How would the results of Eurovision 2018 look under the old system?

Last year we noticed that many of you were interested in the results under the old system we all knew so well. Every country had just one set of points and each country combined televoting and juries. So this year, we’re doing it again. How would the results have looked under the 2009 system?

Why 2009?

The choice for the 2009 system was a logical one this year. In 2017, we used the 2015 system. However, for that system we would need the full televoting rankings from each country. EBU have not given those out this year. They have decided to only give us the televoting top ten results.

That made the 2015 system, with full rankings from both televoting and juries, impossible to use. Instead, we used the 2009 system. In that system, only the top ten from juries and televoters get combined. That system is possible to use for the old results.

The results: Hardly any change in top ten

Looking at the results under the old system, we can see hardly any change in the top ten. Israel would still have won with quite a distance to runner-up Cyprus. Austria and Germany would still come third and fourth. The only difference in the show would have been the fact we had known the winner quite soon in the race. The gap is big enough to one of the ‘more boring’ votings of the past.

The only switch we see is that Denmark fall from ninth to tenth. Moldova in return climb and regain that one spot to end in ninth. This will have to do with the lack of jury support for the Danish entry, which was clearly visible last night.

Bigger losers down the board

France are a noteworthy victim of the old system. Madame Monsieur finished lower than expected last night with their thirteenth place. Under 2009 rules, the French entry would only have finished in seventeenth place. The same goes for Norway. The winner of the second semifinal would have slipped down to nineteenth place, only one point ahead of Waylon, who represented The Netherlands.

The biggest winner under the new system would have been Serbia. Sanja Ilic & Balkanika’s “Nova Deca” scored quite well on televoting with a twelfth place and that has helpe them quite a bit. Their new fourteenth place would be a climb of five.

Lower down the board we see Portugal now escape last place. Host entry “O Jardim” failed to convince Europe last night and finished in last. However, that honour now passes on to the United Kingdom. SuRie would have finished in last with thirteen points.

The scoreboard

Below you can see the scoreboard if we had used the 2009 system last night. Israel’s Netta would have been the winner with 323 points. That would have been 85 points more than Eleni Foureira’s “Fuego”, who would have had 238 points.

What do you think? Is the old system better than the new one? Or should we all be happy with the separation of jury and televoting results? Let us know what you think!


  1. I do liked the old voting too! But I would want to know also where the 12 from all the people votes go to! Love the boos when it’s a bad singing neighboring country. 😉

  2. Eurovision.tv have the full televoting/jury/combined results for all countries available now.. in the scoreboard section.
    I\’d like to see a comparison with the previous voting system which was in use until 2015

    1. It doesn\’t seem they have. The scoreboard tab only gives the \”Top 10s\” of each country, for the jury and the televote. As for the detailed results, they still regretably fail to give us the… detailed results. ^^

  3. I would like to get rid of the jury votes. It should only be based on the votes that audience gives.

  4. Escxtra, could you make an inquiry with the EBU as to why they haven’t released the full televoting rankings after doing so for the last 4 years?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button