More Hugo 2021 Stats – quick look

Monday morning here and the nomination stats are out.

Firstly though, as people noted in the comments to the last post, the finals data has some issues. In Best Novel, there’s a figure missing in Pass 2 for Piranesi.

And more worryingly, in the fourth place run-off there is a major error:

All three are very credible finalists but it’s not fair on them to have this kind of confusion.

On to nominations


Mexican Gothic was a near miss and would have been a credible finalist. I hadn’t read Once and Future Witches but it had good buzz also. Having quality near-misses is a good sign. There’s also some endorsement for how other categories work here. John Scalzi’s Interdependency final didn’t make it to Best Novel but the series got a nod. Novik’s A Dangerous Education made it into the Lodestar.

Further down the list, there’s an EPH nugget of interest. “The Rude Eye of Rebellion” had 33 people who voted for it and nothing else.


I’d expected The Four Profound Weaves to be a finalist but some tough competition there. Bujold’s The Physicians of Vilnoc didn’t muster enough numbers either


Two Truths and a Lie was popular at every stage. I didn’t pick up on the buzz around this but numerically it was a very strong finalist.

Short Story

Cora’s Cold Crowdfunding Campaign had a decent showing on the longlist.

Skipping ahead…

Editor Long Form

OK, well I need an edit to that Afterword chapter to Debarkle. Toni Weisskopf was a finalist for Editor but withdrew. In the circumstances surrounding the Baen’s Bar controversy, I suspect the outcome would have been a repeat of the Puppy years. In terms of overall support she had 35 nominations which on first EPH pass came out as 32.25 points. So ~30ish people voting for Toni W and nobody else plus a few voting for her and others.

Skipping ahead

Fan Writer

Some good company hanging out in the long list there.


9 responses to “More Hugo 2021 Stats – quick look”

  1. I read “The Rude Eye of Rebellion” and it was very entertaining, but I wouldn’t have put it down for a Hugo. I guess the author has about 30 friends and relatives.

    “Two Truths and a Lie” winning wasn’t a surprise to me. It’s literally and figuratively haunting.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. “The Rude Eye of Rebellion” had 33 people who voted for it and nothing else.

    Yes, and the author got 17 of those people to bullet-nominate him for the Astounding Award as well.

    I take a dim view of such ballot manipulation, so congratulations, Mr. Lawless, on earning yourself a permanent spot on my Do Not Ever Read list. What a tool. 🙄

    Liked by 4 people

  3. Further down the list, there’s an EPH nugget of interest. “The Rude Eye of Rebellion” had 33 people who voted for it and nothing else
    Strictly speaking we don’t know that. We only know the points at round 148 of EPH, some or all of them may have nominated other works that where eliminated in one of the 147 previous rounds.

    (And I see now that it’s possible to make fairly detailed estimates of which books where nominated together, by tracking the changes in points when one work is eliminated. But it’s a lot of work.)

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I finally sat down to dig into the finalist voting stats and had to stop because the glitchy things in it were making me crazy. Several more than the two you mention here. I don’t think there is anything that changes any results, but it is really annoying for me to see. (I assume Paul and Alasdair’s names should be switched in the finalist column there.) I would hope for it to be cleaned up at some point, but I won’t hold my breath. They seriously need the Tyop Partol! I’m scared to look closer at the nominations stats now.

    Liked by 2 people

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: