This Is It: The Final Round of the 2017 Goodreads Choice Awards Starts Now!

Posted by Cybil on November 13, 2017


Vote now in the Final Round! »

It's all come down to this: It's time to pick from the best of the best to determine the winners of the 9th annual Goodreads Choice Awards. It's the only major book awards decided by you, the readers!

In the first two rounds of this year's Choice Awards, you cast 2.19 million votes (which also included your 19,000 write-in nominations). Those votes have been tallied and now we’ve narrowed down the field from 20 to ten favorites in each of the 20 genres.

Be sure to check out who made the final cut and vote your favorites onto victory in each of the categories including Fiction, Historical Fiction, Mystery & Thriller, Young Adult Fiction, Romance, Science Fiction, Nonfiction, and Debut Goodreads Author.

This final round lasts from November 14 until November 27.

We know that you stand by your vote, so share your picks with your friends, family, and followers on social media with the hashtag #GoodreadsChoice.

All of the Goodreads Choice Award winners will be announced on Tuesday, December 5.

So, what are you waiting for? Get to voting!



Comments Showing 1-24 of 24 (24 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Tamara (new)

Tamara My vote goes to From Sand and Ash by Amy Harmon in Best Historical. Hands down the best one on the list.


message 2: by Mike (new)

Mike The release date for Artemis is 14th November yet it is in the final round of the the Goodreads Choice Awards - where voting opens on 14th November.

How does this happen?

I'm a huge fan of Andy Weir and the Martian - and I hope Artemis is worthy of being in the choice awards - but this doesn't give me any sort of good feeling about the legitimacy of the awards.

I realise that the book has already been available for advanced previews but surely not enough to vote the book into the final round? Something doesn't sit right.


message 3: by Lidia (new)

Lidia I voted for Astrophysics for People in a Hurry by Neil deGrasse Tyson and Lost in a Book by Jennifer Donnelly. These are one of the best books I read this year! Very satisfying year so far!


message 4: by De Anna (new)

De Anna Mike wrote: "The release date for Artemis is 14th November yet it is in the final round of the the Goodreads Choice Awards - where voting opens on 14th November.

How does this happen?

I'm a hu..."


I agree. That doesn't make much since at all.


message 5: by MommaBear (new)

MommaBear Who do we address about these awards being rather fraudulent? Books with less than stellar reviews, suspicious release dates, obvious favorites of those who work for Goodreads are what's nominated. How did these even GET nominated? Can you prove the votes received for each? Strange how discussion groups dedicated to some of these authors are silent
about these awards, and they'd be the ones voting for their favorite book.

I'd like an audit done by an independent site. Most things Goodreads are unreliable, like as-yet-unpublished books getting 4+ star "reviews", but a few of these finalists are REALLY suspect, in my opinion.


message 6: by MommaBear (new)

MommaBear Mike wrote: "The release date for Artemis is 14th November yet it is in the final round of the the Goodreads Choice Awards - where voting opens on 14th November.

How does this happen?

I'm a hu..."


Most of these don't sit right. See my comment.


online timesheet Timesheet Awesome collection all are very useful, thank you for this post


message 8: by Yaaresse (new)

Yaaresse Don't we all realize that awards and contests like this are basically popularity contests anyway?

First, as has been pointed out every year and as is particularly illustrated by the inclusion of Artemis this year, there is no way most readers could be expected to read some of these books. Even with the ridiculous number of ARCs given away these days, it's not enough to warrant inclusion in the final round of voting.

Why not set the eligibility dates for July 1 to July 1 with nominees announced at the usual time? It wouldn't make things much more legit, but at least more people would have time to access the books through traditional channels. (You know, actually buying them or getting them from a library that has bought them.) Authors probably would appreciate winning a reader-driven award if the voters actually might have read their work.

Since GR tracks everything and likes to number crunch. it would be interesting to see what percentage of voters have read how many of the nominees...or have at least shelved them as read. I'm willing to bet the 80/20 rule is alive and well. In fact, I'd be shocked if 80% of the voters had read 20% of the nominees. I'd be surprised if the average voter has read more than five of the nominees. So while this whole exercise is fun, let's stop it with the "best of the best" nonsense. It's not even going to be "the best of what anyone really read this year." It's probably closer to "best marketed" or "things people wish they had read but couldn't possibly have known about because of GR's ridiculous eligibility rules."

(And before the avalanche of people claiming they have read ALL of the nominees, don't bother. No one will believe it, not even if you run to your GR page and shelve every book as read and backdate the read date.)


message 9: by MommaBear (last edited Nov 16, 2017 08:56PM) (new)

MommaBear Yaaresse wrote: "Don't we all realize that awards and contests like this are basically popularity contests anyway?

First, as has been pointed out every year and as is particularly illustrated by the inclusion of ..."


Excellent points. I Tweeted this page urging Goodreads to respond to our comments.

"# fake awards"

What's the point, exactly?


message 10: by Shaun, Goodreads employee (last edited Nov 17, 2017 07:47AM) (new)

Shaun Mike wrote in message 2: "The release date for Artemis is 14th November yet it is in the final round of the the Goodreads Choice Awards - where voting opens on 14th November.

How does this happen?


Hi Mike! To address your query — readers copies are often distributed, giving readers the opportunity to read and shelve books before the official publication date, which is why we accept nominations for books published past the start of Goodreads Choice Awards (like Artemis).

It’s important to mention that we have to set the awards cutoff date for each year somewhere. We understand that the date is chosen may not be ideal for some books. We’re interested to hear your thoughts around where that cutoff date should be so we can consider it for future awards.


Nihcki wrote in message 5: "Who do we address about these awards being rather fraudulent? Books with less than stellar reviews, suspicious release dates, obvious favorites of those who work for Goodreads are what's nominated...."

I can confirm that nominees are in no way chosen based on favorites of those who work for Goodreads. Rather, this is how it works — in the Opening Round, the 15 nominees in each of the 20 categories of the Goodreads Choice Awards are selected by our editors based on Goodreads data, including ratings, reviews, and shelvings. Our goal is to identify the books that are both the most popular and well-rated by our members. In an nutshell, our members choose who is nominated.

In addition to that, we also allow members to cast write-in votes for eligible books in the Opening Round. We then weight the write-in nominees with Goodreads data in order to determine the top five books to be added in the Semifinal Round.

I hope this helps to clarify how the awards nomination process works!


Yaaresse wrote in message 8: "Don't we all realize that awards and contests like this are basically popularity contests anyway?

First, as has been pointed out every year and as is particularly illustrated by the inclusion of ..."


Yaaresse — thanks for the post! Your feedback and comments have been passed on to our team.


message 11: by MommaBear (new)

MommaBear Nice try, Shaun, but let's address what youve said.

Where did those 15 nominees come from; "reviews" of 4-5 star ratings given by whom, since anyone on Goodreads can post reviews and award stars, and on books published when? Many Goodreads members are authors themselves, their agents, folks in the publishing industry, bloggers, etc, which are all biased opinions from the get-go, wether they use their professional or personal Goodreads account, because they can have both active accounts. Hey, double voting right there, Shaun!

Ratings. I've seen numerous unreleased-yet books bearing 4+ star "reviews" without a single written word about the book anywhere. On books as-yet unpublished, Shaun! I can shelve and award stars to any book I want. Doesn't mean I've actually read it.

I've read reviews where 4-5 stars are given, yet the review itself is full of negativity about the book. I've even asked a few people how they determine the number of stars given, why give 4+ stars when every other sentence is "except for this" and "but I didn't like that", and each person gave a different, made-no-sense-to-me-personally answer. Some automatically give 4 stars based on author name, the cover, or based on their experience with previous books. How is that an indicator of book quality? So the star ratings mean nothing, really. One has to read what was written along with it. And 5 star reviews without any written review are highly suspect.

Reviews. Goodreads labels EVERYTHING a "review", from status updates to adding a book to a shelf such as "want to read". Those aren't reviews, and I've asked your fellow "experts" about this to no avail. The buck got passed and was ignored after a canned answer was given about "looking into it". And a review is only reliable to a reader if the reviewer has had similar opinions on the same books read as me.

Shelves are arbitrary and I can create any shelf I want. How exactly does shelving determine a nominee as you said, Shaun?

Lastly, how are Goodreads experts hired? Based on activity on Goodreads? The number of Goodreads "friends"? Computer knowledge to crunch already-skewed data? Until you experts realize that any Goodreads member can post whatever they want and that doesn't make it true, this is all a joke.


message 12: by Mike (new)

Mike Shaun wrote: "Mike wrote in message 2: "The release date for Artemis is 14th November yet it is in the final round of the the Goodreads Choice Awards - where voting opens on 14th November.

How d..."


I think that the book has to be publicly available for a period of time before it can be considered for the voting process. This at least levels the playing field a little - books that have only been pre-released are going to have much fewer people who can vote.

Personally I think that the book of the year should mean that - so I would open voting in Feb/Mar for books with a full release in the previous year.


message 13: by Yaaresse (new)

Yaaresse I think that the book has to be publicly available for a period of time before it can be considered for the voting process. This at least levels the playing field a little - books that have only been pre-released are going to have much fewer people who can vote. ."

This. For that matter, I think a book should not be "ratable" at all until it is available to the general public. For example, Helene Wecker's sequel to The Golem and the Jinni has 14 rating and is at 3.71. There is no firm publication date for it. In fact, I think it has not even been WRITTEN yet. Short of time-traveling readers, how can that even be?

I understand there are such things as ARCs. I understand it well enough to believe that they have actually hurt the integrity of reviews and made review sites a joke.


message 14: by MommaBear (new)

MommaBear Yaaresse wrote: "I think that the book has to be publicly available for a period of time before it can be considered for the voting process. This at least levels the playing field a little - books that have only be..."

Exactly. I've asked several times, on the book pages and to Goodreads "help", how unpublished books get ratings. Still waiting for an answer.


message 15: by Bren (new)

Bren Quick question..does anyone think there should be a 3.5 star rating? I have given fours to books I don't really think deserve it but that I do think are above average. I think there should be a 4.5 rating as well. Sometimes It is difficult with the current rating system.

This isn't that different from Movie awards is it? How many times has a film won an Oscar or Golden Globe when it was widely seen but many better films that nobody saw never even get nominated?


message 16: by Carol (new)

Carol I'd like to see a 2.5, 3.5, and 4.5!!!


message 17: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine Yaaresse wrote: "In fact, I'd be shocked if 80% of the voters had read 20% of the nominees. I'd be surprised if the average voter has read more than five of the nominees. So while this whole exercise is fun, let's stop it with the "best of the best" nonsense. It's not even going to be "the best of what anyone really read this year."

I never vote in these things because either I haven't read any of the books yet, or I've read one or two, so I'm not going to vote for a book (unless I loved it) just because I've read it.

The only value I get from these lists of the "best books" is I get ideas for future books to read.


message 18: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine I've got to ask... what does ARC stand for?


message 19: by Mike (new)

Mike Jasmine wrote: "I've got to ask... what does ARC stand for?"

Advanced Reader's Copy. Essentially a preview release of the book made available to selected people prior to the full release.


message 20: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine Mike wrote: "Jasmine wrote: "I've got to ask... what does ARC stand for?"

Advanced Reader's Copy. Essentially a preview release of the book made available to selected people prior to the full release."


Thanks!


message 21: by Shaun, Goodreads employee (new)

Shaun Yaaresse wrote: "This. For that matter, I think a book should not be "ratable" at all until it is available to the general public. For example, Helene Wecker's sequel to The Golem and the Jinni has 14 rating and is at 3.71. There is no firm publication date for it. In fact, I think it has not even been WRITTEN yet. Short of time-traveling readers, how can that even be?"

Generally, authors have found that listing their books early creates valuable pre-release buzz, and it's a great way for readers to share their excitement about an upcoming book too. In addition to that, if someone owns an advanced reader copy (ARC), they should be able to review that book, even if it's not available to the public yet. I hope this information helps!


message 22: by MommaBear (new)

MommaBear Carol wrote: "I'd like to see a 2.5, 3.5, and 4.5!!!"

Folks have been asking for half-star ratings for 5 years or more. Shows how the powers that be actually listen, eh?


message 23: by MommaBear (new)

MommaBear Bren wrote: "Quick question..does anyone think there should be a 3.5 star rating? I have given fours to books I don't really think deserve it but that I do think are above average. I think there should be a 4.5..."

It's the same idea. Those movie awards are nominated by and voted for by the industry insiders, not the viewing public.


message 24: by Jasmine (new)

Jasmine Yes, I'd love half star ratings! Due to lack of half star ratings, I have to give a lot of books a 3, even though they should be 2.5 or 3.5, because they aren't so bad they rate a 2, or so good they rate a 4.


back to top