Saturday, August 23, 2008

Gold medals or total medals?

Should the "top" champion of the Olympics be measured by acquired golds, or by TOTAL # of medals, including silver and bronze??  

Of course, China received more gold medals than the United States, but America received more medals of any color than anyone else. 


COUNTRY MEDALISTS GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL
United States 36 38 36 110
China  51 21 28 100


Which is the appropriate means to determine who had the most success at the Olympics?

Any thoughts?

1 comment:

josué said...

I think maybe you should do a total medals count, but have each medal weighted differently (i.e gold is worth three points, silver is two points, bronze one point.) This method gives the following results: China - 223 Points, U.S.A. - 220 Points.

Another factor to consider would be the inclusion of an accounting for population (i.e. medals won per capita). All other factors being equal, China should always have the most medals based on the simple fact that they have the largest gene pool of any nation from which to draw capable athletes. Of course, all other factors aren't equal. But it would be a good baseline to judge how well each country's programs are really doing. If China has 25% of the world's population they should be winning at least 25@ of the medals, provided that their athlete program is running efficiently.

If you throw in a per capita qualifier, it wouldn't surprise me too much if the winning countries would be neither China nor the U.S.A., but rather other smaller countries that provide above standard resources for their athletes, thus winning an extraordinary amount of medals for the size of their population.

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License.