Home Forums Television The Problem with Gold Derby Predictions

The Problem with Gold Derby Predictions

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 24 total)
Created
4 years ago
Last Reply
4 years ago
23
replies
709
views
18
users
3
2
2
  • Matt Morse
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 1st, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277707

    The prediction function on Gold Derby is a bit of a self fufilling prophecy.

    It encourages us to promote and who we thing will win opposed to who should win.

    Recently here on the Emmy boards, Boomer wrote:
    “PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE start updating your predictions every week or two. Many industry people are watching these rankings VERY closely, and your predictions are part of the statistics. AND it very much matters how you rank your contenders #1-6 (top position is weighted much more than your sixth selection).”

    Now I know I’m not an Academy member.  I know Im not casting a ballot when making the predictions.  I know nobodys gonna log on and say “Oh Hodag129 predicted Modern Family to win, I’ll vote for that again!”  I know that a lot of voters take a great deal of pride and carefully watch tapes selecting who they feel is most deserving.

    But I do know that voting has a lot to do with buzz (especially during nominations).  And I know these industry insiders Boomer refers to create that buzz based on what they see and hear (such as Gold Derby’s prediction tools amongst others.)  Voters themselves may log on to see whos getting buzz, then examine those actors more closely.

    So.

    Say one of the experts or editors or even a member like me is filling out a prediction.

    Say that individual feels very strongly that Nick Offerman deserves to win Supporting Actor, for example.  But this individual is pretty savy and knows that Offerman, no matter how deserving, has no chance at winning.

    Do they select him in their predictions anyways, ruining their reputation and overal score?  Or do they feed the buzz from the 6 actors who already have the most buzz in the first place?

    It seems to me the editors here, the forum users, the televison watchers need to promote and who should win instead of who will win.  Maybe this isn’t the place for that.

    Just wondering what people’s thoughts on this are.  I love making predictions and guesses but I’ll keep them to myself if they’re hurting the people I feel deserve the win.  Is there a way we could curb this phenomeon?

    Reply
    CanadianFan
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 23rd, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277709

    Interesting.

    Goldderby does have threads and year-end lists about the best of movies and stuff but I would definitely like for it to become a part of our profile. If we can spotlight who we actually believe are the 6 best in the category and GD can statistically analyze it, that would make a huge difference.

    A good example is Mariska Hargitay (I believe). No one thought she was one of the top six in her field but people predicted her based on what the *voters* liked. There is definitely a difference between my tastes and the typical Emmy voter and it would be intriguing to see who the community believes is in the top 6 versus who we predict will make it in. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Juan Iturri
    Member
    Joined:
    Oct 7th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277710

    I agree with the points you made, which is why I try to do a mixture of who I think will get in with who I think deserves to get in. I don’t just try to predict all the spots because there are obviously performances that I really and would like to see get nominated.

    ReplyCopy URL
    TV12
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jun 14th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277711

    The prediction center is used to predict who will win, not who should win. That’s what the Gold Derby TV Awards are for. What we say on this board has little actual impact on buzz. There may be a few exceptions, but otherwise, nada. If we were voting for who should win, we’d be voting for our own awards that would not reflect the actual Emmy winners.

    ReplyCopy URL
    BenitoDelicias
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 3rd, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277712

    My problem with the predictions center is that they want, at this nomination stage, to place the predictions in order of “likelyhood of WINNING”. It makes no sense since we can’t tell that right now (we can in some cases…but it’s not the idea). It makes no sense because I’m supposed, for example, to rank Arrested Development low because I don’t think it will win, when at this point I should rank it high because I do think it will be nominated. Once nominations are out, we do it the other way, but right now, no. It’s always been the case, and it will never make sense. So I just go right ahead and order them in likelyhood of being nominated and don’t pay attention to the text at the top of the chart.

    Other than that it should be about who we think WILL be nominated/win and not who SHOULD.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    Halo_Insider
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 3rd, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277713

    My problem with the predictions center is that they want, at this nomination stage, to place the predictions in order of “likelyhood of WINNING”. It makes no sense since we can’t tell that right now (we can in some cases…but it’s not the idea). It makes no sense because I’m supposed, for example, to rank Arrested Development low because I don’t think it will win, when at this point I should rank it high because I do think it will be nominated. Once nominations are out, we do it the other way, but right now, no. It’s always been the case, and it will never make sense. So I just go right ahead and order them in likelyhood of being nominated and don’t pay attention to the text at the top of the chart.

    Other than that it should be about who we think WILL be nominated/win and not who SHOULD.  

    That’s generally been my only problem with the center, too. It’s not anything that bothers me too much, but it strikes me as odd when I see some of the experts suffer slightly in their prediction scores because they put a lot of support into a long shot nomination on the basis that they had good enough tapes to actually win.

    For example, I recall Tom ranking Laura Dern pretty high on his predictions for Lead Actress in a Comedy last year (I think, he might have ranked her in his #1 or #2 positions). This was because he thought that she would be a huge force to be reckoned with if she managed to clear that hurdle of getting nominated. However, the buzz for Enlightened wasn’t terribly strong (even with Dern’s Golden Globe win), and I don’t think that Dern was listed very high on the statistics chart, so it would have made more sense (if one were to predict Dern at all) that she be placed somewhere in the #5 or #6 slots.

    Again, this is my only complaint, and it doesn’t really seem to affect the general consensus much. After all, I agree with the majority of those influencing the prediction center who think that Aaron Paul is the most likely to earn a nomination for Supporting Actor, even though he probably has a minimal chance at winning.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Matt Morse
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 1st, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277714

    Yeah I was going to mention some of the things I think Gold Derby does that does champion who we think should win.  My OP was running long but many of you have touched on them for me.

    I was going to mention the Best of the Year lists, signatures and the show threads themselves.  And as TV12 mentioned, the GoldDerby Awards.  And Tom/Boomer/Rob’s emmy chats with actors who may be further behind in the race does more for those campaigns than anything else.
    So there are ways to voice opinion for candidates that may fall off the top 10 in the rankings.

    But if you go the main page right now its all about who WILL win with no reguards to who should.  I love the feature.  (I love awards almost as much as I love charts and plotting trends over time.)  But it’s all to cyclic for me.  Excitement for a submission generated by this site creates momentum which increases excitment for a submission which gives them more momentum.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    Riley
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277715

    The only problem I have is the one that BenitoDelicias and Halo_Insider detailed about it making no sense to rank based on likelihood of winning.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Tom_Scavo
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jun 3rd, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277716

    Interesting points…

    ReplyCopy URL
    Beau S.
    Member
    Joined:
    Feb 10th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277717

    The only problem with the prediction center is that we rank by likelihood of winning, not by likelihood of nomination. We are expected to pick the winners despite not having seen the films nominated for Oscars, the episodes submitted for Emmys or the plays/musicals up for Tonys. Nominations we can at least speculate and use name recognition, trailers, interviews, etc. to have a basis for.

    THAT needs to change. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Webly
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 8th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277718

    The only problem with the prediction center is that we rank by likelihood of winning, not by likelihood of nomination. We are expected to pick the winners despite not having seen the films nominated for Oscars, the episodes submitted for Emmys or the plays/musicals up for Tonys. Nominations we can at least speculate and use name recognition, trailers, interviews, etc. to have a basis for.

    THAT needs to change. 

    Out of everything that has been said, this is what I support the most. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    deccahm
    Member
    Joined:
    Dec 16th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277719

    I agree with the above comments. Up until nominations are released, we should be tipping potential nominees rather than winners. Especially for the Emmys, when winning is based on episode submission. Predicting winners when we don’t even know the tapes they will submit undermines the whole process. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Riley
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277720

    Just adding to this point, it is not like we have to keep the same predictions before and after the nominations.  Everything is reset, so we should be able to predict who is getting nominated before nominations and who will win before they announce the winners.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Tom_Scavo
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jun 3rd, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277721

    I’d love to hear the thoughts of a GoldDerby editor on this topic…

    ReplyCopy URL
    Renaton
    Member
    Joined:
    Jun 4th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #277722

    Can I be honest? I hink it’s a bit naive to think voters come to Goldderby prediction center to see what they should vote for. If they want to know about shows they haven’t heard of that they aren’t watching and you could possibly be worthy of a nomination, they’ll do it in some other way. I really, really doubt the prediction center has this influence in determining their votes. Buzz is created by a huge number of factors beyond the prediction sites and blogs. It has to do with the people involved, with the acclaim it has, how popular it is, hwo it could appeal to voters, where it airs, how it’s being campaigned… If anything, Goldderby predictions center is about how we react to already existant buzz, not about us creating said buzz.

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 24 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
jf123 - Nov 17, 2017
Television
Andrew D - Nov 16, 2017
Television