View Full Version : More Medals or More Golds?
McNulty
08-22-2008, 09:04 AM
Would you rather have more overall medals then every other country, or more Golds then every other country?
Mackus
08-22-2008, 09:11 AM
Definitely more Golds.
And honestly, I think anybody who says more overall medals is only saying that because the US has the most overall medals as opposed to the most overall Golds.
square634
08-22-2008, 09:12 AM
More golds... that means that you have the best athletes in the world in the sports your country focuses on.
Danielos38
08-22-2008, 09:33 AM
I'd rather have more golds, but I realistically think that we could have had both, which is obviously better.
TyCobb
08-22-2008, 09:38 AM
Definitely more Golds.
And honestly, I think anybody who says more overall medals is only saying that because the US has the most overall medals as opposed to the most overall Golds.
Having the most medals shows we have the greatest pool of athletics. Now I voted for more Golds cause that just better, but overall is still meaningful.
Mackus
08-22-2008, 09:40 AM
Having the most medals shows we have the greatest pool of athletics. Now I voted for more Golds cause that just better, but overall is still meaningful.I don't think having the most medals is meaningless, but having the most Gold medals shows your dominance more, and therefore is better.
The Wedge
08-22-2008, 09:42 AM
I actually fluctuate back and forth between what I think is better all the time. On one hand, more golds means you just rocked the crap out of a lot of events. But most overall medals means your country has placed top 3 in the world in the most events...both are pretty darn impressive.
glenn__davis
08-22-2008, 09:51 AM
More golds for me. Hats off to the Chinese. They vowed to win more golds than the US at the Olympics and have done so rather handily.
Aside from Phelps, I think this is probably viewed as a dissappointing Olympics for the US. Shawn Johnson and Nastia Liukin had good individual performances, but we lost that team competition to China. Katie Hoff failed to win a single gold. The softball team lost. The track and field team was bound to have some success, but by and large I think they've been viewed as a major dissappointment, although Tyson Gay's injury probably has a lot to do with that.
Obviously most other countries in the world would love to have an Olympics like the US has had, but I have to think it could've been a lot better.
Mackus
08-22-2008, 09:58 AM
I actually fluctuate back and forth between what I think is better all the time. On one hand, more golds means you just rocked the crap out of a lot of events. But most overall medals means your country has placed top 3 in the world in the most events...both are pretty darn impressive.Yeah but 3 is a pretty arbitrary number. Why not give out ruby and amethys medals and say top 5? Or just limit it to gold and silver and say top 2?
Golds is where its at.
ElToro75
08-22-2008, 10:00 AM
Would you rather have more overall medals then every other country, or more Golds then every other country?
I would say more medals overall.
If you assign a point value to each medal, in this case 3 for a Gold, 2 for a Silver, and 1 for a Bronze (much like the way high school track meets are scored) then it's easier to determine an overall "Olympic Winner" in medals
US
Gold - 30 (90 points)
Silver - 36 (72 points)
Bronze - 35 (35 points)
China
Gold - 47 (141 points)
Silver - 16 (32 points)
Bronze - 25 (25 points)
With this method, the US has 197 points and China has 198 total points. Pretty close so far by my method.
Here is my reasoning:
Going back to HS track, my HS team won 3 out of 4 state championships this way. We would always have a decent amount of gold medals, but we always had alot of athletes finish 2nd - 5th. There would always be a few teams that would win a good many golds, but they weren't deep enough to finish athletes 2nd - 5th. We would accumulate more total points that way and therefore won 3 state championships in 4 years.
The Wedge
08-22-2008, 10:16 AM
Yeah but 3 is a pretty arbitrary number. Why not give out ruby and amethys medals and say top 5? Or just limit it to gold and silver and say top 2?
Golds is where its at.
So's the judging in a lot of the events to begin with...
ChaosLex
08-22-2008, 10:21 AM
And honestly, I think anybody who says more overall medals is only saying that because the US has the most overall medals as opposed to the most overall Golds.
Yeesh! Way to stereotype us. :p
While gold is nice, I'm pretty happy when our boys/gals win ANY medal.
Mackus
08-22-2008, 10:34 AM
I'm pretty happy when our boys/gals win ANY medal.Me too, but thats not what this thread is about.
The thread is about what is the better title:
Country with the most Gold medals
or
Country with the most medals total
Sports Guy
08-22-2008, 10:43 AM
I will say more medals....Shows you have a better balance in all sports.
Not many countries can put a great Saber and beach volleyball teams out there.
I think it also depends on what sports the golds are coming in...Are you winning a lot in judo, archery, canoeing, kayaking and badminton?
Or are you winning in the sports that are much more mainstream and have many more people competing in them?
Mackus
08-22-2008, 11:17 AM
I think it also depends on what sports the golds are coming in...Are you winning a lot in judo, archery, canoeing, kayaking and badminton?
Or are you winning in the sports that are much more mainstream and have many more people competing in them?I can't disagree with this line of thinking any more strongly.
Every gold medal at the Olympics is just as important as any other.
Spoonless
08-22-2008, 11:24 AM
I don't really care about how many medals the US takes away. Maybe it's unpatriotic of me, but I really just like to see the competition at the highest level. I generally root for the US, but I'm more interested in the sport itself than in who wins. Of course, NBC does a great job of putting sob stories out there to make you root for certain athletes. While backstories are nice and all, it's really about the pure (whatever you want to say about the "purity") competition to me.
Why Not?
08-22-2008, 11:31 AM
More golds for me. Hats off to the Chinese. They vowed to win more golds than the US at the Olympics and have done so rather handily.
Aside from Phelps, I think this is probably viewed as a dissappointing Olympics for the US. Shawn Johnson and Nastia Liukin had good individual performances, but we lost that team competition to China. Katie Hoff failed to win a single gold. The softball team lost. The track and field team was bound to have some success, but by and large I think they've been viewed as a major dissappointment, although Tyson Gay's injury probably has a lot to do with that.
Obviously most other countries in the world would love to have an Olympics like the US has had, but I have to think it could've been a lot better.
We might get that one back.
glenn__davis
08-22-2008, 01:11 PM
We might get that one back.
Yeah, I won't be holding my breath.
The IOC would be hesitant to strip the host country of a medal like that anyway, let alone the fact that it would give the US a gold, which the IOC doesn't want. I know aboslutely nothing about age documents or anything, but I know that they'll take whatever proof they have from the Chinese, while it will take absolute foolproof documents from the US to overturn anything.
Why Not?
08-22-2008, 02:25 PM
Yeah, I won't be holding my breath.
The IOC would be hesitant to strip the host country of a medal like that anyway, let alone the fact that it would give the US a gold, which the IOC doesn't want. I know aboslutely nothing about age documents or anything, but I know that they'll take whatever proof they have from the Chinese, while it will take absolute foolproof documents from the US to overturn anything.
You're probably right. Though, from my understanding, it isn't the U.S. federation spearheading any complaints or investigation.
Now that the Beijing Games are over, I don't think the IOC will feel any need to kiss up to the Chinese. After all, the Chinese broke some promises about web access and such, so blatent cheating like this might be an opportunity for the IOC to stick it to them. Who knows?
More golds to me.
Now if we were close in golds, and winning the overall count by a lot, I'd be happy with that result, but their advantage in golds is greater than our advantage in overall medals. Therefore, advantage China.
sportsfan14
08-22-2008, 07:58 PM
Really interesting debate. Good thread.
I side with the More Medals group...
and it has nothing to do with that favoring USA right now.
Country A having more medals than Country B shows that A has world-class athletes in more sports than B.
I think if we're trying to judge overall athletic accomplishments for countries as a whole, balance > dominance.
----
I think someone made the point earlier that every Olympic gold medal is equal. Thats noble and idealist and all and its true in terms of medal count, but completely untrue in reality imo.
Whats more impressive?
Being the best at Activity X among five people
or
Being the best at Activity Y among ten people?
The difference in competition level in some sports is enormous. I'm not sure its an exaggeration to say that every single country in the entire world cares more about their soccer team than their rowing team. Those medals are simply not equal, in reality.
How many kids grow up playing soccer? How many kids grow up rowing?
(I hope the answer is obvious, although I don't have any data to "prove" my point atm)
Leading up the Olympics, the Chinese were more than ready to spend money to bolster their medal count. Just like a presidential candidate allocating money towards states that he can flip, China poured money into sports where they could quickly become medal contenders. China spent more money on their rowing program than any other country in the world. How did the Chinese soccer team do?
----
Anyway, the entire medal count concept is pretty stupid imo. Example (and yes this part is biased re: USA v. China):
China is clearly, undeniably, the best country in the world at diving. They love that sport. Its a huge part of their culture. In these Games, they will (likely) win 8 gold medals in diving.
The United States is clearly, undeniably, the best country in the world at basketball. They love that sport. Its a huge part of their culture. In these Games, they will (likely) win 1 gold medal in basketball.
Is China's diving dominance really worth 8x as much as America's basketball dominance? Give me a break.
Really interesting debate. Good thread.
I side with the More Medals group...
and it has nothing to do with that favoring USA right now.
Country A having more medals than Country B shows that A has world-class athletes in more sports than B.
I think if we're trying to judge overall athletic accomplishments for countries as a whole, balance > dominance.
----
I think someone made the point earlier that every Olympic gold medal is equal. Thats noble and idealist and all and its true in terms of medal count, but completely untrue in reality imo.
Whats more impressive?
Being the best at Activity X among five people
or
Being the best at Activity Y among ten people?
The difference in competition level in some sports is enormous. I'm not sure its an exaggeration to say that every single country in the entire world cares more about their soccer team than their rowing team. Those medals are simply not equal, in reality.
How many kids grow up playing soccer? How many kids grow up rowing?
(I hope the answer is obvious, although I don't have any data to "prove" my point atm)
Leading up the Olympics, the Chinese were more than ready to spend money to bolster their medal count. Just like a presidential candidate allocating money towards states that he can flip, China poured money into sports where they could quickly become medal contenders. China spent more money on their rowing program than any other country in the world. How did the Chinese soccer team do?
----
Anyway, the entire medal count concept is pretty stupid imo. Example (and yes this part is biased re: USA v. China):
China is clearly, undeniably, the best country in the world at diving. They love that sport. Its a huge part of their culture. In these Games, they will (likely) win 8 gold medals in diving.
The United States is clearly, undeniably, the best country in the world at basketball. They love that sport. Its a huge part of their culture. In these Games, they will (likely) win 1 gold medal in basketball.
Is China's diving dominance really worth 8x as much as America's basketball dominance? Give me a break.
I don't agree with the more medals over more golds part, but for the rest of the post, nicely done, I agree. However, the US will likely have two gold medals for basketball.
Wouldn't it be cool if one on one and two on two basketball were olympic sports?
The Wedge
08-22-2008, 08:39 PM
The United States is clearly, undeniably, the best country in the world at basketball. They love that sport. Its a huge part of their culture. In these Games, they will (likely) win 1 gold medal in basketball.
I like this point, but don't forget that there's a mens and women's team...that's 2 chances.
I like this point, but don't forget that there's a mens and women's team...that's 2 chances.
Plus, if this is a comparison to China, we're better than them at track and field and swimming, where there are many medals at stake.
Sports Guy
08-22-2008, 09:09 PM
The other thing to consider is that some of these sports are done by judging.
Look at gymnastics for example...The american girls kept getting screwed by the judges.
That costs them golds.....I think that has to be taken into consideration...The best doesn't always win in some of these events because of poor judging.
The other thing to consider is that some of these sports are done by judging.
Look at gymnastics for example...The american girls kept getting screwed by the judges.
That costs them golds.....I think that has to be taken into consideration...The best doesn't always win in some of these events because of poor judging.
But that goes for finishing 3rd or 4th as well, so that's a problem for both the gold and overall medal counts.
The Wedge
08-22-2008, 09:35 PM
The other thing to consider is that some of these sports are done by judging.
Look at gymnastics for example...The american girls kept getting screwed by the judges.
That costs them golds.....I think that has to be taken into consideration...The best doesn't always win in some of these events because of poor judging.
Yeah but 3 is a pretty arbitrary number. Why not give out ruby and amethys medals and say top 5? Or just limit it to gold and silver and say top 2?
Golds is where its at.
So's the judging in a lot of the events to begin with...
Okay, I won't. :D
sportsfan14
08-23-2008, 11:33 AM
I like this point, but don't forget that there's a mens and women's team...that's 2 chances.
Yes, thats true. I'm not sure women's basketball fit the rest of what I said though ("big part of their culture"). Guo Jiangling (sp?) is probably treated with more reverence in China than, say, Diana Taurasi is here.
Edit: Alright Wedge, you win ;). I should have said 8-2.
(Its kind of funny that while I was saying this, USA women's bball officially wrapped up the gold medal, pummeling Australia by 27.)
Plus, if this is a comparison to China, we're better than them at track and field and swimming, where there are many medals at stake.
Of course, it goes both ways. Who knows if it actually ever "evens out" though, so I don't think just adding up medals works.
My point wasn't that USA was getting jipped; rather, that the medal count system (straight addition) is highly flawed.
----
For the people who said "more golds", where do you draw the line?
What if it was...
Country A: 5 G | 25 S | 25 B
Country B: 25 G | 5 S | 5 B
Would you still rather be Country B?
What if it was...
Country A: 5 G | 20 S | 20 B
Country B: 10 G | 5 S | 5 B
Would you still rather be Country B?
Obviously I could keep stretching this example, to the point of ridiculousness, but you get the point. I really don't think you can just say "More Golds", you have to qualify it somehow (like mweb did). Use a combination of medals and golds.
I like the point system idea. It seems most people feel that 1 G > 1 S + 1 B, so I'm not sure a 3-2-1 system is best. Maybe more like 5-3-1.
(Fwiw, that puts China ahead 330-312 atm)
The Wedge
08-23-2008, 11:39 AM
Yes, thats true. I'm not sure women's basketball fit the rest of what I said though ("big part of their culture"). Guo Jiangling (sp?) is probably treated with more reverence in China than, say, Diana Taurasi is here.
It does in the sense that basketball is such a big part of our culture that we have both excellent teams in men and womens, savvy? Thereby giving us two opportunities because it's such a big part of our culture. It still fits your argument because its only two compared to however many diving gets you (8?), but yeah. I'm being a stickler. ;)