"Medal Table in the US" Topic

Why doesn't the US use the proper order for the Olympic Table? The official way is to use number of golds, with silver then bronze as a 'tie breaker'. The US uses total number of medals, which makes 3 bronzes a better acheivement than 2 golds.

Total medal count is an indicator for how well-rounded a country's athletes are.

And, let's be blunt here, arranging the table this way keeps the US at the top of the list, which is what the media thinks our people want to see. If Golds alone would do that, then that is what the newsies would be doing.

Of all the losers you're the best. The US, best losers in the world?

Really, for a country that prizes first so much?

So you are expecting this to make sense? Sorry. Not going to happen.

Well, that would put the UK joint 3rd with Russia – except we've got 8 golds, Russia has 3.

I prefer the 3-2-1 format with 3 points for a gold, etc. With that measure the standings as I write would be:

US 94 pts
China 95 pts

Reminds me of an old joke about a race between the USA and the USSR's best sprinters. The USA sprinter wins. Headlines the next day:

NY Times: "American Wins"
Tass: "Soviet Finishes second, American finishes next to last."

What exactly are you whining about, douche?

Oh, how grown up.

What table?

Keep it simple

I think it should be

(Gold x 3) + (Silver x 2) + (Bronze x 1)

Divided by Per million head of population of the country

Minus Average height of country above sea level in metres

Plus 1 if Russians defending title (1941-1945 games only)

Didn't know they they used another system. Maybe they just like big numbers.

Either way, with the amount of money and population size USA and China should be out front.

There are tables adjusted for population and sports spend out there.

So USA, dilemma time – As of 1500 GMT on the BBC site
Top USA 23 golds, 46 medals
2nd China 21 Golds 47 medals

Personally I think Golds should be supreme.

This discussion shows exactly what is wrong with the Olympics Winning is not the point of the Olympics People seem more interested in boosting national egos then in awarding outstanding performances. Trying to establish various formulas to show who is number one in the medal count is no better than those athletes who have puroosedly tried to lose manipulating rules to get a favourable results.

Given all that is going on Flag raising and the playing of National Anthems at medal presentations and the parade of teams at the opening and closing ceremonies should be stopped.

While I have certain sympathy with that point of view, national press is always going to identify 'their' winners, even if the rules were changed so individuals competed, rather than national teams.

I was rather pleased to see there was a group with no nation at the openeing ceremony. We were looking out for Vanuatu so my OH could cheer!

3 of a kind beats a pair.
total nedals is the number to beat.

There is just no way of arranging Australia's medal tally to match New Zealand's. So everything is fine. :-)

meh.
Nova Caledonia has zero…

Not really helping the US right now, though, since China has more AND better medals.
And we are currently beaten by little brother Denmark any way you count. Blast!

The BBC medal table gives you the option of doing it either way (GSB or total medals).

Either way, we at third after the US and China, which given our respective wealth and populations, is faintly astonishing.

I understand the Aussies started this idea of rearranging the table to make it look best for "you" at the last Olympics because they were below GB.
Apparently the "official" medal table is Golds, with silvers as tie-splitters, and then bronzes for tie-splitting silvers….all else is make believe.

The US did it China too, 51 v 36 golds, but 100 v 110 medals.

At one stage the British County of Yorkshire had more Golds than Australia! Sweet…

I think you'll find that The People's Republic of Yorkshire is a country….

Taking both halves of the Olympics, the USA got stuffed by China…