It must be because I’m not European that I cannot fathom why Sweden scored so highly, let alone won. Lyrics just a collation of cliches from every song ever. Average voice. Average stage performance. What did I miss? Love to have someone explain to me.
Good on Latvia for proving everyone wrong and almost qualifying instead of coming near last like odds suggested, people actually heard the song and recognised the quality instead of just tossing it off! Hopefully this close qualification doesn’t turn Sudden Lights off from continuing their career, they’ve got a huge amount of support (that 8 points from “rest of the world” says a lot about their reach). Also hoping Latvia qualifies one day again!
@@NJKAZ2015 Thats your opinion and thats fair. For me it is currently my absolutely favorite song and I listen to it on repeat all the time. I don't think they would have had much chance if they had qualified, but I'm still sad they didn't, so seeing them outperform their odds is great
At the beginning I was a bit disappointed that Estonia wasn’t getting enough attention, which made it unsure if she would even make the finals. But hey! In the end, 8th place ain’t bad . Proud of her👍
This is a crime that Malta is that low. I mean last place in the semi with 3 points??? poor Malta and The Busker. The song was so nice, and it had one of the best stagings of the year imo. I will never understand how that happened. honorable mentions of other things I'm disappointed and shocked about this year: 1. Spain, France and Slovenia finishing that low. Underrated legends, we won't forget y'all. 2. Georgia NQing, and Poland finishing 3rd. 3rd??? what were y'all thinking?
@@unknownredditor semi finals are televote based, and nobody ever vote for malta, malta always qualified thanks to the jury vote. Destiny's the only exception
It did not help that Malta had to perform from position #2 ("the death slot"). And before people bring up "But Armenia easily qualified from this position", the second semi final was significantly weaker and Armenia followed a weak vocal performance from Denmark.
My personal opinion about the final performances: 1. Austria - I adore this song and vote for it, but the live version still lacks something. Energy level also could be higher and Poe Poe part louder (maybe bad TV translation). 2. Portugal - it was a stronger performance than in Semi. Everything depended on personal taste, but Mimicat created winner vibes! 3. Switzerland - nothing special, catchy rhythm and easy meaningful lyrics. Wanted more vocal variety, because he is capable. 4.Poland - great visual performance and catchy song. She made the best she could do, still the vocal is weak. Song created for masses, expected a good televote result. 5. Serbia -good visual performance, but... in semi I heard him better, in the final was hard to understand the words. Maybe sound translation problem, but you can't vote for a song which you don't hear. 6. France - all the song I was asking what happened to La Zarra? It was good, but not so good vocally as I expected. She somehow sounded not enough powerful. And TV camera angles for visual part was also not perfect. 7. Cyprus - well done, but would be better to go not so safe - Andrew is good singer, too much himself backs are not needed. Still solid performance, just nothing new. 8. Spain - I expected more from visual part - more meanings and longer focus on Spanish culture accents, now looked as a little mess. Shouting and screaming was never popular between masses, still she is a great vocalist. Somehow got a feel, that it flop, actually liked her pre-parties performances more. 9.Sweden - in Semi and in her winning performance she sounded more sincere and better. In final one was too strict and not enough emotionally. Still one of the best entries of the night with winner vibes. Strange choice to put Sweden after Spain, I think it hurt Spain. 10. Albania - performance was good, the song itself not for everyone. Family label won some additional votes for sure. 11. Italy - I unexpected felt the 3rd time winner vibes and even vote for it, didn't plan that! Simplicity and extraordinary Marco work with camera angles won me over:) And vocally it was such emotional and impactful performance! Better performance then Sweden; Sweden song itself is more memorable. 12. Estonia sounded good, and Alika finally found her emotions:) It was a great performance, liked more than in Semi. 13. Finland - great energy, originality, charisma. Much better than in Semi, were the 2nd part sounded not well at all. He nailed it on time! 14. Czech Republic - one more great performance with catchy rhythm. So much improvement from pre-parties! 15. Australia - they were great, I planned to vote for Germany, but gave all the votes to Australia! Love the energy:) 16. Belgium - liked his semi performance more, but still it was impactful and the backs fantastic! 17. Armenia - sounded good, looked good, performed good. Got sacked down a little by Belgium and Moldova energies. 18. Moldova - sounded better than in semi, i heard the words this time, still some parts was not enough clear. Could have more energy still and some parts were too repetitive. 19. Ukraine - great visual performance, but the vocals wasn't the best - i heard them performing this song better. 20. Norway - better than in Semi, she managed to perform the best version. Very catchy song. 21. Germany - felt disappointed. Sounded not always as I expected, visual performance was too simple and lack some kind of energy...There was not the best performance as it could be. 22. Lithuania - liked her Semi performance more. She sounded not so sincere as always, too technical. Liked ethno visuals, wanted to see more. 23. Israel - great performance, but for me - I still want more meaningful lyrics. One of the best entries together with Sweden, Finland, Italy, Portugal, Australia of the night. 24. Slovenia- simple but catchy, energetic show. Got a little blanded by Israel and felt that they need to do something more crazy... 25. Croatia - not my cup, but they sounded better than in Semi. 26. United Kingdom - expected worse. The song is catchy, lyrics meaningful, visual performance was great, and she sounded not bad - huge improvement as Blanca, but for this song, we need stronger and more impactful vocal performance, to be on Blanca level is not enough, or you need to sing an easier song as Blanca.
@@swedishbloke I agree. I'm Spanish myself, and when you actually get into the context of Spain's entry and performance, you really realise it's hands down the best performance Spain has sent since 2000. And yes, it was much better than SloMo. But SloMo was much more reachable for an international audience, so I can kinda understand why it got 200+ points both in jury and televoting while EaEa was last in televoting.
1. Austria (my fav) - oh interesting :) I personally prefer the live version much better than the studio version of the song because tthe last (live) chorus is incredibly impressive.
@@MrSpnsh I would say because it was a veeeery extra song and performance. It’s highly cultural and traditional, and that is great, but it’s note everyone’s taste. I had a feeling that something was missing. It was very one-note, I felt there was no real climax to the performance, not even when she was going off on her last note. It takes a certain spice in such avantgarde songs in order to resonate with a broader audience and I (and apparently many others) felt that she failed to capture that.
@Nicsu112 nothing to do with them singing in English, they sent a bad song(again). If they didn't have a televote which stands for majority of the points in their national selection they would've done so much better
@@XquantumX-_- I mean, Lord of the Lost wasn't even among the worst 5 performances of the night. And I have to remind you if they didn't send Lord of the Lost, they would've sent Ikke Hüftgold instead... which would absolutely have been an obvious last place instead.
I think the odds are a fun metric but I think people tend to misinterpret and overvalue them a lot. First of all, the odds are for "who wins" or "who gets top 3" or "who gets qualified", which means that rankings are not showing a predicted final result, thus rendering 90% of this video a fun excuse for listening to all the songs again but there's not much more to it. But more importantly, people think that the odds are some kind of scientific prediction of Europe's opinion - no. The bookies adjust the odds solely to balance supply and demand for individual bets so that they make a profit regardless of the result. If a lot of people are betting on an entry to win, their odds will go up, i.e. the expected win for being right goes down. If there's too little people betting on an entry to win, the bookies increase the price for taking the risk, which means that the entry falls a few places in the odds ranking. This means that the odds are basically just the predicitions of British Eurovision fans who have enough money to bet.
The UK is almost always overrated by the bookies, compared to the actual result, with 2022 as an exception. 2011: Odds 4, result 11 2013: Odds 13, result 19 2012: Odds 6, result 25 2014: Odds 5, result 17 2015: Odds 15, result 24 2016: Odds 9, result 24 2017: Odds 8, result 15 2018: Odds 8, result 24 2019: Odds 20, result 26 2021: Odds 22, result 26 2022: Odds 4, result 2 THE EXCEPTION! 2023: Odds 9, result 25 2024: Odds 10, result ?
Not to bring back half-a-year-old discourse but man this was a weird year. Was expecting France top 5 and Austria top 10. Belgium and Australia were nice surprises though!
All baltic states going from criminally underrated to almost qualifying (Latvia), almost Top 10 (Lithuania) and deserved Top 10 & Jury Top 5 (Estonia). That's crazy!
I'm happy that it ended like this and not as the people thought of. My favorite songs of the edition still didn't get the first positions, but in my opinion this is just the rightest order that i could get.
I'm sorry to say but this is extremely flawed. The betting odds rankings are only chances of winning, not the actual end position. So you could have a sing that is very low in the betting odds to win, but achieves a much higher result in the end.
@@EscDIDI-SpI will speak for France because I am French. In France Eurovision is not appreciated, the people and the media are waiting for the slightest opportunity to criticize this contest. But the worst is not that, the worst is that France spends about 1 million euros in this unpopular competition while our country is in crisis especially in this period.
@@miharu060786 Stupid dude, I didn't say 1 million will save France but France is in crisis and we should use the money to help the country instead of spending in this unpopular contest even when France doesn't flop😆. Try to read my comment better next time thank you :D :D :D
I dont know but how is it real, that the comeback artists like Italy, Sweden, Belgium, Lithuania got like their best result. Im not including Moldova, but Sweden and Italy were overrated!
Sweden and Italy (and Ukraine and even Norway too to a smaller extent) are always overrated. They could send a bunch of stray cats on stage or a person taking a dump in an on-stage toilet and they will be top 5/top 7 anyway.
The party part in me loved Finland, the music-loving part in me loved Spain. Obviously, Eurovision spectators are very party people and not at all music lovers.
I am impartial as I am in North America.. and dont care who won... but Sweden's song should not have even been in the top 10... This contest has not been about the best song for a very long time... they need to reduce the weighting of the jury votes as the same "close" countries vote for each other every year... and the juries trade one years votes for promises to vote in return if another country is in contention in the future.... its always funny how the odds are always 50% for the top country and the other 50 for the rest... so as to ensure that the bookies make their money.... its not about the song... not been for a long time.... its about the money
You do realize that the televoters are much worse when it comes to block voting and diaspora voting than the juries are, right? It's just less obvious since the televoting points are given out in giant blocks instead of on a per-country basis. Iceland, Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark all had Finland, Sweden and Norway in their top 3s (except Sweden, Norway and Finland when it came to themselves) in the televote, except Finland, who conspicuously gave Norway 12 points and Sweden 0 points. Meanwhile, the Icelandic jury gave Finland 10 points, Sweden 7 points and Norway 4 points. The Greek televoters gave Cyprus 12 points but the Greek jury only gave him 4 points. And so on and so on. According to the televoters, Poland was the 3rd best song of the 2nd semi-final and the 8th best song in the grand final. POLAND. Almost every single country in the contest's televoters gave their 12, 10 and 8 points to a country that is a close neighbour or a country with a heavy diaspora population in the local country. Meanwhile, the juries were throwing 12 pointers at Sweden, Italy and Israel from all across Europe, Asia and Australia. There's a reason why when Russia was actually allowed to compete, they were almost always top 10, often top 5, followed by Ukraine whereas the juries were often a bit cool towards their entries. Look into how the televoters vote before speaking on the subject of block voting. The televoters are much worse than the juries, by several magnitudes.
Block voting is just as bad in the televote. Removing the televote won't do shit. Seems like being impartial is not the only effect of liivng in North America, since you're clearly also clueless. Sweden's song was simply the best song out there. The odds are rarely, if ever, this united on one candidate. The only songs that I can remember having over 40% odds to win Eurovision were Stefania and Arcade, it's usually around 3-4 countries that all have around 20% odds of winning. The only reason Sweden had such high odds this year was cause it was a really weak year for Eurovision. That's also why songs that wouldn't have done so well in other years, such as Bridges and Because of you were able to place so high. The only true contenders were Finland and Sweden. Now, the voting is super easily explained, without even considering block voting. Tattoo was an objectively good song, sung by one of the best performers in Eurovision history. To say it shouldn't have even been top 10 is ludicrous, especially since it finished 2nd in televoting. Now, the jury always tends to vote for a more traditionally good song, instead of the more eccentric performances. Since this was a rather weak year, Tattoo was obviously gonna be the heavy favorite among the jury, especially since Loreen is such a good vocalist, which is reflected by the odds. What wasn't expected was the mass televote in favor of Käärijä. I knew, having looked on social media, that Cha Cha Cha was gonna get a lot of televotes. It's pretty obvious, however, that the more traditional jury would overlook a song like that, since it's obviously not as good of a song as Tattoo, relying more on an eyecatching performance and a very likeable performer. This works wonders in televote, who usually don't care as much for the quality of the song if it's entertaining. So TL;DR, the factors contributing to the rift between the jury and televote were a particularly weak year, singling out two heavy favorites and a huge contrast between the two songs, meaning one would predictably win the jury vote, while the other wins the televote. There wasn't any conspiracy to win money for bookies, it wasn't the fault of block voting, since the jury actually deviated quite a bit from regular block votes this year, it's unlikely that we'll see these factors combine again.
But sometimes I feel that the odds are reflecting public opinion that’s generated on fan sites like wiwibloggs that are bias and promote acts they like personally promote shamelessly instead of being objective.