Total Medal Count (after 8 days) United States: 6-6-8 20 Germany: 4-5-4 13 Norway: 5-3-2 10 Canada: 4-3-1 8 France: 2-1-4 7 South Korea: 3-2-0 5 Austria: 1-2-2 5 Russia: 1-2-2 5 Switzerland: 3-0-1 4 China: 2-1-1 4 Sweden: 2-1-1 4 Italy: 0-1-3 4 Netherlands: 1-1-1 3 Poland: 0-2-1 3 Japan: 0-1-2 3 Australia: 1-1-0 2 Slovakia: 1-1-0 2 Czech Republic: 1-0-1 2 Latvia: 0-2-0 2 Belarus: 0-1-1 2 Great Britian: 1-0-0 1 Estonia: 0-1-0 1 Finland: 0-1-0 1 Kazakhstan 0-1-0 1 Croatia: 0-0-1 1 Slovenia: 0-0-1 1
Total Medal Count (after 9 days) United States: 6-7-10 23 Germany: 4-6-4 14 Norway: 5-3-3 11 South Korea: 4-4-1 9 Canada: 4-3-1 8 Austria: 2-2-3 7 France: 2-1-4 7 Sweden: 3-1-2 6 Switzerland: 4-0-1 5 China: 3-1-1 5 Russia: 1-2-2 5 Netherlands: 2-1-1 4 Poland: 0-3-1 4 Italy: 0-1-3 4 Japan: 0-1-2 3 Australia: 1-1-0 2 Slovakia: 1-1-0 2 Czech Republic: 1-0-1 2 Latvia: 0-2-0 2 Belarus: 0-1-1 2 Slovenia: 0-1-1 2 Great Britian: 1-0-0 1 Estonia: 0-1-0 1 Finland: 0-1-0 1 Kazakhstan 0-1-0 1 Croatia: 0-0-1 1
Total Medal Count (after 10 days) United States: 7-7-10 24 Germany: 6-7-5 18 Norway: 5-3-4 12 Canada: 4-4-1 9 South Korea: 4-4-1 9 Austria: 2-3-3 8 Russia: 2-3-3 8 France: 2-2-4 8 Switzerland: 5-0-2 7 Sweden: 3-1-2 6 China: 3-1-1 5 Netherlands: 3-1-1 5 Poland: 0-3-1 4 Italy: 0-1-3 4 Slovakia: 1-1-1 3 Czech Republic: 1-0-2 3 Japan: 0-1-2 3 Australia: 1-1-0 2 Latvia: 0-2-0 2 Belarus: 0-1-1 2 Croatia: 0-1-1 2 Slovenia: 0-1-1 2 Great Britian: 1-0-0 1 Estonia: 0-1-0 1 Finland: 0-1-0 1 Kazakhstan 0-1-0 1
Germany has caught-up to the USA as many predicted. Same # of gold, two more silvers. 1. Germany 7 9 5 (21) 2. United States 7 7 10 (24)
Total Medal Count (after 11 days) United States: 7-8-10 25 Germany: 7-9-5 21 Norway: 6-3-5 14 Russia: 2-3-6 11 Canada: 5-4-1 10 South Korea: 4-4-1 9 Austria: 3-3-3 9 France: 2-2-4 8 Switzerland: 5-0-2 7 Sweden: 3-2-2 7 China: 3-1-1 5 Netherlands: 3-1-1 5 Poland: 0-3-1 4 Italy: 0-1-3 4 Slovakia: 1-1-1 3 Czech Republic: 1-0-2 3 Japan: 0-1-2 3 Australia: 1-1-0 2 Latvia: 0-2-0 2 Belarus: 0-1-1 2 Croatia: 0-1-1 2 Slovenia: 0-1-1 2 Great Britian: 1-0-0 1 Estonia: 0-1-0 1 Finland: 0-1-0 1 Kazakhstan 0-1-0 1
if germany tops the medal tally again which i suspect they will, it'll be the 5th time out of the last 7 winter olympics they've done it. that applies to both total medals and most gold medals.
In swimming a dual meet is usually scored: 5 points for first, 3 for second and 1 for third. That way a first is worth more than an second and third combined, but not by much. I'd propose using that system for scoring medal counts too. So.... USA 2-2-4 is 10 points + 6 points + 4 points = 20 points. vs. Switzerland 3-0-1 is 15 points + 0 points + 1 point = 16 points.
Heap shame. Uriah Heep. It's an event of individual and team competitions. They are there to be won, and there is only one winner per event. The winner or winning team gets the gold medal(s). I don't think anyone is heaping shame, exactly, upon those who do not place first, but it's rare that any other sporting event celebrates placing second or third in a way that distinguishes it from placing seventh or eighth.
Some competitions in world soccer do: A) There is a 3rd-place match in the World Cup to distinguish 3rd and 4th place. B) Depending on the league, Champions League spots are allocated to clubs who finish 2nd to 4th.
Yes, and the only people who care about it are those people from the participating nations- hell, not even those if the team was "supposed" to reach the final or win it all. Brasil wouldn't care about a World Cup bronze medal, nor should they. But you see people happy about Olympic bronze. I mean, fine if that's all you're good for or if you finished behind two athletic freaks, but competitions are there to be won. I also think they do it because the semifinal teams are still there in the country and fans want to see one more game and they're willing to pay for that game. Frankly, I'd like to see every competitor who had a realistic shot at gold be pissed that it didn't work out. That's what competition is about- winning and not winning... and living with not winning, owning not winning, eating not winning until you DO win. I do understand that the Olympic Games have a different vibe, and I guess that's cool, but I was responding to Riverplate's outburst. You and I both know that's about nothing but $$$$. They used to take only the champions and that tournament today wouldn't make UEFA as much money.
Total Medal Count (after 12 days) United States: 7-9-10 26 Germany: 7-9-7 23 Norway: 6-5-6 17 Russia: 3-4-6 13 Canada: 6-4-1 11 South Korea: 5-4-1 10 Austria: 4-3-3 10 France: 2-3-5 10 Switzerland: 6-0-2 8 Sweden: 3-2-2 7 Netherlands: 3-1-2 6 China: 3-1-1 5 Poland: 0-3-1 4 Italy: 0-1-3 4 Slovakia: 1-1-1 3 Czech Republic: 1-0-2 3 Japan: 0-1-2 3 Australia: 1-1-0 2 Latvia: 0-2-0 2 Belarus: 0-1-1 2 Croatia: 0-1-1 2 Slovenia: 0-1-1 2 Great Britian: 1-0-0 1 Estonia: 0-1-0 1 Finland: 0-1-0 1 Kazakhstan 0-1-0 1
Personally, I'd say that the only valid way of ranking nations is by gold medals (silver/bronze as tie breakers). Everything else is either unfair (counting bronze the same as gold) or arbitrary (how many silver/bronze medals is a gold medal worth?) Counting the gold medals on the other hand is counting the winners, not counting the best losers. But since there's no official ranking, everybody is entitled to count whichever way they like best.
I agree only when one country has significantly more golds, but less total medals, than another country. I have to refer back to one of my previous posts:
I think the most disproportionate thing about medal counts is that while one individual speed skater or skier can in theory amass a half dozen gold medals himself for winning a handful of races, an entire team of hockey players has to win a tournament to share one gold medal among them (as far as the count goes).
Well, you could also say that three English teams in the CL semi finals is more impressive than an Italian CL winner... It's the question of what you're looking at...is it winners, or depth? In your example, the US clearly has more depth, but at the end of the day, I'd say it's winners that count. But again, that's my personal opinion. This is clearly not a question where one can be right or wrong.
That makes pefect sense to me. Hockey is one event, just like any one speedskating event. If a skater (or a swimmer or a runner) is in more than one event, s/he has to train for each event. The nature of running is similar- you would not expect a marathoner, no matter how great at distance running, to be competitive in a 100m sprint. But a hockey player is a hockey player. He trains at his position on a team that is trying to win one event. Which skiing (or speedskating) events do you think are so very similar that they can be combined (or one eliminated in favor of the other)?
Do we really need Downhill, Super Combined, Super-G, Slalom, and Giant Slalom? I must admit that I know very little if anything about the differences between the alpine skiing events. Are they all that different?
It's kinda like the difference between 100m, 200m, 400m and 800m at the Summer Olympics. Or like the difference in backstroke, butterfly, breaststroke and freestyle when it comes to swimming, and in all their combinations (100m, 200m, 400m, 1500m, 4x100m, 4x100m medley, 4x200m...)
Total Medal Count (after 13 days) United States: 7-9-12 28 Germany: 7-10-7 24 Norway: 6-6-6 18 Canada: 7-6-2 15 Russia: 3-4-6 13 South Korea: 5-4-1 10 Austria: 4-3-3 10 France: 2-3-5 10 Switzerland: 6-0-2 8 China: 4-2-2 8 Sweden: 4-2-2 8 Netherlands: 3-1-2 6 Czech Republic: 2-0-3 5 Poland: 0-3-1 4 Italy: 0-1-3 4 Australia: 2-1-0 3 Slovakia: 1-1-1 3 Japan: 0-1-2 3 Latvia: 0-2-0 2 Belarus: 0-1-1 2 Croatia: 0-1-1 2 Slovenia: 0-1-1 2 Great Britian: 1-0-0 1 Estonia: 0-1-0 1 Finland: 0-1-0 1 Kazakhstan 0-1-0 1
I'm not necessarily in favor of eliminating events or what have you, I just think that not all medals are created equal and that it should be a caveot when looking at medal counts.
The best (worst) example I can think of for winter olympics is 1000m short-track speed skating and 1500m short-track speed skating. I'm not a short-track expert but I've seen enough to know that it isn't really about raw speed or endurance. It's mainly about acceleration and strategy (how you handle the last 5-7 laps, in particular). Hence a 15 lap is exactly the same thing as a 10 lap race.