Hugo voting details

The detailed Hugo voting results have been posted on the Noreascon site.

As usual, there are a couple of items that had the most first-round votes but ended up not winning: "The Empress of Mars" started out one vote ahead of "The Cookie Monster" in the Novella category, but subsequent rounds of elimination threw more support behind the latter. Jay's novelette started out way ahead of Swanwick. Both the Lambshead Guide and the Hubbard book started out ahead of the Chesley Awards book in Related Book. Giancola and Frazetta both started out a fair bit ahead of Eggleton in Pro Artist.

A couple other items of note in those results:

  • Cheryl started and ended 11 votes behind Dave Langford in Fan Writer. That's pretty close.
  • Unrelatedly, Frank was not just the winner in Fan Artist, but the winner by a lot: he got over half the first-round votes, so there were no instant-runoff rounds.

I don't see the full nominees list anywhere (with the details of how many nominating votes everyone got); I'm guessing it'll be posted sometime soon.

2 Responses to “Hugo voting details”

  1. Cheryl Morgan

    The technical term for what Frank achieved is “winning by a knock-out”. The Lord of the Rings movies have done it every year. Arthur C. Clarke’s “Nine Billion Names of God” did it in the Retro Hugos. But it is an amazing achievement in the fan categories. Even Dave Langford doesn’t get the sort of acclaimation that Frank got.

  2. Vardibidian

    Is it pretty standard IRV-style? I’m a bit perplexed at the numbers. For Best Novel, there were 789 ballots, but only 635 made it to the end. Does that mean that 154 ballots only put ranks for four (or fewer) books, and didn’t include either of the front-runners? The 25 ballots that ranked No Award in first get distributed to their second-ranked book in the second round, right? So one for PoS, two for I, none for SS or H, and one for BL makes four: if I understand the voting (and I likely don’t), that means that twenty-one people just put No Award first, and left the rest blank. That’s more than two percent! Harsh.
    Also, it surprises me that 230 people (29%) like PoS enough to put it in first, but only eleven had it in second or third. Well, no, that’s not quite true, eleven clearly had it below either BL or No Award or both. I suppose it’s possible that as many as 405 people had it in second. No, it isn’t. Only at most 158 could have had it in second. So it got at most 388/789 = half of the ballots at first or second.
    (305-158=) 147 ballots had I no higher than second but higher than PoS, so add those to the 45 ballots that had No Award no higher than second but higher than PoS is 192 (at least) that had it at third. Feh. What I’m trying to work out is if half the balloting population thought it was good and half thought it absolutely stunk , or if half thought it was good, and another quarter thought it was pretty good. 154 people (20%) didn’t even rank it, so that’s something there.

    The upshot is that I don’t really understand the voting. I’ve always thought of it as a way of ensuring that a candidate detested by the majority of voters can’t win, no matter how many candidates are on the ballot. But I could be wrong.

    &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp ,

    P.S. I’m sure I’ve messed up the italics, and I apologize in advance. I wouldn’t have bothered, but that would mean writing out the title at least of Ilium.


Join the Conversation