She Looks So Perfect is definitely not a non-#1 going by the actual chart imo, obviously it had a huge drop but it's sold incredibly well and spent quite a while in the top 40 which removes the tag for me. There's more to a chart run than its second week drop. Obviously it's clear why it's a non-#1 in this thread though with the drop it had!

I think if I were to consider it not a non-#1, it would have had to hang around the Top 10 a bit more, similarly to how Robbie Williams' 'Candy' or Martin Garrix's 'Animals' did.

'I Wanna Feel' is amazing, but its relegation here was inevitable!

I'm old Skool- A "hit" will always be top 75 in my eyes :D . Incidentally I wonder what the OCC use these days as the "Cannon"? :huh:

 

Well if you're truly old skool then it's still a hit anyway as it was top 75 on sales :magic:

Well if you're truly old skool then it's still a hit anyway as it was top 75 on sales :magic:

Darn this streaming has kafuddled my brain! :lol:

NON NUMBER ONE- GECKO (OVERDRIVE)- Oliver Heldens x Becky Hill

 

http://www.livingelectro.com/files/images/s/104503/gecko-overdrive-extended-mix_large.jpg

 

NEW PEAK POSITION: 2

 

Some of the year's biggest dance tunes aren't doing too well on this thread as another takes a demotion. Becky Hill is the first person who appeared in the final stages of "The Voice" to have a UK No 1 single, though here the song stalls behind Ella Henderson's "Ghost".

 

NON NUMBER ONE- ME AND MY BROKEN HEART- Rixton

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cf/Rixton_-_Me_and_My_Broken_Heart_Single_Cover.png

 

NEW PEAK POSITION: 4

 

1-8-12 tells you all you need to know here, Rixton's debut single was a blink and you'll miss it chart topper back in July and indeed can't even go top 3 on this thread- not to worry Jake did better than either of his parents did chart wise so it's all good.

 

NON NUMBER ONE- CRAZY STUPID LOVE- Cheryl Cole Featuring Tinie Tempah

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/Cheryl_Cole_-_Crazy_Stupid_Love_(Official_Single_Cover).png

 

NEW PEAK POSITION: 2

 

Cheryl does have a bad habit of appearing on this thread with only "Fight For This Love" and "Call My Name" having escaped the cull so far. Here the problem comes in the shape of MAGIC!'s "Rude" which keeps her at bay. Maybe better luck later in the year?

 

I think if I were to consider it not a non-#1, it would have had to hang around the Top 10 a bit more, similarly to how Robbie Williams' 'Candy' or Martin Garrix's 'Animals' did.

 

I agree. She Looks So Perfect stuck around long enough to not be considered a non hit, but the lack of time in the top 10 suggests that the no.1 wasn't reflective of true popularity so I consider it a non no.1.

Cheryl relies on two things to make #1: A) X-Factor and B) Attention seeking.

 

 

I agree. She Looks So Perfect stuck around long enough to not be considered a non hit, but the lack of time in the top 10 suggests that the no.1 wasn't reflective of true popularity so I consider it a non no.1.

I can't say I really understand why its top 10 weeks are only what count, surely it should be based on overall sales? Otherwise it would have absolutely no redemption. Would a song going 1-2-4-9-18-29-X be less of a non-#1 because of its top 10 weeks, even if it sold less than 300k? I think She Looks So Perfect had a bit of a terrible start to its chart run, #1 aside, but went on to have a very impressive chart run that shook off the non-#1 status imo.

 

Cheryl relies on two things to make #1: A) X-Factor and B) Attention seeking.

Hence why Crazy Stupid Love made #1 without X Factor being on air at the time. And I'd love to know what attention seeking she does. What a ridiculous post.

 

Not shocked at Crazy Stupid Love being demoted here, a shame though! It did fairly well in the long run really, no less top 40 weeks than Promise This or Call My Name (an identical amount, 9 weeks, in fact!).

1-8-12 tells you all you need to know here, Rixton's debut single was a blink and you'll miss it chart topper back in July.

I thought this spent a reasonable amount of time in the Top 40/75, non? Maybe not compared to most of this year's #1's, but I'd reserve that status for tracks that doesn't 4 or 5 weeks in the chart!

 

Loving the countdown, as usual, though! :D

I can't say I really understand why its top 10 weeks are only what count, surely it should be based on overall sales? Otherwise it would have absolutely no redemption. Would a song going 1-2-4-9-18-29-X be less of a non-#1 because of its top 10 weeks, even if it sold less than 300k? I think She Looks So Perfect had a bit of a terrible start to its chart run, #1 aside, but went on to have a very impressive chart run that shook off the non-#1 status imo.

I suppose the "argument" is that you can have a No 1 song just based on your fanbase (if it's large enough) but a 1-10 drop would seem to suggest that ,in terms of it's ability to make No 1, this was a fanbased chart topper. That it had longevity and built up sales may mean that the casual buyer got into it eventually and kept it buoyant long term (and got it decent sales) but that wouldn't have made it No 1 had not have been for the concentration of fans in week one. A song that progressed 1-2-4-8 might suggest that at its peak it was attracting a broader base of support at sufficient level to be at, or near, the top beyond building up an insurmountable lead in the first 3 days?

I suppose the "argument" is that you can have a No 1 song just based on your fanbase (if it's large enough) but a 1-10 drop would seem to suggest that ,in terms of it's ability to make No 1, this was a fanbased chart topper. That it had longevity and built up sales may mean that the casual buyer got into it eventually and kept it buoyant long term (and got it decent sales) but that wouldn't have made it No 1 had not have been for the concentration of fans in week one. A song that progressed 1-2-4-8 might suggest that at its peak it was attracting a broader base of support at sufficient level to be at, or near, the top beyond building up an insurmountable lead in the first 3 days?

 

Fair point! It was definitely a huge fanbase #1, and I do think its longevity was very impressive, not too dissimilar from The Vamps with Can We Dance as they both picked up Radio 1 airplay once they'd been #1 in the midweeks (obviously Can We Dance didn't hold on, though). I still wouldn't call it a non-#1 myself though, especially when it has sales of over 400k!

I think if 'Crazy Stupid Love' gets a demotion, 'I Don't Care' is 100% certain to get one considering it did so much worse overall and was in fact very lucky to get #1 that week anyway.

I think if 'Crazy Stupid Love' gets a demotion, 'I Don't Care' is 100% certain to get one considering it did so much worse overall and was in fact very lucky to get #1 that week anyway.

 

I'm fairly sure it'll be demoted (sadly), especially with a track like Thinking Out Loud being huge at the time!

I thought this spent a reasonable amount of time in the Top 40/75, non? Maybe not compared to most of this year's #1's, but I'd reserve that status for tracks that doesn't 4 or 5 weeks in the chart!

 

Loving the countdown, as usual, though! :D

Thanks! :D

 

My point was, I think, that this is about chart toppers not chart "hits". I agree it didn't do badly overall but even its total sales don't really scream "a chart topper"- if that makes any sense.

I Don't Care is surely one of the biggest non-#1s of the year, along with SecondCity and Gareth Malone's All Star Choir. They all had abysmal chart runs.

I can't say I really understand why its top 10 weeks are only what count, surely it should be based on overall sales? Otherwise it would have absolutely no redemption. Would a song going 1-2-4-9-18-29-X be less of a non-#1 because of its top 10 weeks, even if it sold less than 300k? I think She Looks So Perfect had a bit of a terrible start to its chart run, #1 aside, but went on to have a very impressive chart run that shook off the non-#1 status imo.

I think to decide what could be considered a non-#1, you have to look at each case individually. I do agree that a song charting 1-2-4-9-18-29-X would be more of a non-#1 than a song with a chart run like that of 'She Looks So Perfect', but for me if it were to get rid of its #1 status, it would have had to chart spent more time higher up in the chart. For instance, like what Martin Garrix's 'Animals' did (1-6-10-9-13-16-13-8-9-15-19-...). The case of 'She Looks So Perfect' being a non-#1 is definitely questionable as the points you've raised are definitely relevant and justified - it's easy to see why someone would consider it redeeming itself after selling 400k+ in total.

 

Gezza's point probably puts it better! :P

:lol: I totally see your point and why you'd still consider it a non-#1, the comparison to Animals is very good and justified actually, She Looks So Perfect didn't quite redeem itself on that level but even so :heehee:

I'd definitely call SLSP a non-#1. Just because it sold 400k doesn't mean it deserved #1, many songs sell that much without going to #1. It dropped 1-10, so clearly the #1 was from a fanbase buy. Same with Rixton, except that didn't sell nearly as much in the end.