Interesting statistics
The male/female divide thing is really stupid. There have been more male winners than female, but only by one person, and there have been an odd number of series so there is always going to be an unequal divide. If a woman wins this series it will be equal, and it's already equal if you include Young Apprentice. (And incidentally, from what we've seen of the candidates so far I think a woman will win - I'm not sure which one, but it seems as though most of the front-runners are female.)
The person who the tabloids predict is going to win almost invariably crashes and burns early on - I remember that Rocky and Gavin were the tabloid favourites for their respective years, for instance.
Originally Posted by george.millman:
“The male/female divide thing is really stupid. There have been more male winners than female, but only by one person, and there have been an odd number of series so there is always going to be an unequal divide. If a woman wins this series it will be equal, and it's already equal if you include Young Apprentice. (And incidentally, from what we've seen of the candidates so far I think a woman will win - I'm not sure which one, but it seems as though most of the front-runners are female.)”
“The male/female divide thing is really stupid. There have been more male winners than female, but only by one person, and there have been an odd number of series so there is always going to be an unequal divide. If a woman wins this series it will be equal, and it's already equal if you include Young Apprentice. (And incidentally, from what we've seen of the candidates so far I think a woman will win - I'm not sure which one, but it seems as though most of the front-runners are female.)”
I think the point they were trying to make there was that, in a man-woman final, the man is more likely to win because it's happened 4 times out of 5.
Originally Posted by Tyjet:
“I think the point they were trying to make there was that, in a man-woman final, the man is more likely to win because it's happened 4 times out of 5.”
“I think the point they were trying to make there was that, in a man-woman final, the man is more likely to win because it's happened 4 times out of 5.”
Actually, male runners-up are really rare as a rule. There have only been two in the adult show - Chris and Tom - and Tom was facing another male candidate.
I'd say that, with only 9 series, the sample size is too small to draw any meaningful conclusions about any of it.
Originally Posted by george.millman:
“Actually, male runners-up are really rare as a rule. There have only been two in the adult show - Chris and Tom - and Tom was facing another male candidate.”
“Actually, male runners-up are really rare as a rule. There have only been two in the adult show - Chris and Tom - and Tom was facing another male candidate.”
That's kind of the point, though. Every other man who made the final ended up winning and with the exception of Stella, every female winner has been up against another woman.
Although let's not get caught up in a debate over a pretty harmless article. There were no accusations of misogyny or anything, just an observation that, based on previous series, if you're a man and you're in the final, you're more likely to win than if you're a woman and you're in the final.
Originally Posted by Tyjet:
“That's kind of the point, though. Every other man who made the final ended up winning and with the exception of Stella, every female winner has been up against another woman.
Although let's not get caught up in a debate over a pretty harmless article. There were no accusations of misogyny or anything, just an observation that, based on previous series, if you're a man and you're in the final, you're more likely to win than if you're a woman and you're in the final.”
“That's kind of the point, though. Every other man who made the final ended up winning and with the exception of Stella, every female winner has been up against another woman.
Although let's not get caught up in a debate over a pretty harmless article. There were no accusations of misogyny or anything, just an observation that, based on previous series, if you're a man and you're in the final, you're more likely to win than if you're a woman and you're in the final.”
Actually no, because some finals have been four people. So if we're talking finalists (not just final two) you need to include Alex Wotherspoon, Jim and Nick.
Originally Posted by george.millman:
“Actually no, because some finals have been four people. So if we're talking finalists (not just final two) you need to include Alex Wotherspoon, Jim and Nick.”
“Actually no, because some finals have been four people. So if we're talking finalists (not just final two) you need to include Alex Wotherspoon, Jim and Nick.”
I'm clearly just talking about the final 2
Originally Posted by Tyjet:
“I'm clearly just talking about the final 2”
“I'm clearly just talking about the final 2
”
Okay, but it doesn't make it any more likely that a man is going to win than a woman, does it? If the final is between a man and a woman then yes, going on statistics from the past, but from the whole selection of candidates you can't pick someone because of that, because one third of the time the final two have both been female. If someone said that the man was more likely to win if there was a man and a woman in the final two I'd understand that, but not based on the entire group of candidates.
And I never suggested there was any misogyny, I'm just saying the statistics don't really reflect what the article is suggesting.
