First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 1  Votes  2822 37/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     3171    (22.5%)  1 Neil COLLINS     3017    (21.4%)  1 John BEZETT     2205    (15.6%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     1858    (13.2%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     1631    (11.6%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     569    (4.0%)  1 Andrew BROWN     529    (3.7%)  1 Stuart KEMP     506    (3.6%)  1 Jane BOREHAM     203    (1.4%)  1 Grant BENSON     192    (1.4%)  1 Graeme HENDERSON     177    (1.3%)  1 Jimmy KNOWLES     55    (0.4%)  1           Results       Neil COLLINS Elected     Leah MCBEY Elected               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Neil COLLINS 194 23/60 55/60 1: 2830   Leah MCBEY 348 23/60 52/60 1: 2945

Each ballot initially counts toward its highest-ranked eligible choice. However, in future rounds, a maximum fraction of a ballot may be imposed on a candidate. This allows voters for popular winners (or for eliminated losers) to help unelected candidates or candidates elected later. If there are no such candidates, the leftover fraction goes back to the first winner, or count toward "none of these" if there are no ranked winners.

The ballot fraction precision is equal to 1/Seats(Seats+1), which ensures that winners can always be kept between Enough votes to win, more than (Total Votes for Candidates)/(Seats+1), and the Ideal Number of votes, (Total Votes for Candidates)/Seats.
If all winners have at least "Enough" votes, it is impossible to elect too many candidates. This number is Ballots/(Seats+1) plus the smallest fraction.
If all winners have exactly the Ideal Number of votes, and they each have an equal voice, everyone who voted for a winner is equally represented.
The dotted line on the graph represents Enough votes.
The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 2  Votes  2822 37/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2835 20/60  (20.1%)  52/60 Neil COLLINS     2857 58/60  (20.3%)  55/60 John BEZETT     2359 27/60  (16.7%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     1949 35/60  (13.8%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     1700 8/60  (12.0%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     619 31/60  (4.4%)  1 Andrew BROWN     571 23/60  (4.0%)  1 Stuart KEMP     538 25/60  (3.8%)  1 Jane BOREHAM     230 19/60  (1.6%)  1 Grant BENSON     203 18/60  (1.4%)  1 Graeme HENDERSON     187 44/60  (1.3%)  1 Jimmy KNOWLES     59 52/60  (0.4%)  1           Results       Jimmy KNOWLES Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 3  Votes  2821 25/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2842 25/60  (20.1%)  52/60 Neil COLLINS     2866 18/60  (20.3%)  55/60 John BEZETT     2364 1/60  (16.8%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     1959 56/60  (13.9%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     1711 42/60  (12.1%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     623 47/60  (4.4%)  1 Andrew BROWN     573 31/60  (4.1%)  1 Stuart KEMP     538 38/60  (3.8%)  1 Jane BOREHAM     230 56/60  (1.6%)  1 Grant BENSON     207 46/60  (1.5%)  1 Graeme HENDERSON     188    (1.3%)  1 None of these     6                Results       Graeme HENDERSON Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 4  Votes  2817 25/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2864 56/60  (20.3%)  52/60 Neil COLLINS     2885 46/60  (20.5%)  55/60 John BEZETT     2395    (17.0%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     1988 9/60  (14.1%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     1730 8/60  (12.3%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     642 34/60  (4.6%)  1 Andrew BROWN     580 39/60  (4.1%)  1 Stuart KEMP     553 55/60  (3.9%)  1 Jane BOREHAM     237 44/60  (1.7%)  1 Grant BENSON     208 9/60  (1.5%)  1 None of these     26                Results       Neil COLLINS Equalized     Leah MCBEY Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Neil COLLINS 68 21/60 54/60 55/60: 2850 8/60: 524   Leah MCBEY 47 31/60 51/60 52/60: 2963 6/60: 656

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 5  Votes  2817 25/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2827 21/60  (20.1%)  51/60 Neil COLLINS     2848 3/60  (20.2%)  54/60 John BEZETT     2420 15/60  (17.2%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     2002 54/60  (14.2%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     1740 39/60  (12.4%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     650 30/60  (4.6%)  1 Andrew BROWN     586 48/60  (4.2%)  1 Stuart KEMP     559 3/60  (4.0%)  1 Jane BOREHAM     241 30/60  (1.7%)  1 Grant BENSON     209 57/60  (1.5%)  1 None of these     26                Results       Grant BENSON Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 6  Votes  2813 25/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2863 18/60  (20.4%)  51/60 Neil COLLINS     2861 57/60  (20.3%)  54/60 John BEZETT     2438 36/60  (17.3%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     2029 15/60  (14.4%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     1770 27/60  (12.6%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     655 15/60  (4.7%)  1 Andrew BROWN     613 30/60  (4.4%)  1 Stuart KEMP     571 9/60  (4.1%)  1 Jane BOREHAM     263 33/60  (1.9%)  1 None of these     46                Results       Neil COLLINS Equalized     Leah MCBEY Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Neil COLLINS 48 32/60 53/60 54/60: 2860 9/60: 520   Leah MCBEY 49 53/60 50/60 51/60: 2976 6/60: 654

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 7  Votes  2813 25/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2825 39/60  (20.1%)  50/60 Neil COLLINS     2824 10/60  (20.1%)  53/60 John BEZETT     2464 9/60  (17.5%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     2044 18/60  (14.5%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     1781 12/60  (12.7%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     663 26/60  (4.7%)  1 Andrew BROWN     619 52/60  (4.4%)  1 Stuart KEMP     576 26/60  (4.1%)  1 Jane BOREHAM     267 48/60  (1.9%)  1 None of these     46                Results       Jane BOREHAM Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 8  Votes  2809 49/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2891 27/60  (20.6%)  50/60 Neil COLLINS     2862 45/60  (20.4%)  53/60 John BEZETT     2483 22/60  (17.7%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     2065 4/60  (14.7%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     1804 19/60  (12.8%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     678 21/60  (4.8%)  1 Andrew BROWN     661 33/60  (4.7%)  1 Stuart KEMP     602 9/60  (4.3%)  1 None of these     64                Results       Neil COLLINS Equalized     Leah MCBEY Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Neil COLLINS 52 56/60 52/60 53/60: 2885 10/60: 526   Leah MCBEY 81 38/60 49/60 50/60: 2970 7/60: 659

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 9  Votes  2809 49/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2854 18/60  (20.3%)  49/60 Neil COLLINS     2825    (20.1%)  52/60 John BEZETT     2509 35/60  (17.9%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     2080 38/60  (14.8%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     1815 41/60  (12.9%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     686 57/60  (4.9%)  1 Andrew BROWN     669    (4.8%)  1 Stuart KEMP     607 51/60  (4.3%)  1 None of these     64                Results       Stuart KEMP Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 10  Votes  2801 1/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2957 52/60  (21.1%)  49/60 Neil COLLINS     2902 51/60  (20.7%)  52/60 John BEZETT     2596 51/60  (18.5%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     2188 23/60  (15.6%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     1879 39/60  (13.4%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     743 30/60  (5.3%)  1 Andrew BROWN     735 54/60  (5.3%)  1 None of these     108                Results       Neil COLLINS Equalized     Leah MCBEY Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Neil COLLINS 101 50/60 50/60 52/60: 2935 11/60: 550   Leah MCBEY 156 51/60 46/60 49/60: 3036 8/60: 682

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 11  Votes  2801 1/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2832 26/60  (20.2%)  46/60 Neil COLLINS     2838 4/60  (20.3%)  50/60 John BEZETT     2665 28/60  (19.0%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     2230 12/60  (15.9%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     1911 56/60  (13.7%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     768 10/60  (5.5%)  1 Andrew BROWN     758 44/60  (5.4%)  1 None of these     108                Results       Andrew BROWN Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 12  Votes  2788 37/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2999 30/60  (21.5%)  46/60 Neil COLLINS     2942 20/60  (21.1%)  50/60 John BEZETT     2752 16/60  (19.7%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     2321 48/60  (16.7%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     2057 6/60  (14.8%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     870    (6.2%)  1 None of these     170                Results       Neil COLLINS Equalized     Leah MCBEY Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Neil COLLINS 153 43/60 47/60 50/60: 2989 14/60: 575   Leah MCBEY 210 53/60 42/60 46/60: 3015 10/60: 680

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 13  Votes  2788 37/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2840 12/60  (20.4%)  42/60 Neil COLLINS     2841 53/60  (20.4%)  47/60 John BEZETT     2856 38/60  (20.5%)  1 Bill ACKLIN     2385 57/60  (17.1%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     2108 46/60  (15.1%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     909 34/60  (6.5%)  1 None of these     170                Results       John BEZETT Elected     Neil COLLINS Equalized     Leah MCBEY Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   John BEZETT 68 1/60 58/60 1: 2245 18/60: 624 13/60: 817   Neil COLLINS 53 16/60 46/60 47/60: 2989 18/60: 575   Leah MCBEY 51 35/60 41/60 42/60: 3015 13/60: 680

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 14  Votes  2788 37/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2822 19/60  (20.2%)  41/60 Neil COLLINS     2833 55/60  (20.3%)  46/60 John BEZETT     2811 54/60  (20.2%)  58/60 Bill ACKLIN     2414 49/60  (17.3%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     2130 43/60  (15.3%)  1 Christopher George MARLOW     929 20/60  (6.7%)  1 None of these     170                Results       Christopher George MARLOW Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 15  Votes  2765 49/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     3039 42/60  (22.0%)  41/60 Neil COLLINS     2994 10/60  (21.7%)  46/60 John BEZETT     3018 15/60  (21.8%)  58/60 Bill ACKLIN     2539 45/60  (18.4%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     2237 8/60  (16.2%)  1 None of these     284                Results       John BEZETT Equalized     Neil COLLINS Equalized     Leah MCBEY Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   John BEZETT 252 26/60 45/60 58/60: 2264 19/60: 625 14/60: 801   Neil COLLINS 228 21/60 37/60 46/60: 3025 19/60: 612 2/60: 683   Leah MCBEY 273 53/60 32/60 41/60: 3022 14/60: 690 2/60: 438

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 16  Votes  2765 49/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2874 38/60  (20.8%)  32/60 Neil COLLINS     2874 25/60  (20.8%)  37/60 John BEZETT     2837 1/60  (20.5%)  45/60 Bill ACKLIN     2802 35/60  (20.3%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     2440 21/60  (17.6%)  1 None of these     284                Results       Bill ACKLIN Elected               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Bill ACKLIN 36 46/60 1 1: 1861 28/60: 367 23/60: 462 15/60: 241

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

There is a newly elected candidate whose maximum could not be reduced. The surplus is lower than the number of ballots in the first histogram bin (the ballots counting the largest fraction toward the candidate) times the smallest fraction, so they cannot all transfer that fraction without exceeding the surplus.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 17  Votes  2765 49/60 (20%) Max Leah MCBEY     2874 38/60  (20.8%)  32/60 Neil COLLINS     2874 25/60  (20.8%)  37/60 John BEZETT     2837 1/60  (20.5%)  45/60 Bill ACKLIN     2802 35/60  (20.3%)  1 Jeremy BELCHER     2440 21/60  (17.6%)  1 None of these     284                Results       Jeremy BELCHER Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 18  Votes  3379 45/60 (25%) Max Leah MCBEY     3451 15/60  (25.5%)  32/60 Neil COLLINS     3313 48/60  (24.5%)  37/60 John BEZETT     3346 43/60  (24.8%)  45/60 Bill ACKLIN     3407 14/60  (25.2%)  1 None of these     594                Results       Leah MCBEY Equalized     Bill ACKLIN Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Leah MCBEY 71 30/60 31/60 32/60: 3018 23/60: 686 15/60: 453   Bill ACKLIN 27 29/60 59/60 1: 1978 29/60: 387 23/60: 494 15/60: 267

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Only winners remain, so the dotted line is raised to the Ideal Number.
Go to the next round

First Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 19  Votes  3379 45/60 (25%) Max Leah MCBEY     3410 38/60  (25.2%)  31/60 Neil COLLINS     3341 50/60  (24.7%)  37/60 John BEZETT     3378 20/60  (25.0%)  45/60 Bill ACKLIN     3388 12/60  (25.1%)  59/60 None of these     594                Results         Bill ACKLIN Elected     John BEZETT Elected     Neil COLLINS Elected     Leah MCBEY Elected

No further maximum reductions are allowed, so the count is complete. All winners should be near the Ideal Number of votes. Usually most ballots count toward their highest-ranked winner. Some count for two winners, but rarely more than that. See the slice report. The depth report shows the contribution of lower choices to the result. The "none of these" pile is an accurate measure of unsatisfied voters.

First Round | Final Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Rank	Fraction of votes for winners
1st	55.9%
2nd	27.8%
3rd	10.6%
4th	4.5%
5th	0.7%
6th	0.3%
7th	0.1%
8th	0.1%

First Round | Final Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Slices	Percentage of ballots with that many slices
1	21.4%
2	78.6%