So who is winning the medal count?

[lexsooner]

We are probably going to win the overall medal count, but China is way ahead in gold medals. Based on the U.S. media, I always thought the standard was total medals, but I have looked at news articles from European and Asian newspapers, and they all rank it by gold medals won, not total medals. Apparently the rest of the world does it this way, and only the U.S. media ranks countries based on total medals. Then I see the IOC also uses gold medals won as the standard. Has our media been deceiving us?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Summer_Olympics_medal_table

[GottaHavePride]

The US media ranks it that way because that's the way we're ahead.

And we have a lot of people who are good at a lot of things. China has a lot of people that get punished if they aren't THE best at things.

[badger]

They'll rank the medals any way that puts them in front. "They" can refer to Americans, Chinese, Russians, French, etc.

[lexsooner]

They'll rank the medals any way that puts them in front. "They" can refer to Americans, Chinese, Russians, French, etc.

The point is, the US media does it different from the rest of the world and the IOC, so it's almost like they have deceived the American public into believing we "won" the mythical medal race even though the rest of the world does not see it that way. I mean, how can we claim some overall victory at the Olympics if nobody outside the U.S. believes it. It is sort of like Alabama claiming one of their bogus national title even though nobody else acknowledges it. It's meaningless.

[Kels]

I guess if one of the other countries doesn't like it, they can come over here and try to do something about it.

[bri]

So, what you're saying is we're the Alabama of the Olympics?

[Chuck Bao]

In the 60s and 70s, American TV and newspapers touted our #1 position for gold medals because the Soviets had a monopoly on total medals for many years. What a difference a generation makes. I think the best prize is # of medals per capita. Who wins that?

I don't know the answer. But, my Aussie friends claim that Australia consistently ranks amongst the top in medals per capita. Australia (pop 21mn) has so far won an amazing 42 medals this Olympics.

I met a senator from Trindad & Tobago a month ago and he was claiming the same. He said that they would do well in the sprints and they did, with a silver in the men's 100m and a silver in the men's 4x100m relay. Trindad & Tobago has a population of 1.3mn.

This time, it probably would be Jamaica, thanks in large to Mr. Bolt. With a population of just 2.8mn, Jamaica has 6 golds, 3 silvers and 1 bronze.

[lexsooner]

http://www.livenews.com.au/Articles/2008/08/19/Who_really_has_the_most_medals

And the per capita medal winner so far is: Armenia, followed by Slovenia, Australia, and Slovakia. Armenia excels in weightlifting and wrestling. The Aussies are good mostly at swimming. The U.S. and China are way back in the 30s to 40s, per capita medal-wise. India has one medal per more than 1.1 billion people, so among the medal winning countries they are probably last.

Note the medal table on the right of the webpage. This Aussie paper is consistent with how the rest of the world ranks the medal count - based on golds.

[badger]

Back many, many years ago, apparently they had a point system where gold medals were five points, silver three and bronze one. A 3-2-1 system might be better, but it's better than what the U.S. is doing (saying that bronze is equal to silver and gold) and China is doing (saying that nothing but gold medals count - why are they issuing medals that are silver and bronze then?!).

Someday, they may issue an overall champion award - like a big huge medal or something to hang over a big huge statue. Now THAT would be kewl :D

[oklaclarinet]

Back many, many years ago, apparently they had a point system where gold medals were five points, silver three and bronze one. A 3-2-1 system might be better, but it's better than what the U.S. is doing (saying that bronze is equal to silver and gold) and China is doing (saying that nothing but gold medals count - why are they issuing medals that are silver and bronze then?!).

Someday, they may issue an overall champion award - like a big huge medal or something to hang over a big huge statue. Now THAT would be kewl :D

Under that 3-2-1 system, using the most recent medal count, the US and China would be tied with 200 points a piece.

[olevetonahill]

We got More than them Cheatin Chinks , Nuff said :rolleyes:

[GottaHavePride]

Someday, they may issue an overall champion award - like a big huge medal or something to hang over a big huge statue. Now THAT would be kewl :D

Nah, then you'd have too many medals.

It needs to be a bell.



:D

[jkjsooner]

In my opinion it doesn't really matter. Maybe there's an official country ranking but it's really about individuals and teams winning medals in individual events.

Plus, medal counts are stupid anyway. When you consider Phelps as eight times greater than the entire US basketball team or you give China tons of medals in stupid sports like table tennis or synchronized diving then it becomes just stupid.

I've said this for years even when we lead the gold medal count.

[jkjsooner]

I don't know the answer. But, my Aussie friends claim that Australia consistently ranks amongst the top in medals per capita. Australia (pop 21mn) has so far won an amazing 42 medals this Olympics.



Like I said in the Phelps post, Austalia has a strong swim team. If you are a smaller country and have a strong swim team then you will win the medals per capita. It's meaningless if you ask me.

[jkjsooner]

By the way, it is virtually impossible for a large country to win the per capita medal count. We would have to win every medal to match what the smaller country has done and that is impossible.

For starters, we have to eliminate a lot of potential medal winners in the US trials.

Whereas being in a large country gives us, China, and Russia and big advantage in total medal count, being a small country gives the smaller guys a big advantage.

The smallest of countries could win this if they produced one good runner or swimmer.

[badger]

So, on that mindset, perhaps we could have divisional titles, much like college sports?

These divisions can be ranked not only on size, but also reputation. Top overall awards will be given based on how countries compare to like-countries.