Our previous analysis
We previously looked at how the running order can potentially have an effect on an entry’s chance to qualify. We also looked at the voting histories for the eligible voters in semi final 1.
We concluded that the running order probably mostly affects entries that are in the middle of the field. Good songs qualify no matter where they start from.
As for the voting histories, we saw that despite EBU’s seeded drawing method, there are still clear indications of biased voting. As to why that is we could not really say without employing too much guess work.
Putting it all together
We have now seen all the entries on stage. We have watched the bookmaker odds fluctuate and kind of settle down on a field of favorites. Now is the time to put it all together and ask: Who is going to qualify from semi-final 1?
We use the running order qualification chance along with the 5 year voting history window from the previous two analysis. For this final deep dive we have added in the odds as they were 13th of May. This gives us three data sets to work with.
We have assigned a rank to each data set similar to how the juries at Eurovision rank entries. 1 is the rank we assign to the best and 17 is the worst. Entries with equal scores in a column get the same ranking. Finally we calculate the average rank for each of the three sets of data to arrive at a final rank.
Predicted Qualifiers
With average rankings in hand we have 10 predicted qualifiers from the first semi-final:
- Australia (Rk. 4)
- Belgium (Rk. 4.67)
- Czech Republic (Rk. 5)
- Estonia (Rk. 5.33)
- Hungary (Rk. 5.67)
- Portugal (Rk. 5.67)
- Cyprus (Rk. 6.33)
- Iceland (Rk. 7.33)
- Serbia (Rk. 8)
- Greece (Rk. 9)
You can view the detailed results and analysis below.
| Country | # | R/O | Vote | Odds | Odds | Vote 5 y | R/O Q | Avg | |
| Q% | 5 y | 13. May | Rank | Rank | Rank | Rank | |||
| 1 | Australia | 12 | 57% | 84 | 1.05 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 4 |
| 2 | Belgium | 10 | 61% | 87 | 1.36 | 8 | 1 | 5 | 4.67 |
| 3 | Czech Rep. | 6 | 64% | 70 | 1.16 | 7 | 4 | 4 | 5 |
| 4 | Estonia | 14 | 75% | 63 | 1.57 | 10 | 5 | 1 | 5.33 |
| 5 | Hungary | 7 | 57% | 63 | 1.12 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 5.67 |
| 6 | Portugal | 15 | 71% | 80 | 2.5 | 12 | 3 | 2 | 5.67 |
| 7 | Cyprus | 1 | 50% | 63 | 1.02 | 2 | 5 | 12 | 6.33 |
| 8 | Iceland | 13 | 68% | 27 | 1.11 | 4 | 15 | 3 | 7.33 |
| 9 | Serbia | 9 | 57% | 35 | 1.14 | 6 | 11 | 7 | 8 |
| 10 | Greece | 16 | 52% | 27 | 1.01 | 1 | 15 | 11 | 9 |
| 11 | Slovenia | 5 | 50% | 37 | 1.36 | 8 | 10 | 12 | 10 |
| 12 | Poland | 4 | 46% | 42 | 1.72 | 11 | 8 | 14 | 11 |
| 13 | Belarus | 8 | 54% | 33 | 3.25 | 14 | 13 | 10 | 12.33 |
| 14 | San Marino | 17 | 58% | 13 | 3.4 | 15 | 17 | 6 | 12.67 |
| 15 | Finland | 3 | 36% | 41 | 7 | 16 | 9 | 17 | 14 |
| 16 | Georgia | 11 | 43% | 33 | 3 | 13 | 13 | 16 | 14 |
| 17 | Montenegro | 2 | 46% | 34 | 13 | 17 | 12 | 14 | 14.33 |
