Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

The Medal Count


Recommended Posts

I know with the summers its more of a sport vs. disciplines in that sport.  If you're a basketball player who played two weeks worth of games but are only walking with one medal, are you worth less than a swimmer or track athlete who can possibly walk away with eight medals?  Is a country who only took home 10 medals but they were mostly team events worth less than a country with 70 medals for mostly individual events.  Basically quantity of medals doesn't always equate to overall quality of country delegation.

There are less disciplines in the winter ones.  I'm sure the most anyone could win with individual/team events is six and that's if you're in Alpine skiing, cross country skiing, speedskating or biathlon.  With snowboarding and freestyle most stick to their specialty meaning there are less chances of one athlete dominating.  

So yeah the medal count doesn't accurately represent a country's dominance.

  • Love 2
On ‎02‎/‎09‎/‎2018 at 11:14 PM, mehtotheworld said:

I truly don't understand the issue with tracking the medal count! Athletes are representing a country, they talk about pride in representing that country, etc. What's the big deal with it?

Some of us mind the emphasis on the medal count because the vast majority of athletes at the Olympics will never win one.  Yet they are just as proud to present their countries as those who do win.  To each, their own.

(That said, I do take a perverse sense of enjoyment in seeing countries like Norway and the Netherlands get lots of medals.)

  • Love 2

My issue with the medal count having turned into a thing is that it's a pointless statistic and it borders on jingoism.  Does the country with the most medals at the end of these games win a prize or get to tell Tonga (as an example) that they suck because they didn't win any medals?

I've always seen the Olympics as individual achievements and not national, but that's just me.

  • Love 2
6 hours ago, MyAimIsTrue said:

My issue with the medal count having turned into a thing is that it's a pointless statistic and it borders on jingoism.  Does the country with the most medals at the end of these games win a prize or get to tell Tonga (as an example) that they suck because they didn't win any medals?

I've always seen the Olympics as individual achievements and not national, but that's just me.

Setting aside the idea of athletes representing the nation, in the modern Olympics pretty much all athletes constitute a not-insignificant investment of public resources.  Certainly, everybody winning medal for Team Canada has been getting $$$ from the Canadian Olympic Committee.

  • Love 3
16 minutes ago, SeanC said:

Setting aside the idea of athletes representing the nation, in the modern Olympics pretty much all athletes constitute a not-insignificant investment of public resources.  Certainly, everybody winning medal for Team Canada has been getting $$$ from the Canadian Olympic Committee.

In other words, the medal count represents a return on the investment, correct?

It's a tracker, people. For certain countries, it's a starting point for a more in depth analysis of their performance. When Team USA's medal count has been analyzed, for example, I never hear them saying they destroyed poor Tonga. I don't expect to hear anyone saying a country like Tonga is worthless for not having an Olympic medalist, nor do I think the Tongan athlete thinks that about themselves. But a country like the Netherlands, Canada, USA, etc. not medalling or having a dramatic decrease in medals would most certainly be news. 

I just find the pseudo intellectual argument against medal tracking to be inane. It eats up the medal count threads, when people now just want to celebrate Norway and the Netherlands killing it. 

The most obvious part of it to me is that most athletes will themselves say they are proud of their accomplishment on behalf of their country. Individuals (or groups of individuals) are putting in the work, but the winners will be carrying a flag for a victory lap and/or singing along to an anthem. Look at how Canada celebrated their hockey wins last time around, with the athletes celebrating their wins with an entire country. That's a powerful thing, don't understand why people discount that by trying to say that these events are only about the individual.

  • Love 11
1 hour ago, legaleagle53 said:

In other words, the medal count represents a return on the investment, correct?

Pretty much.  When Canada won the Vancouver bid, they worked hard to make sure athletes could win on home snow/ice to avoid being THAT host country that didn't win gold again. Canada won the most gold that year.  Whether it truly worked is subject to debate, but I do think after seeing the growing trend upwards after Torino, the program worked well enough.  There are still some kinks to work out in the Summer Games, but it's nice to see that my country is FINALLY considered a multi sport threat. 

  • Love 4
Quote

Setting aside the idea of athletes representing the nation, in the modern Olympics pretty much all athletes constitute a not-insignificant investment of public resources. 

That's not entirely accurate though. Not all countries fund their athletes. The US Olympic Committee receives no money from the federal government. It's all private donations. But the USOC is one of only three countries that don't receive government funding. I think that this may lead to a disconnect between how some countries view the medal count vs the US. Since the US athletes are all largely self funded, it's more of a love of the sport for the athletes (many go broke getting themselves to the Olympics) and the fans can just cheer them on. The US likes to see winners, but they don't have any skin in the game.  

Then you look at the other side. NPR had a story about the US biathletes where they detail their financial struggles and creative ways to earn money compared to how most European biathletes get a government salary and a pension. The Finns even gave land to a world champion. There are huge amounts of public money going to these programs, so they better perform. The medal count is the proof needed that they aren't wasting the money. 

  • Love 5
18 hours ago, mtlchick said:

Pretty much.  When Canada won the Vancouver bid, they worked hard to make sure athletes could win on home snow/ice to avoid being THAT host country that didn't win gold again. Canada won the most gold that year.  Whether it truly worked is subject to debate, but I do think after seeing the growing trend upwards after Torino, the program worked well enough.  There are still some kinks to work out in the Summer Games, but it's nice to see that my country is FINALLY considered a multi sport threat. 

 

I think it did. (and I also think it just shows CDN Athletes that we do invest in them, a lot of potential athletes were going to other countries because Canada was very staunch on  not doing it). Vancouver did a lot of things good for out athletes.

 

Which: Canada is now at 10. (winning Mixed Curling Gold, Luge Bronze (first one EVAH!) and 500m Short Track Speed Skating Bronze.
this is 1 off the best start Canada's had (1994). and per usual, Canada is winning a medal every day. I love it 

6 hours ago, mtlchick said:

Day four just about done and Canada already hit double digits?!  I may faint. 

it makes me so happy. 

  • Love 2

I'm absolutely stoked that Australia got a bronze medal in the Snowboard HalfPipe. Mainly because our broadcaster has been promoting him to the hilt which usually mean they don't live up to the broadcasters expectation. I found our Silver in the Men's moguls a pleasant surprise, as our broadcaster pretty much ignored him in favour of Brittany Cox in the Women's moguls who did nothing. In fact, I went to bed the nigh of the moguls final convinced Australia was not going to win any medals this Olympiad, so I;m glad the team has proved me wrong.

And my mind is still blown from a medal fact I learnt from the opening ceremony, that Australia has won more Winter Olympics medals than Denmark. Denmark has only ever won one medal (A silver) in the Winter Olympics.

  • Love 3
15 hours ago, SeanC said:

5a8765a109a92_HalfwayatPyeonchang.PNG.bea20d127d563fc65ad725e4540d1585.PNG

The Globe & Mail's tracking of Canada's progress at the halfway point in the recent Winter Olympics.  Obviously not 1-to-1 since events are scheduled differently, but it's interesting to compare all the same.

I have to chuckle about Salt Lake because the half way point we were struggling like always.  And then the Sale/Pelletier affair happened and we ended up with 17.  We Canadians are polite but I think that was the turning point, not just for that Games, but for the future.  I felt someone was playing "We're Not Gonna Take It" non stop as a battle cry for days because our fortunes turned around then. 

 

Now we picked up another 2.  Great to see.

 

Meanwhile Norway is running (or skiing) away with this board.

  • Love 5

I'm tired of every medal count going by most golds.  A medal is a medal.  Top 5

Norway: 22

Germany: 17

Canada: 15

Netherlands: 13

USA/Austria/Japan/OAR: 9

We're pretty much underperforming in every discipline except for snowboarding.  The boost in medals happened from Salt Lake on and I don't know if it's because all those athletes have retired and we haven't gotten another generation of that quality but we stand to have our lowest count since Nagano.  

6 hours ago, AshleyN said:

Goddamn, Norway did not come to mess around these Games.

See, I always saw them as a cross country power house and a  speedskating nation but for some reason didn't consider them at all for alpine.  With that in the mix, it's simply a race for the runner up positions now.  For me, I only want Canada to come out ahead of the USA.  I don't think we can beat Germany but I think we can win more than the Netherlands. 

Edited by mtlchick
  • Love 2
On 2/17/2018 at 10:46 PM, PoshSprinkles said:

RE: USA - most winter sports, from my limited knowledge, are very expensive and cost/location-prohibitive for a lot of people. The nearest ice skating rink to me is two hours away and it's located in a mall and not well-maintained. Any other winter sport, like skiing, would require a move. A lot of parents aren't willing to do that when running in the park is free (cross-country), beginning gymnasts can practice at home with a mat, future Olympic swimmers can practice in the community pool for free or for a couple of dollars a month, and track and field competitors can practice for free at the local high school tracks. Not to mention the dozens of youth programs available in virtually every Summer Olympic sport. That's why, in my opinion anyway, the USA tends to dominate Summer, but not Winter Olympic sports. 

This is true for a lot of the country, but we also have a lot of population in colder weather areas that do have access. I lived in Chicago 10 minutes from a curling club and had a town ice rink and live now in Southwestern CT and off the top of my head can count 5 skating facilities, some with multiple rinks, within 15 minutes of my house. And that doesn’t factor in people the upper midwest, rockies and New England with access to  snow for skiing. I think a key element is the diversity of sports opportunities in the US, vs greater focus on winter sports in places like Scandinavia.

  • Love 1
×
×
  • Create New...