symmetric_centrist_all_methods — the Condorcet centrist, every BV method, two sizes¶
One symptom, the full BetterVoting method sweep, at two electorate sizes. Avery (left pole), Blake (right pole), Casey (centrist). Casey is the Condorcet winner but has the fewest first choices, so the three first-choice methods (RCV-IRV, STV, Choose-One) squeeze Casey out and — because the poles are a perfect mirror image — deadlock in an exact tie, while the four whole-ballot methods (STAR, STAR-PR, Approval, Ranked Robin) elect Casey.
| Case | Size | Election | What it adds |
|---|---|---|---|
| BV2171 — minimal | 8 voters (3/3/1/1) | h93tm4 |
the fewest ballots that reproduce the whole symptom — proof it's structural |
| BV2172 — full | 100 voters (47/47/3/3) | bkwfjr |
the profile from the "Should we always elect the Condorcet winner?" video |
Both run all seven BV methods (STAR, STAR-PR, Approval [approve top two], Ranked Robin, RCV-IRV, STV, Choose-One). Winners are identical in structure at both sizes: STAR / STAR-PR / Approval / Ranked Robin → Casey; RCV-IRV / STV / Choose-One → random Avery/Blake tie.
Sibling: symmetric_centrist_bv2170 — the original four-method cut of the same 47/47/3/3 profile (BV2170, pp2q4q). Debate context: FairVote Condorcet claim-check · up: method_comparisons.