6.33
4	9	7	4	3	8	9	6.67
5	4	7	7	–	6	–	6
6	5	4	–	7	2	5	4.6
7	1	2	7	7	4	10	5.17
8	–	2	5	9	7	7	6
9	–	–	–	4	8	4	5.33
10	9	10	–	1	7	2	5.8
11	–	1	–	6	1	–	2.67
12	8	8	6	–	–	7	7.25
13	–	8	1	2	2	6	3.8
14	3	6	8	–	–	5	5.5
15	5	10	10	6	6	–	7.4
16	4	–	4	9	–	–	5.67
17	10	5	10	–	10	8	8.6
18	7	–	1	8	3	1	4
19	3	5	–	2	–	6	4
20	2	6	8	5	4	1	4.33
21	10	–	2	–	3	2	4.25
22	1	–	3	8	9	3	4.8
23	7	4	9	4	–	–	6
24	6	3	7	10	1	3	5
25	2	1	–	1	10	10	4.8
26	–	–	2	10	–	8	6.67

It is impressive that, while position 17th was the most lucky position after giving the victory to 3 countries from 2000 to 2012, we notice that from 2013 onwards, it has taken a slump and is considered the worst position based on the Average Qualifying Place (8.6), but at the same time being the second worst position in the Average Final Place (19.7).

---

How does the running order help countries to repeatt their success they had in the semi-finals?

Many times, we compare the results between semifinals and finals, seeing where a country ended up in the semi-final and how it ended up in the final’s scoreboard.

Sometimes we have seen countries that have done well in the semifinals, but have sank in the final, and we have seen countries that have barely qualified but had a very good place in the final.

How can the running order relate to this imbalance? Can the running order determine the success or the failure of a country in the final in relation to its qualifying place?

In order to detect this percentage, it was necessary to subtract the Final Place from the Qualifying Place, and based on the result, determine which point would be the point of success/failure from the equation.

For the present analysis, the point was -5, that is, any position with a deviation equal to or less than -5 would appear to be successful (=<-5) – e.g. One country qualified in 8th place and finished 15th, so the result is -7 and it is considered a failure. Thus, we have collected the most successful results every year and are as follows (where “-” it means that a BIG-5 country or the host country performed on that position and was not considered):

	2018	2017	2016	2015	2014	2013
13	–	√	√	√	√	√	5/5	100%
25	√	√	–	√		√	4/5	80%
21		–	√	–	√	√	3/4	75%
24		√		√	√	√	4/6	66%
11	–	√	–		√	–	2/3	66%
16		–	√	√	–	–	2/3	66%
9	–		–	√		√	2/4	50%
12	√		√	–	–		2/4	50%
20	√	√				√	3/6	50%
5	√			–	√	–	2/4	50%
14	√	√		–	–		2/4	50%
6	√		–	√			2/5	40%
8	–		√	√			2/5	40%
10			–	√		√	2/5	40%
15	√				√	–	2/5	40%
17		√		–		√	2/5	40%
18		–	√			√	2/5	40%
22	√	–				√	2/5	40%
4	√			√			2/6	33%
7		√			√		2/6	33%
26	–	–	√		–		1/3	33%
19			–	√	–		1/3	33%
23		√			–	–	1/4	25%
1					√	–	1/5	20%
2	–			–			0/4	0%
3							0/6	0%

As we can see in the above table (Table 2), position 13 is the most successful position, since, in all the countries that passed the semi-final process, their final place was up to -5 places below their qualifying place. For example, if a country qualifies in 5th place and appears 13th, the worst place it could take is up to 5 places below, ie 10th.

On the other side, the first 3 positions are, based on statistical data, the most unsuccessful positions, while positions 2 and 3 gather 0% chance to achieve a place equal to or less than 5. For example, if a country qualifies in 8th place and appears in positions 2 and 3, it is certain that its final position will be 14th or below.

We can not ignore, of course, that there were cases where the deviation had a positive sign.

Position 11 retained the same Qualifying Place on the Finals Scoreboard twice (33% – on both occasions, they were winners of the Semi Finals that won the Final, 2014 and 2017). 2 times (33%) also the position 22, where in one case it retained the Qualifying Place (2013) and the other improved the Qualifying Place by 1 on the scoreboard (in 2016 where the country won the final), while the 5, 7, 8, 10, 18, 23 and 25 retained or improved the qualified place (16.6% each).

In fact, we notice that the positions above (5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 18, 22, 23 and 25) are the only positions that have, over the past 6 years, maintained and/or improved the outcome of the country in the Final Scoreboard even once.

---

Which position in the running order shows the smallest deviation of average qualifying place and final’s place?

In order to answer this question, we had to subtract the final place of each country from its qualifying place and then the average of each position to be taken out.

Running Order	2018	2017	2016	2015	2014	2013	Total Average of all years
13	–	-5	-1	-2	-1	-3	-2.4
24	-10	-2	-6	-2	-1	-1	-3.7
21	-11	–	1	–	-2	-4	-4.0
25	0	-1	–	-1	-14	-5	-4.2
9	–	–	–	-4	-6	-4	-4.7
11	–	0	–	-16	0	–	-5.3
8	–	-6	1	-1	-12	-9	-5.4
20	-5	-1	-7	-10	-9	-1	-5.5
12	-3	-6	-2	–	–	-11	-5.5
5	1	-11	-12	–	-2	–	-6.0
18	-7	–	-2	-15	-8	0	-6.4
14	-3	-3	-13	–	–	-8	-6.8
15	-4	-9	-8	-13	-1	–	-7.0
22	0	–	-9	-12	-14	0	-7.0
7	-14	-1	-7	-11	0	-10	-7.2
6	-3	-7	–	-9	-10	-7	-7.2
10	-10	-10	–	0	-13	-3	-7.2
23	-11	0	-11	-7	–	–	-7.3
16	-16	–	-5	-4	–	–	-8.3
4	-3	-9	-13	-4	-7	-15	-8.5
3	-14	-8	-6	-6	-13	-7	-9.0
19	-7	-16	–	-4	–	-11	-9.5
1	-11	-20	-7	-9	-1	–	-9.6
26	–	–	-5	-7	–	-18	-10.0
17	-15	-5	-13	–	-15	-2	-10.0
2	–	-13	-16	–	-11	-13	-13.3

Sorting the table (Table 3) based on the total average of all years per position and so the Final Place does not deviate too much from the Qualifying Place, we see that position 13 has a -2.4 variance (around 2 to 3 places). That is, if a country appears 13th, there is a probability that the final place will have a -2.4 deviation from its qualifying place.

For example, considering the Average qualifying place per position, if a country qualifies 4th and appears at position 13, it is likely that its final place will be as low as 6th or 7th. Based on Table 2, the chances of a country benefiting from the example above are 100% likely to achieve such result.

Instead, position 2 gives the highest Average qualifying place of all years, at -13.3 (around 13 places). That is, if a country qualifies in the 8th place and performs 2nd in the Final, it is highly probable that its final place will be around 13 places below (close to 21st). Based on Table 2, position 2 has a 0% probability of maintaining or improving a country’s qualifying place, then the chances of finishing around 13 positions below the qualifying place are extremely high, almost certain.

---

In conclusion, we can see that the qualifying place may eventually be an important factor in the running order, according to which the countries are evenly distributed in the Grand Final.

Countries that finished in the top five of the semifinals appear in the middle and towards the end of each half, while the countries that finished in the bottom five (6^th-10^th) are filling the gaps, while some countries, in a combination with their position, managed to repeat or even improve the result they achieved in the Semi-Final.

This may be partly justified by the fact that songs that are considered as “favorites”, but also countries that have impressed in the semifinals, do not appear one after another in case of a random allocation, but in different positions from the beginning to the end of the final, hence increasing the interest throughout the final night.

In an interview, Christen Bjorkman said efforts are being made to pop out a song and become the diamond it should be. However, we understand that the trophy can only be won by one country, and therefore, knowing in advance who has the strongest possible package to claim the victory, not to try to deprive it in case of a poor position in the Final – without meaning that they promote it to win.

Do you think these statistics are just random numbers and have nothing to do with reality? Is it important to know the statistics and act likewise? Tell us your opinion.