This paper provides a binary comparison of two preference aggregation rules, the Borda rule and Dodgson's rule. Both of these rules guarantee a transitive ranking of the alternatives for every list of individual preferences and therefore avoid the problem of voting cycles. It will be shown that for certain lists of individual preferences the rankings derived from the Borda rule and Dodgson's rule are antagonistic. (C) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.