Countdown to Rihanna becoming Hot100's most prominent artist

[Sherane Lamar]

countingdownto.com/countdown/rihanna-dethrones-elvis-presley-countdown-clock

On August 9th, 1958, the Hot 100 was born. On that day, Elvis Presley had "Hard Headed Woman" at #4 and "Don't Ask Me Why" at #34, giving him a weekly inverse point system score of 164 (97 + 67), putting him just above Dean Martin as the most prominent artist of the week, as well as the most prominent artist in the one week history of the Hot 100.

www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100/1958-08-09

Now, in February of 2017, over 3,050 weeks later, Elvis Presley is still the most prominent artist in the history of the Hot 100. From the birth of the Hot 100, to the artists death in 1977, there was never a year in which Elvis hadn't logged a hit song into the Hot 100. The man never took a year off. He was the chart's most prominent artist of the 1960's. Even though his career predates the modern charting system, he died with the record high inverse point system total under his belt and 39 years later, he still holds the title. 

However, that's about to change on March 7th, 2017. 



The most popular artist of the 21st century is about to take the title of most prominent artist in Billboard history. 

Rihanna has had an incredible and unprecedented 11.5 year career of hit after hit after hit. Beginning with "Pon De Replay" in July of 2005 when she was only 17 years old. "Love On The Brain" is expected to become her 24th Top 10 hit on February 20th (her 29th birthday).

It should also be noted that Rihanna's inverse point system total does not include her many massive hits as a featured artist, such as "Live Your Life", "The Monster", "Love The Way You Lie", "Run This Town" or "This Is What You Came For".

For reference: 

Elvis Presley: 61,810 points
Rihanna: 61,579 points

For comparison to other major artists:

Madonna: 59,265
Elton John: 58,993 
Taylor Swift: 52,968
Mariah Carey: 52,887 (as of Feb 25, 2017)
Drake: 52,578 (as of Feb 25, 2017)
Usher: 51,102
The Beatles: 45,242
Stevie Wonder: 44,450 



I don't have Michael Jackson, Janet Jackson or Whitney Houston. But I'm sure they'd all be above 40,000 as well. 

[renfield75]

I don't know about their point totals, but there are some glaring factual errors in that article. Elvis died much longer than 29 years ago (it will be 40 this summer) and he turned 23 in January 1958, not 29 in December.

[Sherane Lamar]

Feb 15, 2017 23:21:17 GMT -5 renfield75 said:

I don't know about their point totals, but there are some glaring factual errors in that article. Elvis died much longer than 29 years ago (it will be 40 this summer) and he turned 23 in January 1958, not 29 in December.

Thanks.  IDK how I made such obvious mistakes. 

Thankfully, I used an actual spreadsheet for the number crunching, lmao.  

[Caviar]

Why exclude features?

[Sherane Lamar]

Feb 15, 2017 23:32:09 GMT -5 Caviar said:

Why exclude features?

For a ton of reasons. Short answer: It's a little more fair. 

It probably wouldn't take too long to make a feature version, but I'm pretty sure Drake and Wayne would be the top 2. It would skewed in a similar way to how the "most songs on the Hot 100" skews towards artists who get a lot of features. 

[Old-school 72]

Feb 16, 2017 1:46:40 GMT -5 Sherane Lamar said:

Feb 15, 2017 23:32:09 GMT -5 Caviar said:

Why exclude features?

For a ton of reasons. Short answer: It's a little more fair. 

It probably wouldn't take too long to make a feature version, but I'm pretty sure Drake and Wayne would be the top 2. It would skewed in a similar way to how the "most songs on the Hot 100" skews towards artists who get a lot of features. 

Features should count, but points should be split or divided depending on if there was more than one other artist on the track. I'm not a fan of Elvis or Rihanna, but Rihanna will never be the most prominent artist. Elvis has over 100 hits all on his own, Rihanna isnt halfway there. Elvis songs are more memorable also. I can only think of about ten Rihanna songs that stick out and most were from at least 6 yrs ago. She is a huge artist, but the way music is consumed these days it's hard to know how well Elvis or any other singer of the past would have done with the same type of system we have in play these days. I believe if downloads and streaming existed in the 80s , artists such as Madonna, Michael Jackson and Prince would actually have more hits and more points putting them at the Top far over Rihanna.

[Sherane Lamar]

Feb 16, 2017 2:52:51 GMT -5 Old-school 72 said:

Feb 16, 2017 1:46:40 GMT -5 Sherane Lamar said:

For a ton of reasons. Short answer: It's a little more fair. 

It probably wouldn't take too long to make a feature version, but I'm pretty sure Drake and Wayne would be the top 2. It would skewed in a similar way to how the "most songs on the Hot 100" skews towards artists who get a lot of features. 

Features should count, but points should be split or divided depending on if there was more than one other artist on the track. I'm not a fan of Elvis or Rihanna, but Rihanna will never be the most prominent artist. Elvis has over 100 hits all on his own, Rihanna isnt halfway there. Elvis songs are more memorable also. I can only think of about ten Rihanna songs that stick out and most were from at least 6 yrs ago. She is a huge artist, but the way music is consumed these days it's hard to know how well Elvis or any other singer of the past would have done with the same type of system we have in play these days. I believe if downloads and streaming existed in the 80s , artists such as Madonna, Michael Jackson and Prince would actually have more hits and more points putting them at the Top far over Rihanna.

That's why I stuck to the word "prominent". Fact is her name shows up (as the main artist) towards the top of the list more often than any other artist other than Elvis. That's prominence. Not a fan of getting into the politics of it. We've all had the conversation about turnover rates and industry changes about 200 times each. 

I'm a fan of doing things in a very straightforward way. There's nothing arbitrary about the basic inv pnt system. It's the kind of system that even though I came up with it myself... several other people came up with it by themselves as well. 

Whether we split the points for a song between two artists, or give a song with features more overall points, either way, I think it unfairly effects the list. And more importantly to me, it adds something arbitrary to the system. Would Drake get 50% of "Work"? Would he get 33% of "Work"? What if there were 2 featured artists? Would they each get 25%? Does "And" differ from "Featuring" in how it's split? What about all the other random conjunctions? How would "Artist A & Artist B Featuring Artist C" be treated? Too many rules to make. 

I like to keep my lists and stats as basic and as transparent as possible. Others like to weight them, adjust them and do other things. I'm all for that. I think it's awesome. I put a lot of work into these stats. I enjoy it when I see other people put work into big lists as well. 

[Old-school 72]

I think it's great people like to make their own charts and point systems. I'm not trying to argue who is right or wrong. All I'm saying is Rihanna can have 50 more hits, but in some people's eyes she is still never gonna reach the prominent spot of overtaking legends. Like I said if artists who were hitting the charts before streaming and the allowance of every album track making the chart, people like Madonna, Michael Jackson, The Beatles, and Mariah Carey would have had twice as many hits as they do. So these artists are still more prominent than Rihanna or Drake. My opinion. I have my own chart, which I've been doing since 1988 and Madonna is actually #1 based on my point system.

[Gary]

Nothing wrong with this at all, all measurements are different. All are good, depending on what you want to look at.

The most recent Billboard update from, I think 2015 has Rihanna at #13 and Joel Whitburn (thru 2015) has Rihanna at #11. Joel Whitburn also removes features

If you change the system and look at just most entries, the "legendary" Glee Cast and their 283 chart entries (including Bubbling Under)could even be #1 - LOL

[Baby Yoda Hot100Fan]

Let's hope Billboard comes up with a refreshed Hot 100 All-Time Artist chart when they do their Hot 100 60th anniversary chart next year. I think Rihanna would have entered the Top 10 by then.

[Choco]

At this point Rihanna is a bigger threat to the Beatles record of most #1's by an act than Mariah. I don't think anyone expected the Pon de Replay girl to have such a huge domination of the charts.

I'd still like to see a version of this that includes features. For an artist that has had many huge features like Rihanna it probably makes a huge difference. She's also sung the chorus or been a key element on most of her features (This is What You Came For, for example) instead of random guest verses like some Nicki Minaj or Drake features.

[Old-school 72]

Random question. How many people who post on here are old enough to remember how records were tallied before soundscan.

[jenglisbe]

Wow, how is Rihanna taking over everyone when her features don't even count? She has fewer #1s, fewer top 10s, etc.? Weird. I assume a lot of it is that she's charting in an age when songs stay on the Hot 100 longer?

[Old-school 72]

Feb 16, 2017 13:08:08 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Wow, how is Rihanna taking over everyone when her features don't even count? She has fewer #1s, fewer top 10s, etc.? Weird. I assume a lot of it is that she's charting in an age when songs stay on the Hot 100 longer?

That is exactly it. Songs before soundscan were lucky to get 20 weeks. So the point system isn't fair. Also the songs from those days are classics, I find her stuff underwhelming. Umbrella Ella Ella Ella.

[jenglisbe]

Feb 16, 2017 14:26:25 GMT -5 Old-school 72 said:

Feb 16, 2017 13:08:08 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Wow, how is Rihanna taking over everyone when her features don't even count? She has fewer #1s, fewer top 10s, etc.? Weird. I assume a lot of it is that she's charting in an age when songs stay on the Hot 100 longer?

That is exactly it. Songs before soundscan were lucky to get 20 weeks. So the point system isn't fair. Also the songs from those days are classics, I find her stuff underwhelming. Umbrella Ella Ella Ella.

Ok I thought so on this system. Blah.

I think Rihanna has a few legit classics, but in no way is she on par with Elvis, Madonna, The Beatles, Mariah, etc at this point.

[Baby Yoda Hot100Fan]

Feb 16, 2017 13:00:46 GMT -5 Old-school 72 said:

Random question. How many people who post on here are old enough to remember how records were tallied before soundscan.

I am and do remember looking at some Billboard magazines during the 1980s as well as following the weekly American Top 40 radio show with Casey Kasem. Sorry, if I may ask, is the 72 in your username related to your birthyear? If so, we were born the same year.

[ry4n]

I wonder how people viewed Madonna in 1994 or Mariah in 2001. Did they think their material stood up amongst past legends at the time?

[HolidayGuy]

Not sure what kind of system the above is, but The Beatles are the No. 1 Hot 100 act, per Billboard's methodology.

And, features do count in Billboard's methodology. The lead act gets 70% of the points for a single's week-to-week run, while the featured act gets 30% (if it's more than one featured act, those acts split the 30% evenly).

For duets or tracks where all acts have equal credit, each act gets 50% of the points for a single's run (if it's three acts- like on "Four Five Seconds"- they each get 33.33%). This makes sense; I'm surprised Whitburn still attributes all points to each act for cases like this.

I'm sure Billboard will post an updated list for the Hot 100's 60th anniversary.

[Me. I Am l!nk!nfan815...]

Lmao. This thread is crap and full of lies. There's no way possible Riri has that many points(which by the way...where are the receipts *whitney's voice*) when it's not including her features which are the songs that are her most successful.

Close thread.

[Gary]

Feb 16, 2017 14:46:52 GMT -5 Me. I Am l!nk!nfan815... said:

Lmao. This thread is crap and full of lies. There's no way possible Riri has that many points(which by the way...where are the receipts *whitney's voice*) when it's not including her features which are the songs that are her most successful.

Close thread.

Nothing wrong with this thread, it is the OPs interpretation of who the all-time biggest artist is.  It is not official, it is not meant to be factual.  The countdown with a link to a countdown clock is a little much but beyond that, it is all in fun.

Besides, Glee Cast with their 283 hits probably have more points than Rihanna anyway - LOL

[Baby Yoda Hot100Fan]

One thing I did notice: the fact that Taylor Swift and Drake have more, for example, than The Beatles seems wrong.

The inverse point system is probably one of the worse ones in the sense that it favors the more current artists since they tend to have longer chart runs than the ones that charted before. That easily explains the great disparities in the positions shown here and those using other methods. It is probably the most brute force method there is.

[Me. I Am l!nk!nfan815...]

Feb 16, 2017 15:07:55 GMT -5 Gary said:

Feb 16, 2017 14:46:52 GMT -5 Me. I Am l!nk!nfan815... said:

Lmao. This thread is crap and full of lies. There's no way possible Riri has that many points(which by the way...where are the receipts *whitney's voice*) when it's not including her features which are the songs that are her most successful.

Close thread.

Nothing wrong with this thread, it is the OPs interpretation of who the all-time biggest artist is.  It is not official, it is not meant to be factual.  The countdown with a link to a countdown clock is a little much but beyond that, it is all in fun.

Besides, Glee Cast with their 283 hits probably have more points than Rihanna anyway - LOL

This part of the forum is about numbers/facts backed up by sources. The OP can take this to the Opinions Thread.

[areyoureadytojump]

It's rumored that Rihanna will have a new album out in November.

[NeRD]

Unbelievable.

[Gary]

Feb 16, 2017 15:17:23 GMT -5 Me. I Am l!nk!nfan815... said:

Feb 16, 2017 15:07:55 GMT -5 Gary said:

Nothing wrong with this thread, it is the OPs interpretation of who the all-time biggest artist is.  It is not official, it is not meant to be factual.  The countdown with a link to a countdown clock is a little much but beyond that, it is all in fun.

Besides, Glee Cast with their 283 hits probably have more points than Rihanna anyway - LOL

This part of the forum is about numbers/facts backed up by sources. The OP can take this to the Opinions Thread.

With all the "prediction" threads that have taken over this forum, likely not - but not my call either

[rimetm]

Feb 16, 2017 15:17:23 GMT -5 Me. I Am l!nk!nfan815... said:

Feb 16, 2017 15:07:55 GMT -5 Gary said:

Nothing wrong with this thread, it is the OPs interpretation of who the all-time biggest artist is.  It is not official, it is not meant to be factual.  The countdown with a link to a countdown clock is a little much but beyond that, it is all in fun.

Besides, Glee Cast with their 283 hits probably have more points than Rihanna anyway - LOL

This part of the forum is about numbers/facts backed up by sources. The OP can take this to the Opinions Thread.

It is about numbers though, specifically an empirical inverse-point system filtered by lead credits. Just because you think the methodology sucks doesn't mean it's not backed up by sources (i.e. the Hot 100 itself).

[Baby Yoda Hot100Fan]

Feb 16, 2017 15:22:57 GMT -5 areyoureadytojump said:

It's rumored that Rihanna will have a new album out in November.

It doesn't seem so far fetched. Although, that might mean she's returning to her previous pace of releasing albums. In a sense, Anti was an unusual release due to the amount of time it came after Unapologetic. Before that she released one album per year since 2005, only skipping 2008.

[feoba]

Plus, in 2009 she re-released an album and released two #1 songs lol, 2014 was really the only year she took off.

[Old-school 72]

Feb 16, 2017 14:31:30 GMT -5 Baby Yoda Hot100Fan said:

Feb 16, 2017 13:00:46 GMT -5 Old-school 72 said:

Random question. How many people who post on here are old enough to remember how records were tallied before soundscan.

I am and do remember looking at some Billboard magazines during the 1980s as well as following the weekly American Top 40 radio show with Casey Kasem. Sorry, if I may ask, is the 72 in your username related to your birthyear? If so, we were born the same year.

yes the 72 is my birth year. I enjoyed the charts back in the 80s. Artists released a new single about every three months and the previous hit was deleted from press. That is why most songs got 20 or less weeks. People moved on to the next single, it didn't linger around for a year. I still get the charts every week because it's an old hobby. I tend to know about a third of the chart because I give everything a listen but find that most is crap to my ears. Back to the original subject, there is no way Rihanna is close in points to overtake Elvis, the Beatles or Mariah Carey. Everyone can have their own system but even Billboards system is jacked if it's based on the new trends of today.

[Sherane Lamar]

Feb 16, 2017 15:07:55 GMT -5 Gary said:

Feb 16, 2017 14:46:52 GMT -5 Me. I Am l!nk!nfan815... said:

Lmao. This thread is crap and full of lies. There's no way possible Riri has that many points(which by the way...where are the receipts *whitney's voice*) when it's not including her features which are the songs that are her most successful.

Close thread.

Nothing wrong with this thread, it is the OPs interpretation of who the all-time biggest artist is.  It is not official, it is not meant to be factual.  The countdown with a link to a countdown clock is a little much but beyond that, it is all in fun.

Besides, Glee Cast with their 283 hits probably have more points than Rihanna anyway - LOL

The thread is meant to be 100% factual. If there is something non-factual about it, please point it out and I will try to fix it. 

Glee Cast does not have 283 Hot 100 hits. 283 is including bubbling under. Glee Cast has 8,346 points for this decade. As of the end of 2016, they are the 64th biggest artist of the 2010's decade. 

Keep in mind that this is a system used to measure prominence. Each of Glee's hits only lasted 1 or 2 weeks on the chart. That's not going to put them anywhere near the top. 

EDIT: Oops. This part below is meant for Old School 72

Also, I think you're wrong about Mariah and Madonna being able to do better if they were put into different eras. Compare Mariah to Rihanna. The Soundscan era began like 1 year into Mariah's career. So both exist in eras with similar recurrent rates. The streaming era began only 3 years ago, and Rihanna has performed in 2016 pretty much the exact same way that she performed in 2010-2012. Apart from allowing songs to debut higher, digital sales have not had a great impact on the longevity of songs on the Hot 100. 

You seem upset by the results of a very objective system. I don't see why you need to encourage Coco though...