richy67

...well we certainly didn't get a great x-factor performance!!

well...with enthusiasm for the matt cardle single a bit low today....maybe next week for maroon 5?!?!

real shame this is being abandoned just because of the desire to 'fix' a brief period at number 1 for a track with little support outside a core base. to repeat a point I made on another thread earlier on, perhaps the OCC should review the way the weekly chart is put together. A simple tweak to how sales are registered (such as 50% sales made this week count towards chart, 30% counting to next week and 20% the week after), would prevent the ability to snatch a number 1 with low support. this, combined with on air, on chart could make the charts a bit more reflective of what's really going on in the market

30 rizzle kicks, 29 example 28 emeli sandi (they're updating on the radio 1 website even if reggie cant be bothered to say!)

I agree entirely with what you say here, but I don't think a 'pure' monthly chart would be very interesting. Are you suggesting a rolling monthly chart (i.e. every week the chart consisting of the previous 4 weeks sales?) Alternatively, some form of 'amortised' sales might might the charts more realistic (e.g. weekly sales for chart purposes = 50% this week + 30% last week + 20 % week before). This might allow genuinely 'big' records to get swiftly to the top whilst keeping the minnows down and not being quite so slow as a rolling month long chart. (Whilst also ensuring every sale counts towards the chart at some stage

...has any record EVER been number 2 behind five different number ones before? I remember Alice Deejay being number 2 behind three, but can't think of many other similar? (Can't remember how many Love the Way You Lie was last year) Also, as it seems likely it may make no.1 next week, has any record ever been as long as five weeks at number 2 and then gone on to number 1? Jason/Kylie did 4 I think, and Abba's Fernando similar - any others?

what a crap year! with only 12 tracks left STILL plenty of $h!t to chose from!!!

hmmmm....reading this thread makes me realise how good this year's been so far as there's no song that's really pissed me off yet. (...unlike the '2005' thread which held the most dire records in history!) With no nauseating football songs on the horizon and all charity songs swiftly evaporating , 2011 is looking pretty good!

great idea! ...and now can we re-compile the singles chart to exclude charity singles?!?!

just to confirm - will the 2 versions of someone like you be combined for the final chart of will the live version be regarded as a seperate single (like the florence record last year)?

hmmm....really think you should make it 3 charts, male, female and any collaboration/mixed song should be in a third 'transexual' chart!

I find it hard to vote in this poll, because both options are true in certain circumstances. For example, take Eamon's 'f*** You I Don't Want You Back' - in this record the swearing seems to be a genuine expression of hurt feelings at the end of a relationship (and probably many of us have said similar in those circumstances!), At the other extreme, Enrique Iglesias's 'Tonight I'm f***ing You' - seems really out of place, really a 'how can I get a bit of street cred' and is consequently really sad (the radio edit 'Tonight I'm Loving You' seeming much more genuine) Others, like Cee Lo Green's 'f*** You' seems somewhere between the two

I seem to recall there being a lot of fuss about the notion of '% increase' having been the deciding factor given they were tied in terms of the sample units they used to do the charts in these - and as the media pointed out, Dee-Lite being effectively punished for being no.4 the previous week when the Steve Miller Band were no.6. Maybe I'm mis-remembering, but wasn't there a period afterwards where ties weren't seperated resulting in the occasional 'joint no.26's' or whatever in the early 90s? Quite agree about the pointlessness of buying a record to try to change it's chart place, even though it be nice to see an artist you've supported do well in the charts. Personally, I'm very sad and buy all top 40 singles the week they enter the chart. Only record I couldn't bring myself to buy in the last few years was the 4'33" : what a rip off! Suddenly started having warm feelings towards Simon Cowell afterwards...!

glee cast?

Don't find Reggie personally annoying, but sometimes the mistakes he makes really indicates a dis-interest in the chart. I recall that for several weeks he referred to a record which only reached number 3 as a 'former number 1' : although no doubt a script error, if you can't even remember whether a record reached number one on your own show a few weeks back why do it? I agree the skipping of particular records is irritating - 'Tops of the Pops' used to have almost fanatical rules over what to play and not and the top 40 should do likewise, not that it isn't possible to include all 40 records Given all the plugging of their website, couldn't text messages simply be displayed online rather than read out (on a forum like this for R1 perhaps)?

looks like the early/mid 90s sales downgrades have been completely reversed - Think Twice and Gangsta Paradise both much higher than I expected - be interesting to see where Wet Wet Wet and Robson and Jerome end up!

agreed - someone who can get a full 40 records into 3 hours with a few interesing fact as well ...and no irritating non-entities popping in to warble about how wonderful it is getting to number 27 and how grateful they are to the public for 10 minutes!!

seem to remember the interesting bit of 'rivers of babylon' run was 21-2-1-1-1-1-1-2-3-6-10-18-20-18-10-6-5-4-3-2......(can't remember after that , but think it was quite a swift decline) did any other number 1 record occupy all of the top 6 positions? also, any better symmetry than the 6-10-18-20-18-10-6 bit ever?