Total medals or most golds. Which is more important?

[vwc228]

The problem with actually going by the total medal count is that you give the same weight to a gold medal as you would to a bronze or silver medal. And any honest person would be willing to admit that winning a gold is a lot better than winning a silver/bronze. The best thing to do is that they should actually give points for each medal, say 5 for gold, 3 for silver and 1 for bronze, and then rank the countries according to their totals.

[BlackMamba]

http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/beijin ... oly,101537

interesting read:

The Real 2008 Medal Count

China: 22 gold; 11 silver; 11 bronze

United States: 21 gold; 19 silver; 21 bronze

As you can see, in the events where medals are determined by competitors rather than judges, the gold medal gap between China and the U.S. is greatly narrowed, and the total medal count is an American runaway. Counting the judged events, China has a commanding lead in golds. Hmmm... Nope, nothing fishy about that!

[Aventador]

LOL at that whine.

[dacher]

Oh, the drama! The excitement of big media stirring their big-steaming-pile of drama! How could we otherwise endure the boring games experience without a constant dose of media fed crisis and drama?

I suggest Nancy Grace, Bill O'Reilly, Keith Obermann and their writing teams host the next dram-O-lympics.

[Guy986]

http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/beijing/blog/fourth_place_medal/post/The-REAL-Olympic-medal-count;_ylt=Avs4y837ssiffJKHz9mhQDYazJV4?urn=oly,101537

interesting read:

The Real 2008 Medal Count

China: 22 gold; 11 silver; 11 bronze

United States: 21 gold; 19 silver; 21 bronze

As you can see, in the events where medals are determined by competitors rather than judges, the gold medal gap between China and the U.S. is greatly narrowed, and the total medal count is an American runaway. Counting the judged events, China has a commanding lead in golds. Hmmm... Nope, nothing fishy about that!

That's because almost all the medals the U.S gets are from swimming and track and field, events that dont have judges. All this whining and excuses are pretty pathetic to be honest.

[YiOF]

http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/beijing/blog/fourth_place_medal/post/The-REAL-Olympic-medal-count;_ylt=Avs4y837ssiffJKHz9mhQDYazJV4?urn=oly,101537

interesting read:

The Real 2008 Medal Count

China: 22 gold; 11 silver; 11 bronze

United States: 21 gold; 19 silver; 21 bronze

As you can see, in the events where medals are determined by competitors rather than judges, the gold medal gap between China and the U.S. is greatly narrowed, and the total medal count is an American runaway. Counting the judged events, China has a commanding lead in golds. Hmmm... Nope, nothing fishy about that!

If gold doesn't work, we go to total medals. If total medals doesn't work, we go to none judging events. if none judging event doesn't work, we go to individuals. after all there is no Chinese who can win 8 gold medals.

[Al n' Perk No Layups!]

why do you put words in my mouth? when did I ever say that Euroleague is the qualifying round for the NBA? If I must quote myself------ "You can say NBA is the "finals" for Basketball. Collegian and over seas players compete to get to the NBA. The D-league and Euro Leagues are for those who didn't make to "the Olympics"." I simply said Euroleague is a place a basketball can go if they didn't make to the NBA or doesn't want to play in the NBA, It is not as good as the NBA. It does not imply that Euroleague is the qualifying round for the NBA like you said.

But saying the Euro league is for people who didn't make the NBA isn't true. Players have left the NBA for the Euro league.

Besides, I've never said "everyone in another league is trying to get into the NBA." you just brought this whole point up for no appearant reason other than just have something to say.

...

Collegian and over seas players compete to get to the NBA. The D-league and Euro Leagues are for those who didn't make to "the Olympics". NBA can only have 30 teams because of various limitations, so is the Olympic finals for having only few elite athletes competing.

Is this also some non-sense you bring out just so that you have something to say? "international politics" isn't one of the limitations that doesn't belong to the profitability category? if it isn't, how is profitability the only limitations for NBA to expend like you claimed? you just humored yourself there, just don't laugh too hard.

You claimed that there were so many different reasons you couldn't even explain them to me. I counter-claimed that there were only two. I brought up politics as a reason besides profitablity, not you. You act as if I'm denying it. You still haven't come up with one that I haven't given you. Give me five besides the two I listed. Or were you just making another baseless claim?

Now that the "number game" did get through, you turn to the "time game"? how many players in the NBA plays 12-18 years like you mentioned? You have to be special to play that long in the NBA. Most solid players play 8-10 years. A lot of players only able to play in the NBA for a few years. Player like Kevin Garnett would trade any number of second places to a world championship. Players like Wang Zhizhi who played in the NBA only 4 seasons would also trade any number of second places to win a championship. A 2 time Olympian would trade his 2 silver medal for a gold medal, a 3 time Olympian would trade his 3 silver medal for a gold medal (all assuming you can only win one medal per Olympics), all silver medalists keeps coming back to try to win gold the next time.

I don't see how bringing up the timeframe that athletes have to work with invalidates the amount of competition.

The average career for a great NBA player is 12-18, the average Olympic career for a great gymnast is 1-2 maybe three. Gymnastic stars don't get the chance to come back and try again. NBA stars do. The average NBA player with an average career of five years gets more opportunities to win a championship than a great gymnast who has a max of three shots, except in extremely rare cases.

Also, Wang Zhi Zhi would obviously be happier with a championship, but he would be damn proud of a second place finish with only a four year career.

I have never ever in any of my post said silver isn't good. I only said people would trade multiple 2nd places to a first place.

Fair enough, as long as it's in the same event or discipline. A gold in "race walking" isn't worth as much as a silver in swimming.

[macklock]

Really? Exactly what facts am I making up? You haven't noticed that the NBA adds an expansion team every time it finds a market where it would be profitable to do so?

I love how you're comparing second place in a 30 team professional sports league to second place in the Olympics, and my logic is flawed. If nobody thought second place in the Olympics was impressive, would there be a silver medal? It seems to me at least 90% (more likely 99%) of the world understands that second place out of thousands (or tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of even millions) is pretty damn impressive. But whatever, I must be "making up facts" again.

Dude are you stupid ?
There is even basketball in the olympics.
So a silver medal in the olympics somehow is won over millions but a second place in the NBA is not ??
Do you realise there are more talents in the NBA than in the olympics.

If you are going to call someone stupid, you better damn well be able to put a proper sentence together. I have no idea what you are talking about, and I'm pretty damn sure you missed the point of my argument.

Maybe that's because you are too dumb to understand simple logic.
The NBA teams have way more talents than the teams in the olympics.
A second place in the NBA has AT LEAST comparable talent to sliver medalists in olympics basketball.
How are you stupid enough to think NBA and the olympics are not comparable ??!!
Just because there are qualifying games for Olympics but not for the NBA ??

Fair enough, as long as it's in the same event or discipline. A gold in "race walking" isn't worth as much as a silver in swimming.

I could agree with this. A high jump gold is worth about 3-4 swimming golds.

[captain_cheapseats]

Depends how big the differences are. They both say a lot. The Olympics are about excelling in all the events, so unless it's a big difference in golds I'll take total medals.

I agree with this. Total medals are what matters unless one country has way more golds, and only a few less total medals.

As for this "in the NBA guys would trade one title for ten deep playoff runs, etc." argument, ehh, to me it's not comparable. No matter how arbitrary it may have been, the acient greeks or whoever decided that coming in second/third was an impressive accomplishment worthy of being celebrated/rewarded. It's their standards that rule the olympics, not the norms of America's major sport leagues.

[Jaykoolzboy]

Both are important, but what is the point of getting gold when you can get bronze for the same value? Gold is slightly more important than other medals.

[YiOF]

This is the last post I am going to write about this matter.

But saying the Euro league is for people who didn't make the NBA isn't true. Players have left the NBA for the Euro league.

I guess I just have to break this down word by word so you can understand better. Of course, Euro League is not ENTIRELY made for people who didn't make the NBA. But in the context of discussing about NBA players, Euro league is for people who didn't make the NBA means that Euro League is a place a player can go if he didn't get drafted to the NBA. You can say Euro league is for fans in Europe to watch basketball, you can say Euro league is for basketball development in Euro, all of these statements are true.

You claimed that there were so many different reasons you couldn't even explain them to me. I counter-claimed that there were only two. I brought up politics as a reason besides profitablity, not you. You act as if I'm denying it. You still haven't come up with one that I haven't given you. Give me five besides the two I listed. Or were you just making another baseless claim?

Lets just take NBA expending in Europe for example, since that's what Stern is trying to do.

1. It can be problematic to gain city/government approval to build a stadium for a team, or renting a stadium in a foreign country.
2. Some American players would not want to move their family overseas to play for a Euro team.
3. Travel Issues for NBA play off schadules, going from London to L.A take quite some time.
4. In the eyes of some NBA fans, assimilating European cities into the NBA would damage the nationalist pride of the league. After all, it is the National Basketball Association.
5. Ownership may not approve.

these are all reasons NBA couldn't expend to Europe. I thought some of them would be obvious, but since you didn't know. anyway, this has absolutely nothing to do with what we are discussing, don't even remember or know what you are trying to prove by bringing this out.

I don't see how bringing up the timeframe that athletes have to work with invalidates the amount of competition.

The average career for a great NBA player is 12-18, the average Olympic career for a great gymnast is 1-2 maybe three. Gymnastic stars don't get the chance to come back and try again. NBA stars do. The average NBA player with an average career of five years gets more opportunities to win a championship than a great gymnast who has a max of three shots, except in extremely rare cases.

Also, Wang Zhi Zhi would obviously be happier with a championship, but he would be damn proud of a second place finish with only a four year career.

I said in my original post that NBA players would trade 10 second place finishes to one championship, which would equivalent to most good players lifespan in the NBA. what I basically meant was trading careers of multiple second places for one first place. Translate into Olympic term, a life time of 2-3 silvers for 1 gold. nobody is comparing ONE silver medal to ONE NBA 2nd. nobody is saying silver isn't impressive.

Gold is the measure stick for Olympics.

[Yao_noodle]

You can have two medals the same time in swimming, diving, gymnastics, field and track, shooting, but you can only get one in basketball, volleyball, soccer, baseball, weightlifting and all other team sports.

the medal count does not make any sense because of the game setting.

[XcalibuR]

This is how it should be ranked.

[XuDa]

Total gold medals.

Of course, the sore losers who i shall not name can keep clinging to the "total medals" excuse.

[canoner]

You can have two medals the same time in swimming, diving, gymnastics, field and track, shooting, but you can only get one in basketball, volleyball, soccer, baseball, weightlifting and all other team sports.

the medal count does not make any sense because of the game setting.

Well, actually you can have THREE medals the same time in field and track.

Moreover, in weightlifting any country can participate in more than 5 out of 7 women and 5 out of 8 men events and in each event it participate it can send only one athlete. This makes absolutely no sense.

[dacher]

China has done great as host.

USA vs China medal count, I say it is inconclusive who done better -- as one has much more gold, one has much more total. But because USA doesn't have home field advantage that China has, I'll say USA.

China has improved olympic showing by huge steps since 1992.

What I want to see is if China holds on to their medal gains and steps even further up in 2012 London. It'll only get harder. But if China can do it -- I will be very impressed.

[Guy986]

Considering how dominant China is in Weightlifting, Diving, Gymnastic, Shooting, Badminton, and table tennis, i wouldn't be surprised if they managed to break the 40 Gold Mark consistently in the olympics from now on. They certainly wouldn't perform as well in London but i dont think breaking the 40 gold mark is gonna be a problem for them anytime soon.

[DelaneyRudd]

Interesting Note: If you do 3 points for gold, 2 points for silver and 1 point for bronze the USA and China are tied with 200 points right now.

[Guy986]

Interesting Note: If you do 3 points for gold, 2 points for silver and 1 point for bronze the USA and China are tied with 200 points right now.

Going by that point system 2 gold would be the equivalent of 3 silver. Winning the championship 2 times is the same as losing in the finals 3 times? Think about it. I believe being the best in the world means significantly more than being runner up . I think 5 points for Gold, 3 points for Silver and 1 point for Bronze is much more fair IMO.

If we're going by 5,3,1 then the United States is at 298 and China in the lead with 311.

[canoner]

Throughout history, one gold was valued at about 16 silvers. Now that ratio is more than 60.

I'd prefer my team win one champion rather than making 5 failed attempts, much less speaking 2. So 15 pt for gold, 3 pt for silver, and 1 pt for bronze.