That says it all, I think. Anywhere that objectivity mattered, we won. Wherever the results depended on human (lack of) judgement, the host country won. I’ve been wondering for sometime whether the Chinese Govt might have pressured the judging cohort in some way. This only strengthens that idea.
The score looks even more lopsided if you eliminate the obscure events that we didn’t even bother to enter athletes for (and neither did most other major countries); those sports were basically “gimmes” for the well-supported Chinese; it’s easy to win when your next closest challenger comes from a tiny banana republic and has next to no training facilities. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that China entered athletes in those events solely because they knew they could inflate their medal total that way.
Now with baseball and softball eliminated from Olympics in 2012, I won’t even find it worth watching the games. IOC is anti-American and biased so why should I give them my support?
....”Objective Sports - Goals, Quickness, Accuracy (eg Basketball, Track, Shooting)
USA 33 Gold, China 25 Gold
Judged Sports (Gymnastics, Diving, Boxing, etc)
China 26 Gold, USA 3 Gold.
pliable officiating, and loose rules regarding age help too.... “
This was a point I was trying to make all the way through the olympics. Look at the difference in gold medals (for the ChiComs) between “judged” sports and real head to head sports.
(I have long argued that no “judged” sports should be in the olmpics because they will NEVER be fairly judged. Darn. We would have to rid of gymastics AND, in the winter, fagureskating.)
I guess if the host country get’s this kind of favoritism, the UK can look forward to a boatload of “judged” medals in 2012.
The ChiComs “gold medal total” is laughable when you sit back and look at it in perspective....