Comments on: Tallying Olympic Medals

By: Justine

Justine — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 05:04:58 +0000

Impressive! And I do like Australia coming in no. 2.

Now you just have to factor in how much those countries spend on getting the medals. Watch Australia drop way way way down that list.

By: Dave H.

Dave H. — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 04:19:08 +0000

OK, I just came up with a super stat that takes into account medals won, how many sports they were won in, GDP and population.

By that standard, the most successful countries:

1) Cuba
2) Australia
3) Norway
4) Belarus
5) Ukraine
6) Slovenia
7) Mongolia
New Zealand
9) Georgia
10) Denmark
11) Holland
12) Lithuania
13) Latvia
14) South Korea
15) Hungary
16) Armenia
17) Kazakhstan
18) Croatia
19) France
20) Germany

The United States finishes 43rd, China finishes 49th.

By: Justine

Justine — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 01:45:56 +0000

Chris: Problem with that is that relatively speaking there’s not much federal funding of sports in the US. A lot of it training and support happens through private means especially private universities.

Winchester Grey: Isn’t he wonderful? And quite the hero at home.

By: Electric Landlady

Electric Landlady — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 19:57:35 +0000

Ha! Canada beats nearly everyone in the DFL standings!

I do love the Olympics, regardless of how my country does (although it’s nice to win a medal here or there). But I get really annoyed by all the commentary (sadly all too prevalent) suggesting that we suck if we don’t win everything, or that every one of our athletes somehow OWES us a gold medal.

…sorry, rant. I totally agree with you about GDP, and I love it when little underdog countries come out of nowhere to do well in something!

By: Winchester Grey

Winchester Grey — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:35:05 +0000

Thanks for mentioning Matthew Mitcham, who is my new hero. I can’t imagine how different my life might have been if he had been competing, out, 28 years ago when I was swimming and diving seriously.

By: james

james — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 12:21:15 +0000

Nice chart and table.
I found this widget that displays who won the 2008 Olympics from different perspectives.
It displays medals won by total medal count and gold count.
In addition it can show medals won per million inhabitant and per million dollar GDP.

I think you might like it:-)
http://www.youcalc.com/apps/1219403616554?application_popup=1

It’s free and easy to embed

By: Chris Lawson

Chris Lawson — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:09:35 +0000

I has me doubts about GDP as a measure. North Korea tends to throw a lot of resources at things that have political clout or propaganda value, which is why it has a population about Australia’s and an economy between that of the Faroe Islands and Togo, but still manages to field the fourth-largest army in the world (1.2 million!). Zimbabwe, as Dave says, only ranks well because of one athlete who doesn’t even train in Zimbabwe.

I think two things are needed to make economics a useful measure. The first is not to look at GDP, which has its economist critics even as a measure of national prosperity, but to look at the amount of national spending that goes into athletics. The second thing is to exclude single-medal performances, just as cricketers need to play a few matches before their averages are counted as meaningful.

By: Justine

Justine — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:33:38 +0000

I really think GDP is the most important stat. Rich countries—like Australia and the USA and GB and China—have the money and resources to put together huge teams in many sports. A poor country less able to do that. Running’s one of the cheaper sports to prepare for.

By: Dave H.

Dave H. — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 04:26:08 +0000

Nah, the official way is to only count events without judges, and then use a 5-3-1 point scale. Haven’t you been reading my blog?

I like the concept behind the GNP and population lists, but they tend to get skewed by countries who throw up one great athlete or focus on one sport. Bahrain makes both lists, but they only won one medal, won by an athlete who trained in Morocco. Zimbabwe looks great, but it is all one American-trained swimmer – Kirsty Coventry. Jamaica is at the top of both lists, but won all their medals in one subset of one sport – sprinting.

How about this? There were 30-something sports at the Olympics. If you give each country one point for winning a medal in each sport, then how do the tables look by GNP and/or population.

I guess I have to figure that out now.

By: Hillary!

Hillary! — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:53:19 +0000

Another question: when was the last time you were in Australia?

By: Kevin Wignall

Kevin Wignall — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:19:50 +0000

Australia came sixth? That’s a great result. I’m not sure how Great Britain did… oh, come on, you have to allow us our moment of glory, particularly as it’s so rare. And the British results back up your theory about funding, because several of our key sports have benefited from lottery funding over the last ten years.

My highlight was the Coxless Men’s Fours, and not because we pipped Australia to the medal but because it was such a thriller, a length behind with 250m to go, and we still pulled it back to win.

Mind you, our Double Decker routine in the handover ceremony was so lame it’s untrue.

By: Lizabelle

Lizabelle — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:37:41 +0000

I had no idea Mitcham was the only openly gay male competitor – even more kudos to him.

I loved the way the Aussie commentators were all laid back and, “well, I suppose he might do it if he dived out of his skin…he’d need an absolutely amazing dive, but I suppose it’s theoretically possible”. And then he produced the highest scoring dive in Olympic history and everyone went mental. It was fab!