Mag Talk - Weekly Shonen Jump [2015] - Discussion and TOC Talk (2025)

Here is the positions that WT got in this year (so far):

9 5 7 4 10 6 13 9 8 9 9 8 10 7 12 10 5 11 9 9 13 10 13 13 12 8 7 11

As we can see it's normal for it to get low positions.
The sales are growing, so it's not doomed like everyone is saying.

piau9000 said:

1 - One Piece
2 - My Hero Academia
3 - Assassination Classroom
4 - Hinomaru Zumou
5 - Black Clover
6 - Food Wars
7 - Straighten Up
8 - Gintama
9 - Toriko
10 - PSI Kusou Saiki
11 - World Trigger
12 - Kochikame
13 - Nisekoi
14 - Best Blue
15 - Bleach
16 - Kagamigami

Average ranking of 2015 - VOL 43

Names in red means that the series ended or moved to another magazine.

One Piece - 1.62
Assassination Classroom - 1.96
My Hero Academia - 2.46
Haikyuu - 4.10
Food Wars - 4.2
Black Clover - 4.66
Straighten Up - 5.44
Hinomaru Zumou - 5.72
Toriko - 6.91
Gintama - 6.97
PSI Kusou Saiki - 7.02
Nisekoi - 8.70
World Trigger - 9.17
Kagamigami - 10.18
Hakkyuu Houtei - 11.15
Kochikame - 11.32
Bleach - 11.78
Ultra Battle Satellite - 11.9
Judos - 12
Takujou no Ageha - 12.33
Hi-Fi Cluster - 12.71
Best Blue - 13
Devily Man - 13.44
Cyborg Roggy - 13.5
E-Robot - 13.5
Sporting Salt - 13.5
Lady Justice - 14.22

Click to expand...

Since a lot of people are watching this thread I think someone should point this out: Are you aware, that even the Jump survival thread on 2chan is using an eight week average model? It doesn't make sense to use a valuation starting at issue #1. What do you intend to do when we reach issue #1/2016 in december.

conankudo said:

Since a lot of people are watching this thread I think someone should point this out: Are you aware, that even the Jump survival thread on 2chan is using an eight week average model? It doesn't make sense to use a valuation starting at issue #1. What do you intend to do when we reach issue #1/2016 in december.

Click to expand...

Wouldnt he logically start the count over for #1 2016? since it is an averange for x year list.

SharkBait said:

Wouldnt he logically start the count over for #1 2016? since it is an averange for x year list.

Click to expand...

He would and those numbers would not be represantive in my opinion in the first weeks

A full average is way better as it can show how a series really did in a yearly basis.
By using the 8 week formula we get placebo results that doesn't not represent the reality and the positions became chaotic.
It's pretty stable right now, so it's a fine example of why a full average is better.

After a new year begins I'll warp it up and start a 2016 list.
In the beginning it will be a chaos, but after a while it will stabilize.
It would make more sense to wait for the year end to do the list but it's better to do it weekly so you can trace the information better and can get a grap of the changes in positions.

It makes perfect sense to me to count issue #1 as it's how average works.
When making a average you takes into account EVERYTHING, not just what you think fits better.

I don't see why you make a huge fuss about it... :S

piau9000 said:

A full average is way better as it can show how a series really did in a yearly basis.
By using the 8 week formula we get placebo results that doesn't not represent the reality and the positions became chaotic.
It's pretty stable right now, so it's a fine example of why a full average is better.

After a new year begins I'll warp it up and start a 2016 list.
In the beginning it will be a chaos, but after a while it will stabilize.
It would make more sense to wait for the year end to do the list but it's better to do it weekly so you can trace the information better and can get a grap of the changes in positions.

It makes perfect sense to me to count issue #1 as it's how average works.
When making a average you takes into account EVERYTHING, not just what you think fits better.

I don't see why you make a huge fuss about it... :S

Click to expand...

Because it doesn't make sense on a weekly basis and therefore you spread false data . You can compile an annual ranking when the years is over to give an overview but as a working sheet it is just wrong. 8 weeks or 10 weeks averages would be more accurate.

Why not?
You just said that the 8 week (that is way more loose as it don't account everything) is fine. Why the first weeks don't?
Or it will only make sense to you after 8 weeks have passed?
How can a 8 week be more true and accurate than a full account?
Do you really know what average means?
False data? I'm using the data that YOU and other people posted here. There's nothing false here.
Or do you like to spread false information sometimes?

Don't read my list. Simple.
I'm not doing it to please you or the 2chan users.
I'm doing for archiving (for future use) and to prove why the weekly ranks make sense as the list shows that the canceled series are in the bottom.

For example.
By looking at the list we can pretty much assume that Best Blue will be the next axed series as it's in the middle of the red pool.

YOu are using an arithmetic mean method with different denomionators every week. The value changes every week since the denominator is getting bigger. If you would use an 10 or 8 weeks average model each week would have the same value every week (the same denominator) and you are able to compare the results. You can use an annual chart to compare it with previous years but not on a weekly basis. Mathematically speaking it doesn't make sense to me

---------- Post added at 07:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:37 PM ----------

And by the way, stop trying to insult me.

conankudo said:

YOu are using an arithmetic mean method with different denomionators every week. The value changes every week since the denominator is getting bigger. If you would use an 10 or 8 weeks average model each week would have the same value every week (the same denominator) and you are able to compare the results. You can use an annual chart to compare it with previous years but not on a weekly basis. Mathematically speaking it doesn't make sense to me

Click to expand...

I'm not doing it for comparation with other weeks. The weekly TOC that jump releases every week already does that perfectly.
Like I said I'm doing it to get a result at the end of the year, and I'm doing it weekly to get a grasp of the subtle changes, like a championship of sorts.
Another way to do it is by giving points based on the position.

And I'm not insulting you. You came all pasive-agressive trying to lecture me saying that I was wrong.
I'm just defending myself.

Anyone suggesting World Trigger ending anytime soonish (including next year) with the strong sales, tie-in products and all those other big series ending must be out of his/her mind.
The Jump Editors are no hysterical idiots. They can evaluate the situation of the magazine and see that with the strong current lineup it will be hard to get a new series that will do better than any old one in the long term and thus won't easily trash a series just because it sometimes ranks lower than some of the other heavy hitters it has.
Wild guess: World Trigger will reach 200 chapters at the very least, unless the mangaka gets hit by a truck or something.

The only series I'm worried about is Kagamigami, but more because of poor Iwashiro-sensei. I like what he is building up again, but his timing really sucked. :<

Antxon Kolokon said:

Last week I was in Fukuoka, Japan, And I visited the Jump official Store. Most of the merchandising was One Piece, Gintama, Naruto, Jojo and a little bit of Kuroko and Haikyuu.

Click to expand...

I think I already know the answer, but was there anything related to Bleach there?

DeidaraGrimmjow said:

I think I already know the answer, but was there anything related to Bleach there?

Click to expand...

The latest manga tankobon.

Antxon Kolokon said:

Last week I was in Fukuoka, Japan, And I visited the Jump official Store. Most of the merchandising was One Piece, Gintama, Naruto, Jojo and a little bit of Kuroko and Haikyuu.
I was rather shocked by the lack of World Trigger merchandising. Most of my Japanese friends don't read it either (but I don't think that's an indicator since they're in their 20s)
After seeing the real impact in a Jump Store in Japan, I kind of think that the West is overhyping a series that's not that popular there. (At least compared to the really popular stuff)
Maybe I got it wrong, but I can't see WT becoming a flagship or even getting to the 300 chapter mark.
But I may be wrong, of course. It was only one store.

Click to expand...

but theres tons of world trigger events and merchandise. perhaps you went during a time when they are preparing to restock and reorganize.

Antxon Kolokon said:

Last week I was in Fukuoka, Japan, And I visited the Jump official Store. Most of the merchandising was One Piece, Gintama, Naruto, Jojo and a little bit of Kuroko and Haikyuu.

Click to expand...

and Assassination Classroom?

vampire killer said:

440,289 (10 days) Kuroko no basket Extra game 1
241,891 (10 days) World trigger 12
200,033 (10 days) Toriko 36
Toriko sales are getting too way for no reason. This is the lowest I have seen them.
Fot the same amount of days:
Volume 34 237890
Volume 35 233428
So what the hell happened?

Click to expand...

Times change....just look at Bleach...Gintama managed to bounce back a bit thanks to the anime.......

SharkBait said:

but theres tons of world trigger events and merchandise. perhaps you went during a time when they are preparing to restock and reorganize.

Click to expand...

Occam's Razor, buddy.