Posted on 08/28/2004 6:54:24 AM PDT by AgThorn
|
I believe the above table is pretty current, reflecting the medal counts by country (top 20). My question is this: When you factor in the actual number of athletes that each country sends, what then would be the 'ranking'? i.e. a 'quality' or 'percentage' ranking, comparing scoring athlete stat's to attending athlete stat's?
I think it would be an interesting comparison. I know that I saw a listing of all the athletes by country, but can't locate it this minute. In looking at it, I did a quick check on USA, China and Russia. It shows that USA has sent over 600 athletes, Russia over 500 and China over 400. The ranking of these three countries may not change with those numbers but it would definitely show China number one in the Gold based on such a smaller number of athletes in attendance.
Just a 'statistician junkee's' question, I know, but it puts some realism on the top three medal winning countries when you look at the shear number of athletes we send and compare it to the other smaller countries. It would be a nice ranking to reflect the real 'quality' and focus that a particular country puts in.
| Coalition of the Willing | 465 |
| Commies/Despots/Axis of Evil | 81 |
| Appeasers/Surrender Monkeys | 223 |
| Unknown | 18 |
I sure hope we finish with more Gold than the Chinese...
I do too, but I have to ask, based on their sending 400+ athletes to our 600+, are we really finishing with 'more Gold' unless we show at least 50% more!
No.
It's not our fault that their athlete's couldn't compete with ours.
Your logic says the army that wins the battle actually loses if they have more firepower or troops.
Maybe they don't send their athletes because they don't have any that are of the proper caliber? I think it requires a certain level of prosperity (or government backing in the case of the commies) to develop a World Class athlete in many of these sports.
Well, true, if this was a 'war', shere number of warriors showing up often trumps.
But my 'logic' is a simple one ... i.e. what would the statistics/ranking be if we simply divide the number of medalists (per country) by the number of athletes (per country). A 'quality' metric, rather than just a 'quantity' one.
If you're going to use a type of metric to guage the power of each country, why don't you use total population instead of athelete's sent to the Games?
Most of the Olympians have already qualified for their events in preliminary, pre-Olympic tournaments.
How many Chinese athletes failed to qualify for events that Americans qualified for? If they had of qualified, they would have been present at the Olympics, thus upping their total number.
I absolutely agree. Ethiopia is a case in point - they 'excell' in quality for distance runners, but yet they don't show up in this 'top 20' ranking since (I imagine) they don't try to compete in areas that they don't excell in. (They also hurt their medal rankings overall by boycotting three of the recent olympics, so other factors weigh in as well).
I think it requires a certain level of prosperity (or government backing in the case of the commies) to develop a World Class athlete in many of these sports.
And that is a very valid point as well. i.e. 3rd world countries just can't compete on a financial investment basis, not being able to field as many good athletes. But a 'quality' ranking would help them 'show' better, i.e. factoring in their decision to compete in what they can do effectively.
I'd be interested in seeing the breakdown of medals by athletes training in the U.S. and competing for other countries and those training in their own countries.
Interesting feedback. How would one get these statistics though? The number of athletes sent in the olympics is readily available, not sure if one can find number of 'failed to qualify' as easily.
Not really trying to guage 'power of each country' as much as I am 'quality'. One can easily 'overpower' in numbers if you have the resources. Just trying to show a new 'valid' metric that the underdog countries can get bragging rights in. i.e. Ethiopia in long distance running for example, Georgia in Judo, etc.
REally it seems like every athlete is a Student at UConn and trains in Norwich, Conn or some such thing
Hey! You forgot John Kerry! </g>
All I can say is that the American mens basketball team ought to flat out be ashamed of themselves. I hope they are embarrassed about their performance.
The guages I have seen have always been population based.
One year, the media was gushing about Lichtenstien, which won a medal, only having X amount of low population, meaning, for every X in population, they won one medal.
Last Olympics it was Cuba...which won several Golds for a country 25 times smaller than the US.
Also, I don't like the way the standings are kept.
It should be points based. Gold should be 10, Silver should be 5 and Bronze should be 1.
Why should Russia, with far less Golds than China be ranked ahead of them?
I've noticed many of the water sprots athletes are from Southern Cal. USC, UCLA, Stanford (although they are not so southern Cal).
A lot of the wrestlers are from the Mid-West (Iowa, Oklahoma).
A lot of the track stars (Foreign and Domestic) are from SEC schools.
A more logical basis for that comparison would be medals per capita (population), since the number of great athletes should be proportional to the overall population. In that analysis, China would fall well down in the standings.
Good points .. population based ranking would be a great stat to track as well. On that basis, China and India should be blowing the rest of the world away and they aren't.
The fact is you can rank them however you want. No country is declared the "winner" of the Olympic Games. They are not a "team" in the sense that they are working toward a common goal of a "US Win." They are simply the representatives of the different nations in separate events. All this medal count stuff is just media generated conversation. There isn't a "right answer" to the way to count medals.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.