Quote:
Originally Posted by Dunbar
It's true that a higher percentage of women than men voted for AP. But it's also crystal clear from those graphs that more people overall voted for Kansas City than for AP. If you only had those "by gender" graphs to go by, there's no rational way you would conclude that AP got the most votes.
Whatever way they got the sample of voters in that gender graph, it wasn't representative of the overall voting. There's nothing subtle about the discrepancy:
http://www.si.com/sportsmanofyear/20...sportsman-year (about half-way down the page, just above the comments) |
I wouldn't say "crystal clear," but I would agree that the bar graphs are a muddled mess- without showing the numbers next to the colors, there's not much you can take from the bar graphs (though they are very pretty). My brother's take on it was that it was highly unlikely it was representative data- if you're only taking respondents who self-identify their gender and age, you're not going to get a clear representation, because only using voters who voluntarily give out that data is already affecting the results. He mostly focused on the fact that the poll is clearly skewed by its nature to America, which made me laugh. To quote him:
"The world figure shows it was a pretty biased selection with the US dominating the number of respondents. The rest of the world cares about soccer and almost exclusively soccer. That figure does show that we do have to be careful in interpreting the data. Australia voted for Stephen Curry? Really? The American basketball player. Either there is a Rugby or Cricket player also named Stephen Curry or the only vote from Australia was by an American ex-pats living there."
But hey, props to Uruguay, for voting for the Pharoah!