2010 Winter Olympics Medal Count

The difference in swimming is there are inherently different ways to swim. if 10 people were told to swim a few laps in a pool, a few of them would probably use a technique other than a normal forward crawl. Different strokes for different folks... literally.

In short track speed-skating (referring to what BocaFan was talking about) and the alpine skiing events, there are no fundamentally different ways of competing in those events.

 

Actually, there's a big difference in alpine skiing events.

I actually like the swimming analogy. In swimming, you have to cross the water, using different techniques.
In alpine skiing, you have to race down the hill using different techniques.

And they really are quite different. Downhill and Super-G are somewhat similar, but both Slalom and Giant Slalom are very different.

Especially with the men, where there is more specialization, when you watch the Slalom race, you won't find any skiers among the top racers who have dome well in Downhill or Super-G races. It's almost like the difference between backstroke and butterfly in swimming. When you look at the races, you'll see yourself that the technique is entirely different. Again, only Downhill and Super-G will look similar.

Other than that, you will find more swimmers who can be successful across the board than skiers. So obviously there is less dissimilarity among the swimming events. Not to mention that the different distances apparently don't make much of a difference in terms of who'll win. Thats also why it's traditionally the swimmers who win the most medals during one Olympic event.

As for short track, I really have no idea. I never followed that. It might be the case that it's redundant, but since I don't care for it, I'm probably the wrong person to talk to...

 

Caveat.

Why? Medal counts by nation are for idiots anyhow. The rest of us get past citizenship and watch athletes, period.

What do you hope to gain in terms of Internet pissing contest readiness by trying to devalue someone's medal while overvaluing someone else's?

Someone with more expertise than I have gets paid to make distinctions between those events.

Read on, from someone who has a better response:

This.

 

Tight race for the most golds. Guess the host nation have to be the favorites at this point. Two curling finals to play where they are solid favorites. Ice hockey where again Canada are favorites.

USA looks good for the bobsled (4-men).

What else is coming up?

 

Short track is up tonight. There are the snowboard parallel giant slalom races. Skiing has the slalom races. Here's a schedule: http://www.vancouver2010.com/olympic-schedule-results/ . (BTW, Germany is likely to give us a tough challenge in the the 4 man.)

 

Relax. FFS my team is among the worst offenders, if you take my critique seriously, at running up medal counts in sports like swimming, track & field and the skiing, snowboarding and speed skating events.

I don't put much stock in medal counts for a number of reasons (one of which I mentioned), so why don't you try not assuming other peoples motives before you post .

 

http://de.eurosport.yahoo.com/olympische-winterspiele/2010/medaillenspiegel/


Germany on top again with 9 Gold medals, but I expect the hosts from Canada or the USA to win the medal ranking in the end.


Btw: Great comeback from Norway after their Turin 2006 disaster!

 

Switzerlands total is much more amzing considering that they are a tiny country they now have 6 golds

 

A tiny country located in the Alps and completely obsessed with winter sports. Aren't children in Switzerland taught to ski before they learn to walk?

 

It is odd how here the medals are not listed by amount of golds but by amount of total medals

 

It is called a "medal count"

Canada has 2 more gold's than us, but we have 13 more top-3 finishes. Is 2 gold medals more impressive than 13 non-gold medals?

 

It looks to me that in the Summer Olympics what really counts is the number of golds, ain't it?...

Wouldn't the WOs follow the same principle?...

 

The US has always counted by total medals, Summer and Winter Olympics.

 

At least this site puts Canada up in front:

https://www.swivel.com/charts/11596-2010-Winter-Olympic-Medal-Count

And they justify:

I don’t want to put ice on the beer, but ...

 

Of course it is.

What truly matters is the gold. You can't give the same weight to the 3 medals.

Silver and bronze are consolation prizes. Still prestigious obviously but a far cry from being the Olympic Champion.

How is this even an issue??

 

Which makes this more ironic:

"Host Canada gives up on gold goal, raises white flag"

They use whatever system ranks them the highest

 

Looks like the IOC doesn't agree.

 

Canada's goal was to "Own the Podium". Having 13 fewer medals than the US isn't owning the podium.

The U.S. and Germany have been far more consistent in events than Canada has. That's a fact. Canada having 1 more gold than Germany and 2 more gold's than the US is insignificant.

 

There is a reason why the medals are molded with different materials.

Otherwise you would have 3 golds..

 

I don't care about Canada and the USA, really, I'm neutral...I'm just stating (what I thought was) the obvoius, regardless of who's first right now.

I've always seen countries ranked according to the amount of gold medals...silvers and bronzes only matter when you won the same number of golds.

We (Italy) completely sucked in these olympics, only winning 1 silver and 3 bronzes....according to your criteria, we would still be 'ahead' of Australia, who won 2 golds and 1 silver....it makes absolutely no sense.

And by your criteria, the USA would be the best country in the last Beijing olympics, despite the hosts winning (way) more golds...unacceptable and against the very logic of the olympic games.

 

Sorry, Pope:

That also applies to SO's:

What is, is.

 

I stated earlier in this thread that a country should be ranked above another country only when that country has significantly more gold's than the other. In Beijing, China had 15 more gold medals than the US, which was a greater margin than the US had total medals over China (10). Therefore, I agree that China 'won' the 2008 Olympics.

In the Vancouver games however, Canada has only 2 more gold medals than the US, but 13 fewer total medals. Therefore, I rank the US above Canada.

A 15 gold medal differential is significant while a 2 gold medal differential is not.

 

Since when did anybody give a shit about the IOC?