Total medals or most golds. Which is more important?

Total medals or most golds?

Most Golds
90
82%
Total Medals
20
18%
 
Total votes: 110

GQStylin
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,283
And1: 1,636
Joined: Nov 12, 2004
Location: Lovin' Toronto!

Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#1 » by GQStylin » Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:17 am

Putting this to a poll, which do you think matters more in the medal count? Total number of medals or whoever has the most golds?
eyeatoma
RealGM
Posts: 28,164
And1: 11,643
Joined: Feb 25, 2005
Location: An Indian in Indonesia
     

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#2 » by eyeatoma » Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:22 am

Most golds...
User avatar
Ming Kong!
RealGM
Posts: 24,480
And1: 31
Joined: Nov 21, 2002
Location: Jazz fan in Miami, FL.

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#3 » by Ming Kong! » Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:34 am

Most countries seem to follow the gold medal count, but the US media seems to kind of split the attention between the two, and lists teams by total medal count. I like to weigh both, but if you have to have one or the other, I'd take more golds.
User avatar
BlackMamba
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 16,297
And1: 81
Joined: Jun 20, 2004
Location: Cd. de M
         

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#4 » by BlackMamba » Sun Aug 17, 2008 5:05 am

both.

for me gold medals show how good your athletes have been.

but the total count shows how dominant you have been as a whole.
User avatar
High 5
RealGM
Posts: 15,546
And1: 2,088
Joined: Apr 21, 2006

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#5 » by High 5 » Sun Aug 17, 2008 5:13 am

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.
canoner
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,722
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 21, 2004

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#6 » by canoner » Sun Aug 17, 2008 5:20 am

A point system would be nice but in that system gold should be awarded A LOT MORE points than a silver. Just ask yourself would you rather your team (NBA, NFL, MLB) win a championship or make 3 failed trips to the finals? I'd take the trophy in a heartbeat.
User avatar
rsavaj
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 24,863
And1: 2,767
Joined: May 09, 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#7 » by rsavaj » Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:53 am

Most golds, IMO. China's pwning right now, and US wouldn't even be in the conversation without Phelps.
YiOF
Sophomore
Posts: 192
And1: 0
Joined: Nov 12, 2007

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#8 » by YiOF » Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:16 am

Gold no question. If you ask any NBA player if he would rather go to NBA finals 10 straight times and lose or only go to the NBA finals once and win, everyone should know what the response would be.
User avatar
The Duke
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 15,560
And1: 3,178
Joined: Jul 18, 2003
Location: Da Beaches

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#9 » by The Duke » Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:52 am

It will be Gold as the main measure
User avatar
XcalibuR
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,099
And1: 79
Joined: Jan 04, 2005

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#10 » by XcalibuR » Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:20 pm

Gold has intrinsic value, in any sport, any competition, there is always a first place. 2nd/3rd isn't really that much different than fourth/5th, they still represent the elite of the world, but first is always the champion.
vwc228
Freshman
Posts: 95
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 28, 2008

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#11 » by vwc228 » Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:00 pm

without a doubt gold. In the case of the olympics this year, eventhough the US have a couple more medals than China, China in my view has been superior considering how many more gold medlas they have. What's surprising to me is how/why the chinese don't seem to have bothered to try and master the swimming events since there are sooooo many medlas to be won there. Meanwhile, the US seems to have the gotten the overwhelming majority of their medals in the pool.
User avatar
treiz
RealGM
Posts: 11,984
And1: 564
Joined: Aug 17, 2005
Location: London, England
       

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#12 » by treiz » Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:10 pm

Most golds.
User avatar
dacher
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,729
And1: 1
Joined: Jun 20, 2003

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#13 » by dacher » Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:11 pm

China dominates diving, so China wasn't totally shut out of the pool events.

China medal win rate will slow down after the gymnastics are over. China is weak in track and field, and not strong in rowing and cycling where huge numbers of medals are to be taken. Other events I think they have equal chance to the USA. USA has a chance everywhere except in the events the USA has no interest in.
j127
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 10,015
And1: 41
Joined: Nov 13, 2003
Location: Toronto

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#14 » by j127 » Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:30 pm

In the Olympics and vast majority of the world, total golds have always been used as the metric for ranking countries. Thus, total golds are more important.

But it seems like the US media and many Americans prefer total medals, so if that's what Americans like, then that's what Americans like.

If country X started ranking the countries based on total bronze medals, can we really say anything against it? Sure it goes against Olympic tradition, but to each unto his/her own.
User avatar
Al n' Perk No Layups!
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,532
And1: 1
Joined: Jan 30, 2006

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#15 » by Al n' Perk No Layups! » Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:35 pm

We've already gone over this (Medal count vs Gold) in a prior thread.

YiOF wrote:Gold no question. If you ask any NBA player if he would rather go to NBA finals 10 straight times and lose or only go to the NBA finals once and win, everyone should know what the response would be.


That's not even close to the same thing. There are 30 NBA teams, it's championship or bust because finishing second out of thirty isn't impressive. In the Olympics, there are thousands of athletes from hundreds of countries, finishing in the top three IS impressive.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 55,848
And1: 15,934
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#16 » by dougthonus » Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:39 pm

That's not even close to the same thing. There are 30 NBA teams, it's championship or bust because finishing second out of thirty isn't impressive. In the Olympics, there are thousands of athletes from hundreds of countries, finishing in the top three IS impressive.


I'd disagree, by the time you get to the Olympics, you usually are competing against ~30 guys in any one individual sport. It depends on the sport of course though.
http://linktr.ee/bullsbeat - links to the bullsbeat podcast
@doug_thonus on twitter
User avatar
Rasho Brezec
Knicks Forum Euro Scout
Posts: 61,780
And1: 18,400
Joined: Mar 12, 2008
Contact:
   

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#17 » by Rasho Brezec » Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:05 pm

Undoubtely most golds.
Image
User avatar
Al n' Perk No Layups!
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,532
And1: 1
Joined: Jan 30, 2006

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#18 » by Al n' Perk No Layups! » Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:20 pm

dougthonus wrote:
That's not even close to the same thing. There are 30 NBA teams, it's championship or bust because finishing second out of thirty isn't impressive. In the Olympics, there are thousands of athletes from hundreds of countries, finishing in the top three IS impressive.


I'd disagree, by the time you get to the Olympics, you usually are competing against ~30 guys in any one individual sport. It depends on the sport of course though.


That number would not be including all of the trials, you have to make your own team by qualifying in your nations heats, quarter finals, semi finals and finals; then make the Olympic finals by going through all of the heats, quarter finals and semi finals. You're comparing an entire league to a championship round, it'd be more fair to compare the NBA finals (where you are competing against one team) to the Olympic finals.
YiOF
Sophomore
Posts: 192
And1: 0
Joined: Nov 12, 2007

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#19 » by YiOF » Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:20 pm

Al n' Perk No Layups! wrote:
dougthonus wrote:
That's not even close to the same thing. There are 30 NBA teams, it's championship or bust because finishing second out of thirty isn't impressive. In the Olympics, there are thousands of athletes from hundreds of countries, finishing in the top three IS impressive.


I'd disagree, by the time you get to the Olympics, you usually are competing against ~30 guys in any one individual sport. It depends on the sport of course though.


That number would not be including all of the trials, you have to make your own team by qualifying in your nations heats, quarter finals, semi finals and finals; then make the Olympic finals by going through all of the heats, quarter finals and semi finals. You're comparing an entire league to a championship round, it'd be more fair to compare the NBA finals (where you are competing against one team) to the Olympic finals.


Why continue this pointless argument? 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". NBA can only have 30 teams because of various limitations, so is the Olympic finals for having only few elite athletes competing.
Acolistic
Banned User
Posts: 8
And1: 0
Joined: Jul 31, 2008
Location: At my Computer or at my Dorm...

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#20 » by Acolistic » Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:27 pm

Most medals shows the broadness of our types of athletes and golds shows excellence in a any particular sports. You see some golds are won through ties, and some by .01 of a second so if you want to compare you cant just look at gold count.
What does Acolistic mean? I know I've heard it before somewhere... Sounds very familiar... Hmm lets try dictionary.com or google.com...

Return to Olympics