Winter Olympic standings

[yester64]

I don't get it. What is the correct reading on stats.
I compared several international sites and every one has a different statcount for rankings.

BBC and Spiegel go by gold medals, then i checked msnbc and they go by overall medals to determine the ranking.

Isn't there a global rule?

Feels like you can not trust even newspapers.

[swoll1980]

I don't get it. What is the correct reading on stats.
I compared several international sites and every one has a different statcount for rankings.

BBC and Spiegel go by gold medals, then i checked msnbc and they go by overall medals to determine the ranking.

Isn't there a global rule?

Feels like you can not trust even newspapers.

Look at the medal count, and choose for yourself who did the best.

[Arkitekt]

Official Site : http://www.vancouver2010.com/

Trust that

[NovaAesa]

My understanding is that the newspapers of a country will put it in any certain way that makes them look the best. I.e. it traditionally would go ordered by gold medal count (then ordered by the next one down if there is a tie etc). Of course, if a certain country *cough cough* will look better if it was to order by total medal count, they will often put it that way instead.

[Lightstar]

Medal count is useless, it should never be the way things are counted.

USA has like 215 athletes, vs some countries who have only 1-10. There is no way they could be number one, right?

What if 10 out of 10 of their athletes got gold? they would still not be number one, because USA has so many athletes they would get 20+ gold medals.

It should be all counted in %
Gold medal % out of athlete number, same for silver, bronze.. etc.

I don't see how the olympics organizers don't think of it.

[swoll1980]

Medal count is useless, it should never be the way things are counted.

USA has like 215 athletes, vs some countries who have only 1-10. There is no way they could be number one, right?

What if 10 out of 10 of their athletes got gold? they would still not be number one, because USA has so many athletes they would get 20+ gold medals.

It should be all counted in %
Gold medal % out of athlete number, same for silver, bronze.. etc.

I don't see how the olympics organizers don't think of it.

That's the way it goes though. Here in Ohio high school football is huge, but the big schools, 3000 + students always win the title. They have a larger talent pool to dip into.

[cariboo]

I agree, there really isn't a good metric for which is the best country in the Olympics. We Canadians with a population 1/10th of the US, have more gold medals than any other country, so obviously we are the best. :)

[JDShu]

A sad fact is that nobody cares about the silver and bronze medals except for the people who won them. In today's society, only being number 1 is worthy of respect.

[cariboo]

I have to agree, even here the media seems to ignore silver and bronze medal winners after they have had their moment on the podium. The only bronze medal winner that seems to be getting any attention is the Canadian figure skater whose mother passed away from a heart attack last weekend just before the competition started.

[jomiolto]

From wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_medal_table):


Officially, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) does not recognize a ranking of participating countries at the Olympic Games. Nevertheless, the IOC does publish medal tables for informational purposes, showing the total number of medals earned by athletes representing each country's respective National Olympic Committee.

That's the traditional way of doing it and I think it makes more sense than just straight out counting the medals -- gold should be valued higher than silver or bronze. That being said, I've always thought that the best way to rank the countries (if you care about such nonsense) would be to assign values for the medals and make some sort of a score based on it; for example, each gold gives you 3 points, each silver 2 points and each bronze 1 point, and then you just sum them up for the final score.

Of course, with a system like that people would fight about the number of points given for each medal ("This way makes more sense! It's just a coincidence that it makes my country look better!").

[RabbitWho]

Also, if there's like 1 million people in your country and one of you enters the olympics, that's fricking awsome.




...........................Gold Silver Bronze Total
1. http://www.google.com/images/flags/small/USA.gif United States 9 14 13 36
2. http://www.google.com/images/flags/small/DEU.gif Germany 10 12 7 29
3. http://www.google.com/images/flags/small/CAN.gif Canada 13 7 5 25 -
http://www.google.com/images/flags/small/IRL.gif Ireland 0 0 0 0



Damn.


Czech republic got 6 medals, 2 gold. Only 12 million people in the country. Báječné!

Someone here should work out the percentage standings... but then someone would come along and say you have to take into account the percentage of them who live in a hot part of the country.. It's just endlessly complicated, we should accept Ireland is best and put an end to it.

[hobo14]

Golds first is the only right way, IMHO.

That's the way it's always been presented here, until Britain beat Australia in Beijing (!) and then they started talking total number of medals here instead of golds.

That interpretation kept us "above" Germany, but everyone knew why.

It was really hard for us to stomach being beaten by Britain at the Olympics for the first time in many years, even if their population is triple ours ;)

[RiceMonster]

Look at the medal count, and choose for yourself who did the best.

Canada, the country with the most gold medals :D.

[Lightstar]

yay canaduh

[LinuxFanBoi]

You could compile a medals:athlete ratio.

[Lightstar]

Table with %!
updated at 3:20pm (vancouver time, right after hockey results)

If we look in % Korea is the best. Followed by Netherlands.

[HomoGleek]

I think a points based system, Gold is worth 4 points say, Silver 2, and Bronze 1.

[DownTown22]

I have to agree, even here the media seems to ignore silver and bronze medal winners after they have had their moment on the podium. The only bronze medal winner that seems to be getting any attention is the Canadian figure skater whose mother passed away from a heart attack last weekend just before the competition started.

I don't know....TSN's doing a decent job of talking about gold, silver and bronze medalists.

[yester64]

Golds first is the only right way, IMHO.

That's the way it's always been presented here, until Britain beat Australia in Beijing (!) and then they started talking total number of medals here instead of golds.

That interpretation kept us "above" Germany, but everyone knew why.

It was really hard for us to stomach being beaten by Britain at the Olympics for the first time in many years, even if their population is triple ours ;)

See, if i look on my german news they count gold for ranking. Even the brits count it that way. But here in the US they count the total numbers of medals.
That is what is so confusing. So i am not sure what to think.
If every country does it the way they want, then there is no point or is there. Canada lead by gold medals alone. Well earned.

btw. why does the bbc not count both germanies as one. For them i guess the GDR is preserved for the future. That was in the alltime standings.
I am very confused and don't know how to say who is at which rank. :confused:

[malspa]

Medal count is useless, it should never be the way things are counted.

USA has like 215 athletes, vs some countries who have only 1-10. There is no way they could be number one, right?

What if 10 out of 10 of their athletes got gold? they would still not be number one, because USA has so many athletes they would get 20+ gold medals.

It should be all counted in %
Gold medal % out of athlete number, same for silver, bronze.. etc.

I don't see how the olympics organizers don't think of it.

Thanks for this post. From now on, I'm going to ignore any medal count by country because you're right, it's useless (and pointless).

[Alexandre Putt]

You could compile a medals:athlete ratio.

This won't be meaningful, because countries send different numbers of athletes for different reasons. Some countries send more people (including non-performers) so that they gain useful experience. Others just save money and send the best of the best.

I think that the size of participating countries has no effect either, at least for the countries having more than one million people.

[Arkitekt]

GO Canada! lol alot of eyes are glued to the TV today, it seems the culmination of a showdown between the US and Canada in our most loved sport is all this country cares about... and the fact that we got gold in the first place, for the first time at a Canadian Olympics. Although, it is pretty sweet that we are leading in total gold :)

and Cariboo I am also from BC, although from the Okanagan.

[cariboo]

@Arkitekt, I have family in Rutland, I've been through Kelowna many times, but never seem to be able to stop there for more than a few hours..

2 - 0 For Canada.

[HomoGleek]

See, if i look on my german news they count gold for ranking. Even the brits count it that way. But here in the US they count the total numbers of medals.
That is what is so confusing. So i am not sure what to think.
If every country does it the way they want, then there is no point or is there. Canada lead by gold medals alone. Well earned.

btw. why does the bbc not count both germanies as one. For them i guess the GDR is preserved for the future. That was in the alltime standings.
I am very confused and don't know how to say who is at which rank. :confused:
Were has the BBC referred to Germany as 2 separate nations?

[yester64]

Were has the BBC referred to Germany as 2 separate nations?

That was in the alltime standings. I believe the records from 1925 or so...
In germany both countries are united for their medals, but bbc seperates them for some reason.

[La Roza]

I agree, there really isn't a good metric for which is the best country in the Olympics. We Canadians with a population 1/10th of the US, have more gold medals than any other country, so obviously we are the best.

That's only because the British let you think that. :D

[cariboo]

Canada beat the US 3-2 in hockey, for a 14th gold medal. :)

[hobo14]

Canada beat the US 3-2 in hockey, for a 14th gold medal. :)

I was hoping Canada would win ;)
Cariboo, is William's Lake in Canada?

[RiceMonster]

Canada beat the US 3-2 in hockey, for a 14th gold medal. :)

That was an awesome goal by Crosby at the end there.

[JDShu]

As a Red Wings fan and an American, I hate Crosby. But that was an amazing game.

[cariboo]

I was hoping Canada would win ;)
Cariboo, is William's Lake in Canada?

Yes we are almost right in the center of British Columbia.

[Arkitekt]

Crosby didnt really perform the entire tournament, he scored the shootout goal against the Swiss, and he scored the gold winning goal. However, personally I think all praise should go to Luongo. Either way, A record number of goals scored, a record number of gold medals won, & first gold won for Canada on home soil made Vancouver 2010 a memorable Olympics for all Canadians.

@cariboo907, I live in Rutland :), been through Williams Lake a few times, its definitely a nice place.

[robertcoulson]

Just proud to be Canadian ( Like other people are proud of their Country)
Robert
P.S. - Now the world knows who's game they are playing( Ha,ha)

[HomoGleek]

That was in the alltime standings. I believe the records from 1925 or so...
In germany both countries are united for their medals, but bbc seperates them for some reason.
If you notice there is a East Germany, West Germany and just Germany.

I suppose its because they it would be wrong to add both of the former countries scores to the united Germany, as it would be unfair. That is why there is still the Soviet Union in the table lol