Sports
11 Jun 07
12 Jun 07
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundYou really disproved your own argument here. china with one billion people more than the united states recieves less gold medals, less silver, less bronze, and 40 less medals overall.
2004 olympics
1 United States 35 39 29 103
2 China 32 17 14 63
3 Russia 27 27 38 92
4 Australia 17 16 16 49
5 Japan 16 9 12 37
6 Germany 14 16 18 48
7 France 11 9 13 33
8 Italy 10 11 11 32
9 South Korea 9 12 9 30
10 Great Britain 9 9 12 30
11 Cuba 9 7 11 27
12 Ukraine 9 5 9 23
13 Hungary 8 6 3 17
14 Romani ...[text shortened]... ilver/bronze/total.
Can anyone find a list of participents per country ? I'm having trouble.
And whats more, Russia generally sends out better athletes than china--bringing home nearly 30 more medals and coming close to the united states in total. China performs very well in a few sports, netting it a high number of gold medals, and poorly in many others, leaving it with a low medal total. The fact that china has a higher percentage of gold out of the events it recieved medals in means nothing, the PRC and USA both COMPETED in the same number of events, and the USA recieved a higher percentage gold of those events, and absolutley slaughtered everyone but Russia in terms of actual overall performance.
12 Jun 07
2 edits
Originally posted by ShaKKaXuluI'm afraid not. If that were the case, then surely plucky little Cuba would be the best, with a frction of the population of america, and 27 medals.
You really disproved your own argument here. china with one billion people more than the united states recieves less gold medals, less silver, less bronze, and 40 less medals overall.
And whats more, Russia generally sends out better athletes than china--bringing home nearly 30 more medals and coming close to the united states in total. China performs ...[text shortened]... e events, and absolutley slaughtered everyone but Russia in terms of actual overall performance.
I asked how many of each country attended so we can have a ratio of winners:participants (for each country).
By your rational, surely Cuba is the best ??? NO ?
edit. population of Cuba - 2006 estimate 11,382,820
We have a winner, the best athelete in the world smoke Cigars 🙂
12 Jun 07
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mediareleasesbytitle/BE9F47591541E29ECA256EF40004F25A?OpenDocument
"On 18 August, the Australian Bureau of Statistics released an alternative view of the traditional Olympic medal tally to take into account the populations of competing nations."
Gold medals per capita
1. Bahamas
2. Norway
3. Australia
4. Hungary
5. Cuba
6. New Zealand
7. Jamaica
8. Greece
9. Sweden
10. Georgia
Great Britain ranked 29th
USA ranked 34th
China ranked 53rd
Australia comes in at 3rd, which is not surprising considering our love of watching, playing and anything to do with the outdoors and sport.
12 Jun 07
Originally posted by Esotericthere you go. much more realistic. plus the BIG countries have to have an
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mediareleasesbytitle/BE9F47591541E29ECA256EF40004F25A?OpenDocument
"On 18 August, the Australian Bureau of Statistics released an alternative view of the traditional Olympic medal tally to take into account the populations of competing nations."
Gold medals per capita
1. Bahamas
2. Norway
3. Australia
4 ...[text shortened]... sing considering our love of watching, playing and anything to do with the outdoors and sport.
"erection" about everything in the Olympics. Spirit went out the window 6O years ago.
- Joined
- 23 Mar 04
- Moves
- 254972
12 Jun 07
Originally posted by EsotericSee, even pot smoking Dutchies on clogs are doing better as number 17...
Great Britain ranked 29th
USA ranked 34th
China ranked 53rd
Seeing Norway that high rated suprises me a bit. This is summer Olympic, after all. I wonder how the ratings will be for the winter version.
12 Jun 07
actually the reason these poor countries do well in olympivs in relation to others is because of the lack of pro sports in their countries so there pro athletes are actually "amateurs"
Like Cuba for example that has no pro sports at all but a high emphasis is placed on sports like baseball and so their amateur team is just as good as any pro team out there ad they win gold every time
12 Jun 07
Originally posted by maverick28Australia poor? Norway poor? New Zealand poor?
actually the reason these poor countries do well in olympivs in relation to others is because of the lack of pro sports in their countries so there pro athletes are actually "amateurs"
Like Cuba for example that has no pro sports at all but a high emphasis is placed on sports like baseball and so their amateur team is just as good as any pro team out there ad they win gold every time
12 Jun 07
Originally posted by mlpriorNo, he's going over because the MLS are paying him a ridiculous amount to advertise and try to popularise Football in the US during the twilight years of his professional career. Kind of like a care home for the footballing elderly really.
Wasn't there some really hot looking soccer player that came to the U.S. to play because there was more money in it?
Can't blame the fella though. I'd do exactly the same in his shoes if someone offered me £125 million for a 5 year contract.
12 Jun 07
Originally posted by ShaKKaXuluIf you just count the European countries on your short list and counting Russia as Asia you get:
You really disproved your own argument here. china with one billion people more than the united states recieves less gold medals, less silver, less bronze, and 40 less medals overall.
And whats more, Russia generally sends out better athletes than china--bringing home nearly 30 more medals and coming close to the united states in total. China performs ...[text shortened]... e events, and absolutley slaughtered everyone but Russia in terms of actual overall performance.
Europe 52 47 54
Europe +GB 61 56 66
so the United states of Europe are far superior.
In fact nothing can be prooved in either direction. There are really good sportspeople in the USA and everywhere else in the world.
Competition should in my opinion be judged by athlet or team.
btw Gb starts as 4 teams at football world championships, imagine they combined the strengths!
12 Jun 07
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundah, cuba. the land of vast availability of modern sporting facilities, and financial resources poured on the athletes from left & right. (I always thought australia performed best of the 'big' sports countries, but it seems cuba can beat even them.)
We have a winner, the best athelete in the world smoke Cigars 🙂
does the cuban athletic superiority to the u.s., despite the total lack of commercial money, prove the communist system better than capitalist one? 🙂
I wonder how they would do if u.s. hadn't been actively destroying cuban economy for the last 40+ years.
12 Jun 07
Originally posted by PocketKingsi think the u.s does have some of the best athletes in the world; they have a very good education system out there which strongly encourages sporting excellence... as for football (soccer); the south americans lead the way in that as well, not europe, i'm english and we invented the game of football but we're not the best; anyone who disagrees, just look at who's won the world cup the most
See, the problem here is that Europe thinks of itself as Europe the continent, and not as the individual countries that are Europe. Are these people making it a Europe (continent) vs. USA (country)? Or is it their country vs the USA? If they want to make it a continent battle than they should say Europe vs. North America. If North America could make an A ...[text shortened]... s in sports. Maybe a forum Mod could take care of that for me please. I'm going to bed 🙂