Here’s an updated list of our Accumulated Performance Order metric. To refresh your memory, the higher the score, the more often the contestant has performed towards the end of the show.
Poor Kris Allen always performs near the beginning of the show, at which point we’ve almost already forgotten his performance. Question: do you think APO or performance order matters?
As of this writing, here are the top rated performances of the week. All ratings out of 10. Let your voice be heard by putting in your votes here!
Up-to-date ratings can be found here.
One metric I want to track is something I call “Accumulated Performance Order” (APO). Basically, this sums the performance order of the contestants over the weeks. The higher the number, the more often you’ve appeared in the back-half of the performance order, and vice-versa.
After 2 rounds of the Finals, here are the APOs (out of a possible 24 points):
Matt Giraud got the last spot this week, and the second-to-last spot last week. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that being in the last spot is very advantageous, since you can remember the performance very clearly as soon as voting begins.
Worst of all is the first spot of the night, whose performance you can barely remember (unless it was amazing). Is it possible we say goodbye to Michael Sarver, given how early he’s been appearing on the show?
Two growing trends that I did NOT like:
I personally like this season. There are some clear favorites, but there are some dark horses that SHOULD get much more attention than they’re currently getting (Matt Giraud and Kris Allen).
I stumbled upon this thread out on the American Idol forums. It’s really interesting to see who people thought would advance, based entirely on what the American Idol producers wanted us to see.
Predictions at the American Idol forums
I was impressed by Michael Sarver tonight. But looking at the bigger picture, I believe Michael proved something: that the wild-card round sucks. The general consenses prior to tonight was that Michael had no business in the Top 13, especially over Anoop Desai (see this post at idolblog).
Based on tonight’s performances, you could argue that America, and also the wild-card round, got it right. They chose the better singer (Michael) and didn’t choose the weaker one (Anoop). While this is all true, my problem with this is we only got to see each contestant perform one full-length song. In the statistical world, each contestant had a sample size of exactly 1. It’s pretty ridiculous to judge someone based on one performance.
And this is where editors’ choice enters the picture. If everyone is given one song, then those who have been shown on air more than others (Danny Gokey, Lil Rounds) have an advantage over those who didn’t get much at all (Felicia Barton, Ricky Braddy, Ju’Not Joyner).
I feel last season’s format was MUCH better. For all but 4 of the semi-finalists, we saw each perform more than 1 song, giving each person a chance to redeem themselves after a poor performance or song choice. This year, over half of the semi-finalists were cut after 1 song. As Michael (and also Matt Giraud) proved, maybe you just need a second song to show how good you really are.
There didn’t seem to be much bias in which contestants were chosen to go first, and which were chosen to go last. Two early favorites started 1 and 2 (Lil Rounds and Danny Gokey), while two others went somewhere between the middle and end (Anoop Desai and Adam Lambert).
I don’t know if it’s my growth into adulthood, but my memory sure ain’t what it used to be. I can’t remember exactly how good or bad the first 4 or 5 performances were. I thought Lil was pretty good, but not great, I thought Danny was great, too. But if I’m comparing against Adam or Alexis Grace, can I accurately say that I liked Lil more than I liked Adam? Fact is, I remember Alexis because she went last. Later on, I want to do a more formal analysis on performance order, because with the level of talent fairly high this season, I think smaller factors like performance order and air time will play a larger role.