2016 Olympics

[BridgeTroll]

One thing I think is silly is that Americans are the only people in the world who go by total medals instead of gold medals when determining the medal count. The USA is in first right now (and likely to end up first overall), as they are tied with China on golds and have more silvers.

lol... really?  What makes you think they are the "only country"?

[BridgeTroll]

Front page BBCnews... http://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/rio-2016/medals/countries/china#china

Front page of the Guardian... https://www.theguardian.com/uk?INTCMP=CE_UK

I suspect nearly every country in the world keeps track of totals...

[Adam White]

One thing I think is silly is that Americans are the only people in the world who go by total medals instead of gold medals when determining the medal count. The USA is in first right now (and likely to end up first overall), as they are tied with China on golds and have more silvers.

lol... really?  What makes you think they are the "only country"?

Maybe not literally the only country - I think Canada might do it the same way. It was an eye-opener when I moved overseas.

I think the USA is still stuck in that Cold War mentality where it has to be first in everything - and if it isn't, it will change the rules. I wouldn't be surprised if Russia started doing the medal count the same way if they were behind the USA on golds but ahead overall.

As you can see, the Germans do the medal table on golds, as do the British, Australians and Japanese:

http://www.dw.com/en/top-stories/olympics/s-100857

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/rio-2016/medals/countries

http://www.abc.net.au/news/rio-olympics-2016/medal-tally/

http://www.japantoday.com/category/olympics/view/olympic-medals-table

[Adam White]

Front page BBCnews... http://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/rio-2016/medals/countries/china#china

Front page of the Guardian... https://www.theguardian.com/uk?INTCMP=CE_UK

I suspect nearly every country in the world keeps track of totals...

You just made my point. They are ranked by total golds, not total medals.

Of course people keep track of total medals, but ranking is by golds - and ties are broken by silvers, followed by bronze.

[Adam White]

Apparently, the IOC preference is to rank by golds. And, as the article suggests, it is also the preference for the rest of the world, more or less.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_medal_table

[BridgeTroll]

Front page BBCnews... http://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/rio-2016/medals/countries/china#china

Front page of the Guardian... https://www.theguardian.com/uk?INTCMP=CE_UK

I suspect nearly every country in the world keeps track of totals...

You just made my point. They are ranked by total golds, not total medals.

Of course people keep track of total medals, but ranking is by golds - and ties are broken by silvers, followed by bronze.

Rofl... whatever Adam... every single link you provided listed medal totals.  Kindof petty critique if you ask me...

[Adam White]

Front page BBCnews... http://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/rio-2016/medals/countries/china#china

Front page of the Guardian... https://www.theguardian.com/uk?INTCMP=CE_UK

I suspect nearly every country in the world keeps track of totals...

You just made my point. They are ranked by total golds, not total medals.

Of course people keep track of total medals, but ranking is by golds - and ties are broken by silvers, followed by bronze.

Rofl... whatever Adam... every single link you provided listed medal totals.  Kindof petty critique if you ask me...

I don't understand. If you look at all of those, Australia is ahead of Italy, even though Italy has more total medals.

Seriously.

Australia - third place with four golds, seven medals overall. Italy - fourth place with 3 golds, nine medals overall.

In American media tables, Italy would be third.

[BridgeTroll]

Front page BBCnews... http://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/rio-2016/medals/countries/china#china

Front page of the Guardian... https://www.theguardian.com/uk?INTCMP=CE_UK

I suspect nearly every country in the world keeps track of totals...

You just made my point. They are ranked by total golds, not total medals.

Of course people keep track of total medals, but ranking is by golds - and ties are broken by silvers, followed by bronze.

Rofl... whatever Adam... every single link you provided listed medal totals.  Kindof petty critique if you ask me...

I don't understand. If you look at all of those, Australia is ahead of Italy, even though Italy has more total medals.

Seriously.

Australia - third place with four golds, seven medals overall. Italy - fourth place with 3 golds, nine medals overall.

In American media tables, Italy would be third.

Seriously persnickity Adam...rofl.   Besides... the link I provided in my post this morning was from the NYTimes and displays the medal count just how... you... like it.  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/sports/olympics/schedule-results-rio.html?_r=0

[Adam White]

Seriously persnickity Adam...rofl.   Besides... the link I provided in my post this morning was from the NYTimes and displays the medal count just how... you... like it.  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/sports/olympics/schedule-results-rio.html?_r=0

I wasn't referring to your link - I read the text and didn't follow it. It was a general observation that occurred to me, as it's something that I notice every two years. It's weird and mildly embarassing (as an American).

(NBC's ranking: http://www.nbcolympics.com/medals)


I wasn't taking exception to your post - so I apologise if it came across that way.

[BridgeTroll]

Seriously persnickity Adam...rofl.   Besides... the link I provided in my post this morning was from the NYTimes and displays the medal count just how... you... like it.  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/sports/olympics/schedule-results-rio.html?_r=0

I wasn't referring to your link - I read the text and didn't follow it. It was a general observation that occurred to me, as it's something that I notice every two years. It's weird and mildly embarassing (as an American).

I wasn't taking exception to your post - so I apologise if it came across that way.

Fair enough... I still think your "general observation" is off base... perhaps tinted by european lenses.  You seem to be embarrassed as an American often. 

[finehoe]

Jacksonville's Ryan Murphy Wins Gold Medal

http://www.nbcolympics.com/news/ryan-murphy-keeps-us-backstroke-streak-alive-olympic-gold

[BridgeTroll]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/running-circles-around-us-east-african-olympians-advantage-may-be-more-than-physical/

African Olympians' Advantage May Be More Than Physical
In studying runners' genes and climate adaptation, science often overlooks a key cultural clue
By Frank Bures on August 5, 2016

When the starting gun fires at the Olympic track in Rio de Janeiro, there is little doubt who will be in the lead. In the Men's 1,500 Meters Asbel Kiprop will be up front. In the women's 5,000 meters Almaz Ayana will run away, and she may also take the 10,000 Meters. In the marathon Helah Kiprop will push the women whereas Eliud Kipchoge will be the one to watch among the men. In the Men's 800 Meters, David Rudisha will likely hold his title and maybe break his own world record.
In other words most of these races will be dominated by runners from, or with roots in, east Africa—namely Kenya and Ethiopia, with a few Eritreans and maybe a Ugandan also standing out. Mo Farah, currently at the top of the ranking for 10,000 meters, was born in Somalia and raised in the U.K., and now trains in the U.S. Bernard Lagat, who just won the U.S. 5,000-meter Olympic qualifier (at age 41) is Kenyan-American.
East African runners have dominated for the two decades since Kenyans started winning in the mid-1990s, followed by Ethiopians shortly thereafter. This has lead to great soul searching on the part of former distance powers like the U.S. and U.K. Yet reasons for that dominance remain hotly debated, and science has had little definitive to say about it..........

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/running-circles-around-us-east-african-olympians-advantage-may-be-more-than-physical/

[Adam White]

Seriously persnickity Adam...rofl.   Besides... the link I provided in my post this morning was from the NYTimes and displays the medal count just how... you... like it.  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/sports/olympics/schedule-results-rio.html?_r=0

I wasn't referring to your link - I read the text and didn't follow it. It was a general observation that occurred to me, as it's something that I notice every two years. It's weird and mildly embarassing (as an American).

I wasn't taking exception to your post - so I apologise if it came across that way.

Fair enough... I still think your "general observation" is off base... perhaps tinted by european lenses.  You seem to be embarrassed as an American often.

My general observation (if you're referring to how the US media tends to list medal ranking vs the rest of the world) is pretty much spot-on.

As far as me being embarrassed as an American - I don't know what you mean. I mean, yeah - I was ashamed about Afghanistan and Iraq (and the whole US "war on terror." But I can't really think of many things that are embarrassing to me - hell, even Donald Trump's popularity doesn't embarrass me. But maybe I'm overlooking other comments I've posted. If you want to post examples, I'm happy to respond to them.

[BridgeTroll]

Seriously persnickity Adam...rofl.   Besides... the link I provided in my post this morning was from the NYTimes and displays the medal count just how... you... like it.  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/sports/olympics/schedule-results-rio.html?_r=0

I wasn't referring to your link - I read the text and didn't follow it. It was a general observation that occurred to me, as it's something that I notice every two years. It's weird and mildly embarassing (as an American).

I wasn't taking exception to your post - so I apologise if it came across that way.

Fair enough... I still think your "general observation" is off base... perhaps tinted by european lenses.  You seem to be embarrassed as an American often.

My general observation (if you're referring to how the US media tends to list medal ranking vs the rest of the world) is pretty much spot-on.

As far as me being embarrassed as an American - I don't know what you mean. I mean, yeah - I was ashamed about Afghanistan and Iraq (and the whole US "war on terror." But I can't really think of many things that are embarrassing to me - hell, even Donald Trump's popularity doesn't embarrass me. But maybe I'm overlooking other comments I've posted. If you want to post examples, I'm happy to respond to them.

Here ya go bro... have at it... rank em if ya got em...rofl...  http://www.topendsports.com/events/summer/medal-tally/rankings.htm

Medal Tally Ranking Systems

The common method of determining the success of countries at the Olympic Games is a ranking order based first on the number of gold medals won, then silver and bronze. This method is used by the IOC and most media outlets during the Olympic Games, but there is still no 'official' method.

Usually the country that has led in total medals also led in the gold count - when did it not? Exceptions are the 1896, 1912 and 1964 Summer Olympics when the United States finished first in gold medal count but second in the overall medal count. Also in 2008, the US finished first in total medal count but second to China in the overall based on gold medals. A criticism of counting only gold medals to determine success is that it implies that winning silver and bronze, or making the final, is worthless.

Another commonly used method (the predominent method used in the USA) is to rank countries based on the total medals won. In this case, a silver and bronze medal count the same as the gold medal - is a silver or bronze really worth as much as a gold medal? Certainly not to the athlete.winners stand

There are numerous possible other ways of ranking success at the Olympics, with some of the alternative medal tally ranking systems having merit. A more extreme system that has been tried is to count all gold medals won, so the results from team sports count the number of individual medals given out. This totally biases countries which win medals in the team sports.

Then there are weighted systems which assign differing amounts of points to each of the gold, silver and bronze medals. You can see a discussion of the weighted methods which compares a few variations using this method. Other ranking methods have factored in demographic factors such as population size and economic factors such as gross domestic product (GDP). You can see a discussion of the demographic methods.

Below are listed quite a few alternative medal ranking systems, and a discussion of any differences that they may make.

olympic olive wreathAll Ranking Systems

Here are some of the ranking systems that have been devised. A weighted system of some sort seems like the best system, but it is not as simple to implement as either the gold first or total medals method.

gold first method — based first on the number of gold medals, then silver and bronze. Does silver and bronze have no value?
total medals — based on the total number of medals (gold, silver and bronze). This method gives equal rating to gold,silver and bronze, which does not seem a fair system.
total gold medals — counting all the gold medals won, including counting the medals for each individual athlete in team sports.
Improvement Rating — based on percentage improvement from previous Games result.
Compared to expectations — there are several groups that forecast or predict the medal won for each country based on factors such as population, GDP and previous performances, at prior Olympics and competitions leading up to the Olympics.
Fibonacci weighted point system (3:2:1) — gold 3 points, silver 2 points, and bronze 1 point.
Exponential weighted point system (4:2:1) — gold 4 points, silver 2 points, and bronze 1 point.
London 1908 weighted point system (5:3:1) — gold 5 points, silver 3 points, and bronze 1 point.
LOF weighted point system (5:3:2) — gold 5 points, silver 3 points, and bronze 2 point.
Topend Sports weighted point system (6:2:1) — gold 6 points, silver 2 points, and bronze 1 point.
per-capita demographic ranking — number of medals is divided by the population of the country.
per-GDP demographic ranking — number of medals is divided by the gross domestic product (GDP) of the country.
Comparing Ranking Systems

Some of the weighted ranking systems only vary slightly, but can make a significant difference in the order on some tables. See the comparisons of the most successful countries at the Olympics using the weighted points and demographic systems, and the same using the all-time medal list. These weighted systems are also used to compare the greatest Olympic athletes of all time.

Here are poll results... http://www.topendsports.com/resources/polls/sport/medal-ranking-systems.htm?view_results

[BridgeTroll]

Domination! 

Women Gymnasts, Ledecky and Phelps again...

Gold
Women's gymnastics, team competition
Michael Phelps, Men's 200m butterfly (swimming)
Katie Ledecky, Women's 200m freestyle (swimming)
Men's 4x200m freestyle relay (swimming)

Silver
Travis Stevens, Men's Judo 81kg

Bronze
Phillip Dutton, Individual eventing (equestrian)
Maya Dirado, Women's 200m individual medley (swimming)

Highlights

The Final Five: The women's gymnastics team was utterly dominant, finishing with a margin of victory of over eight points -- the largest victory at a major gymnastics meet.
Phelps steals the show: Everyone, including the USA basketball team, was cheering on Phelps as he won an incredibly close 200m butterfly race over rival Chad le Clos. It was Phelps' 20th gold medal. Just an hour later, he swam the anchor leg in a gold medal win in the 4x200m freestyle relay.

Killer Katie: In what will probably be her toughest race of the Olympics, Katie Ledecky won the 200m freestyle in exciting fashion. It was her second gold medal of the games, her third overall.
Not perfect: The U.S. women's soccer team showed that it does have flaws in a 2-2 draw with Colombia. The UWNT still won the group, however, and advances to play Sweden.
Bye, bye Serena: After losing in doubles with her sister Venus, Serena Williams was ousted from the singles tournament on Tuesday at the hands of Elina Svitolina. No top seed is left in any of the Rio tennis draws.