PDA

View Full Version : Best sporting Nations adjusted for population


TheNatural
08-21-2008, 10:52 PM
This is a list of the best sporting Nations relative to their populations based on the total medal count adjusted for population size and based on the currentOlympic Medal Tally (http://www.foxsports.com.au/beijing_olympics/fullmedaltally) of the top 14 nations

The numbers just show the Total # of medals each of the top 14 nations would have relative to eachother if they had the same population. Chinas population was used as the reference because it has the biggest population and highest medal count, and each country's count shows the medals they have relative to china adjusted for population size.

Pretty interesting. If all the countries had the same population these would be the Olympic rankings.

Top 14 nations - TOTAL Medal tally relative to population

1 Jamaica 4279
2 Australia 2523
3 Netherlands 1197
4 Great Britain 868
5 South korea 702
6 France 662
7 Ukraine 542
8 Russia 484
9 Italy 499
10 Germany 496
11 USa 436
12 Spain 360
13 Japan 250
14 China 83



Top 14 Nations GOLD medals tally relative to population

1 Jamaica 2738
2 Australia 712
3 Netherlands 479
4 Great Britain 368
5 South Korea 270
6 Germany 176
7 Italy 159
8 RUssia 149
9 Ukraine 143
10 United States 132
11 Spain 131
12 France 104
13 japan 94
14 China 46

helloworld
08-21-2008, 11:15 PM
Population is not an indicator of a country's strength. India has 1 billion people and they have 1 gold medal, the only gold medal ever won by India. If population determines the number of medals won, India should have something close to 40 gold medals by now.

TheNatural
08-21-2008, 11:49 PM
I know population isnt an indicator of a countrys OVERALL strength. I didnt say that. But it shows how much more likely you are to find a great sportsperson in 1 country relative to another country

To make a simple analogy, imagine if a country with 100 people had 30 medalists, and the USA had 60 medalists. It simple means that in the country with 100 people,its much easier to come across a great sportsperson, so the average person in the country with 100 people is much more likely to be great at an Olympic sport compared to the average person in the USA.

You can divide the number of the top countries by the lower countries to see how much better they are at olympic sports for their population.

You can get some good information. For example Australia 2523/USa 436 = 5.8 . so the Average Australian is about 6 times more likely to excel at Olympic sports compared to the average American. And the average Jamaican is 51.6 times more likely to excel at an Olympic sport compared to the average Chinese.

Australia 2523/USa 436 = 5.8
Australia 2523/ China 83 = 30.4
Jamaica 4279/ USa 436 = 9.8
Jamaica 4279/ China 83 = 51.6



Population is not an indicator of a country's strength. India has 1 billion people and they have 1 gold medal, the only gold medal ever won by India. If population determines the number of medals won, India should have something close to 40 gold medals by now.

TheNatural
08-22-2008, 12:03 AM
china is only 1.17 X the population of India. India has 3 total medals so far so they'd have about 4 (3.51) medals if they had the population of China.

Population is not an indicator of a country's strength. India has 1 billion people and they have 1 gold medal, the only gold medal ever won by India. If population determines the number of medals won, India should have something close to 40 gold medals by now.

BreakPoint
08-22-2008, 03:11 AM
china is only 1.17 X the population of India. India has 3 total medals so far so they'd have about 4 (3.51) medals if they had the population of China.
Yet China already has 83 medals. Big difference between 4 and 83.

TheNatural
08-22-2008, 04:10 AM
I think playing cricket and watching cricket watching are the #1 and #2 sports in India. Mabe they shoudl diversify a bit like China does.

If Jamaica and Australia had the population of China , they would have to invent some new sports, because Jamiaca and Australia would have 4279 and 2523 medals repectively:)


Yet China already has 83 medals. Big difference between 4 and 83.

pennc94
08-22-2008, 04:40 AM
This is an interesting thread.

I too dislike medal totals.

I have always wanted to devise a medal index. I would not base it on the country's population. It would be an index based on medal opportunities.

Each athlete has X number of medal opportunities entering the games. A gold in each medal opportunity would equal 1, a silver 0.5, a bronze 0.25, and no medal (whether or not you make a medal match or round is a zero).

The top countries woulkd be determined based on a minimum number of medal opportunities. That way, a country with 1 athlete that wins gold in his 1 opportunity is not the number 1 country with an index of 1.

Anyone have the data for this?

hollywood9826
08-22-2008, 04:43 AM
Population is not an indicator of a country's strength. India has 1 billion people and they have 1 gold medal, the only gold medal ever won by India. If population determines the number of medals won, India should have something close to 40 gold medals by now.

What you mean is the only "individual" Gold medal ever won by India.

India dominated filed Hockey winning 6 golds in a row, then a silver, a gold, 2 bronzes, and in 1980 won the countries last gold medal until this year.

Kevin T
08-22-2008, 08:15 AM
But how many of Jamaica's medals are outside of track and field? Those numbers really don't mean anything. How about breaking down each sport compared to population? That's your assignment for the weekend.

stanfordtennis alum
08-22-2008, 09:50 AM
great post and thanks for the informative info

malakas
08-22-2008, 09:54 AM
I think,that's the right way to see medal totals.In Athens the top team in analogy with population was Cuba.

Feņa14
08-22-2008, 11:00 AM
Nice!

I'm relatively pleased with 4th :)

ScovilleJenkins
08-22-2008, 11:04 AM
wow they sure do need alot more events to be able to give out that many medals!

Steady Eddy
08-22-2008, 11:13 AM
Interesting. But I'm surprised Canada isn't on there. They win medals, and their population is about as small as Australia's.

LuckyR
08-22-2008, 11:22 AM
Population is not an indicator of a country's strength. India has 1 billion people and they have 1 gold medal, the only gold medal ever won by India. If population determines the number of medals won, India should have something close to 40 gold medals by now.

So true. Another method would be to divide the medals by the number of World Class trainers/coaches in the country, since a talented guy with zero training = a ditch digger.

tangerine
08-22-2008, 11:31 AM
You can get some good information. For example Australia 2523/USa 436 = 5.8 . so the Average Australian is about 6 times more likely to excel at Olympic sports compared to the average American.
Summer or Winter olympics or both? Because if you factor in both Olympics you'll find that the Aussies don't do much in the wintertime.

I have always wanted to devise a medal index. I would not base it on the country's population. It would be an index based on medal opportunities.
I'd like to see a medal count of all the athletes who live and train in the USA but represent another country. :)

JamaicanYoute
08-22-2008, 03:08 PM
If Jamaica and Australia had the population of China , they would have to invent some new sports, because Jamiaca and Australia would have 4279 and 2523 medals repectively:)

But how many of Jamaica's medals are outside of track and field? Those numbers really don't mean anything. How about breaking down each sport compared to population?

The problem we have in JA is that we have a lot of talented athletes, but don't have anywhere near the type of coaching available that they have here in the US. Proper coaching leads to more than good technique. It leads to proper discipline. Down there, we need both.

I live in Miami and go back home to JA quite a bit, and every time I do I realize the same thing. Our coaches/facilities down there only take you so far. There isn't really anyone taking Tennis to the next level. We have some amazing athletes but no coaching. The best example is that some of the runners in the olympics representing JA right now train on a run down track w/ grass...

Hopefully things get better and we start seeing some of our athletes in other sports.

ollinger
08-22-2008, 03:52 PM
Over the years it's clearly Australia. Jamaica had a good Olympics this year, albeit essentially in one event, whereas in Olympics past Australia is typically about fourth in total medals with something like 20 million people (I think they were fifth this year). I've never met a young Aussie who didn't play some kind of sport, but I sure know a lot of Jamaicans who, well, don't seem like they're in much of a hurry.

helloworld
08-22-2008, 04:00 PM
I think playing cricket and watching cricket watching are the #1 and #2 sports in India. Mabe they shoudl diversify a bit like China does.

If Jamaica and Australia had the population of China , they would have to invent some new sports, because Jamiaca and Australia would have 4279 and 2523 medals repectively:)

I don't see Jamaica or Australia dominating in Table Tennis, Diving, Gymnastics, Weightlifting, etc, no matter how much population they have. There are certain sports that certain countries excel.

counter_puncher
08-22-2008, 04:06 PM
hahaha! JAMAICA playing table tennis? jamaica doing synchro swimming? jamaica doing diving? jamaica doing gymnastics? jamaica doing weightlifting? jamaica doing badminton? jamaica playing tennis? lol.

usain bolt doing synchronised swimming.

Feņa14
08-22-2008, 04:14 PM
hahaha! JAMAICA playing table tennis? jamaica doing synchro swimming? jamaica doing diving? jamaica doing gymnastics? jamaica doing weightlifting? jamaica doing badminton? jamaica playing tennis? lol.

usain bolt doing synchronised swimming.

lol! Whatever next? A Jamaican bobsleigh team? ;)

JamaicanYoute
08-22-2008, 04:24 PM
hahaha! JAMAICA playing table tennis? jamaica doing synchro swimming? jamaica doing diving? jamaica doing gymnastics? jamaica doing weightlifting? jamaica doing badminton? jamaica playing tennis? lol.

usain bolt doing synchronised swimming.

lol! Whatever next? A Jamaican bobsleigh team?

I really don't understand these posts. I mean, are you that bored with your time that you feel the need to post negative remarks about something that you're probably totally ignorant on? JA doesn't really do gymnastics or weightlifting, but the other sports you mentioned (and others you didnt) Jamaica isn't horrible at. We may not be as huge as other countries, but we still have great athletes. Like I said before, hopefully one day we get the coaches/facilities that we need to properly compete.

If I were as much an idiot as you, I guess I could ask how come a place like Jamaica continues to kick other HUGE countries asses in anything at all?

Feņa14
08-22-2008, 04:35 PM
I really don't understand these posts. I mean, are you that bored with your time that you feel the need to post negative remarks about something that you're probably totally ignorant on? JA doesn't really do gymnastics or weightlifting, but the other sports you mentioned (and others you didnt) Jamaica isn't horrible at. We may not be as huge as other countries, but we still have great athletes. Like I said before, hopefully one day we get the coaches/facilities that we need to properly compete.

If I were as much an idiot as you, I guess I could ask how come a place like Jamaica continues to kick other HUGE countries asses in anything at all?

Well I don't think Jamaica will be winning many golds at the sense of humour Olympics :neutral:

I'm sure you know, Cool Runnings was a film about the Jamaican bobsleigh team.. It's a film! Based on a true story I believe.

Get off your high horse.

JamaicanYoute
08-23-2008, 06:06 AM
Well I don't think Jamaica will be winning many golds at the sense of humour Olympics :neutral:

I'm sure you know, Cool Runnings was a film about the Jamaican bobsleigh team.. It's a film! Based on a true story I believe.

Get off your high horse.

I don't believe having 'fun' or 'humour' at someone else's expense qualifies as having a 'great sense of humour'.

And because of the fact that there WAS a JA bobsled team makes it NOT funny. You're trying to continue making a joke when in fact it did happen. You're that guy in the movie that makes a joke and everyone gets quiet bc it did happen.

Off my high horse? I'm the one saying I wish we had good coaches/facilities so that we could compete with the rest of the world. You're an idiot.

Phil
08-23-2008, 07:50 AM
Population is not an ideal way to measure a country's athletic prowess. Instead, one has to measure dollars and resources poured into national sports programs. Countries such as Cuba and China heavily subsidize (i.e. totally support) their respective Olympic programs.

The reason countries like Cuba and Bulgaria have done so well relative to their populations, is that they allocate tremendous amounts of resources to their athletic programs (certainly in comparison to per capita income). China too, spends BILLIONS to bring home the gold. Communist countries equate winning Olympic medals with national prestige and they use it to compare their "systems" to those of the west.

So, how about using dollars spent per athlete and compare that number to per capita income? BTW, the US and a number of other countries, receive absolutely no government funding for their Olympic programs.

helloworld
08-23-2008, 08:23 AM
Population is not an ideal way to measure a country's athletic prowess. Instead, one has to measure dollars and resources poured into national sports programs. Countries such as Cuba and China heavily subsidize (i.e. totally support) their respective Olympic programs.

The reason countries like Cuba and Bulgaria have done so well relative to their populations, is that they allocate tremendous amounts of resources to their athletic programs (certainly in comparison to per capita income). China too, spends BILLIONS to bring home the gold. Communist countries equate winning Olympic medals with national prestige and they use it to compare their "systems" to those of the west.

So, how about using dollars spent per athlete and compare that number to per capita income? BTW, the US and a number of other countries, receive absolutely no government funding for their Olympic programs.

The thing is the Olympics is a western tradition, and the last time I check, China isn't even a western country. Let's face it. China is beating us in our own games. If they can beat Western countries in the Olympics, I have no doubt that they are capable of doing much more.

Phil
08-23-2008, 08:31 AM
The thing is the Olympics is a western tradition, and the last time I check, China isn't a western country either. Let's face it. China is beating us in our own games. If they can beat Western countries in the Olympics, I have not doubt that they are capable of doing much more.
This is way too simplistic. First of all, the Olympics is an international event. Both Eastern and Western countries have been competing in it since right around the time it was revivived in 1896. That China chose not to participate for years due to the Chicomm's reisistance to the games, is irrelevant.

I don't equate the Olympics to "our own games". Again, too simplistic. If ANY country spent $20 billion dollars to board its athletic children from age 4 or so and ruthlessly train them, it would win a lot of medals. Other countries have far greater priorities than ping pong and women's diving and therefore are not so obsessed with "proving something" to the the rest of the world. The fact that the USA wins the most overall medals and yet, doesn't spend a cent from government coffers for its Olympic program, says a lot more to me about being on top of the game. Same with Australia, England, etc. Once upon a time, a fascist/"socialist" country and its satellites absolutely CLEANED UP at the Olympics...and yet, that country became a broken down wreck and only proved what a fascist/socialist country it really is. Any prestige or respect that it earned did not come from women's weightlifting gold medals.

helloworld
08-23-2008, 08:39 AM
This is way too simplistic. First of all, the Olympics is an international event. Both Eastern and Western countries have been competing in it since right around the time it was revivived in 1896. That China chose not to participate for years due to the Chicomm's reisistance to the games, is irrelevant.

I don't equate the Olympics to "our own games". Again, too simplistic. If ANY country spent $20 billion dollars to board its athletic children from age 4 or so and ruthlessly train them, it would win a lot of medals. Other countries have far greater priorities than ping pong and women's diving and therefore are not so obsessed with "proving something" to the the rest of the world. The fact that the USA wins the most overall medals and yet, doesn't spend a cent from government coffers for its Olympic program, says a lot more to me about being on top of the game. Same with Australia, England, etc. Once upon a time, a fascist/"socialist" country and its satellites absolutely CLEANED UP at the Olympics...and yet, that country became a broken down wreck and only proved what a fascist/socialist country it really is. Any prestige or respect that it earned did not come from women's weightlifting gold medals.

You can't be serious about government not funding the Olympics athletes. The US practically spend the most on finding and training athlete. Why not. They are the richest country on earth and a few billion dollars wouldn't matter much anyway. I can sense that you have this hatred toward Communism or Socialism, so you will come up with arguments that probably wouldn't make much sense anyway, but the truth is any country, whether it is Democratic or Communism that wishes to do well in the Olympics, need tremendous financial support to provide proper training and facilities to its own athletes.

Phil
08-23-2008, 08:56 AM
You can't be serious about government not funding the Olympics athletes. The US practically spend the most on finding and training athlete. Why not. They are the richest country on earth and a few billion dollars wouldn't matter much anyway. I can sense that you have this hatred toward Communism or Socialism, so you will come up with arguments that probably wouldn't make much sense anyway, but the truth is any country, whether it is Democratic or Communism that wishes to do well in the Olympics, need tremendous financial support to provide proper training and facilities to its own athletes.
The US doesn't spend a dime. Not the government. It's all funded through private and corporate donations. Look it up if you don't believe me (but I guarantee that I'm right). That does not mean that the US Olympic team is exactly hurting. Corporate donations/sponsorships add up. But it doesn't compare to China's $20 billion, or the efforts that Russia/Romania/Bulgaria/E. Germany, etc., went to in fielding top teams.

My point is that if you LOOK at what the Communist countries have become, for better or worse, the Olympics has very little to do with it. I guess it helps a people's self-esteem, but it's a very shallow way to bolster self esteem and it certainly doesn't generate much respect outside those countries. No one is fooled.

Communism has murdered tens of millions of people and continues to crush people, but...hey, why would I hate such loving regimes?

malakas
08-23-2008, 08:59 AM
what's the difference between women weightlifting gold medal and gold in womens' sailing or womens' basketball and women's soccer?:roll:

Phil
08-23-2008, 09:06 AM
what's the difference between women weightlifting gold medal and gold in womens' sailing or womens' basketball and women's soccer?:roll:
I dunno...maybe the fact that three of those are athletic competitions, and the fourth event, outside of the Olympics, is only done by people with hyphenated names, with large trust accounts and armies of servants, and who actually consume margheritas and gin and tonics while engaging in this "sport".

malakas
08-23-2008, 09:14 AM
I dunno...maybe the fact that three of those are athletic competitions, and the fourth event, outside of the Olympics, is only done by people with hyphenated names, with large trust accounts and armies of servants, and who actually consume margheritas and gin and tonics while engaging in this "sport".


there is actually a world and regional (i.e european) championships in weightlifting.The fact that this sports are less.."prestigious" is to me,even more honourable for these athletes,most of them don't get the recognition they deserve for years of training,but only in a couple of competition.

Phil
08-23-2008, 09:23 AM
there is actually a world and regional (i.e european) championships in weightlifting.The fact that this sports are less.."prestigious" is to me,even more honourable for these athletes,most of them don't get the recognition they deserve for years of training,but only in a couple of competition.
I don't know from those-I don't follow the European championships of women's (or men's) weightlifting, I do strongly believe that there is no way that SAILING should be an Olympic...uhm..."sport".

Hey, if these athletes were so worried about recognition, they should have taken up a sport like tennis or golf. But you use what you're given and if your talent lies in lifting heavy weights, that's what you do. I don't think many people in weightlifting are complaining about lack of recognition. They probably have some sense that theirs is not exactly the most interesting or dynamic sport.

malakas
08-23-2008, 09:40 AM
I don't know from those-I don't follow the European championships of women's (or men's) weightlifting, I do strongly believe that there is no way that SAILING should be an Olympic...uhm..."sport".

Hey, if these athletes were so worried about recognition, they should have taken up a sport like tennis or golf. But you use what you're given and if your talent lies in lifting heavy weights, that's what you do. I don't think many people in weightlifting are complaining about lack of recognition. They probably have some sense that theirs is not exactly the most interesting or dynamic sport.

They do what they love,in spite of the lack of recognition or funds etc Yes they understand they are not going to become famous,or win big money..But what is the so big difference in watching a woman kick a football hard and fast,and a woman lifting 3x her body weight? For me they are equally amazing,worth of praise and incredible.And the Olympic medals these women won,are of the same value.

Phil
08-23-2008, 09:59 AM
They do what they love,in spite of the lack of recognition or funds etc Yes they understand they are not going to become famous,or win big money..But what is the so big difference in watching a woman kick a football hard and fast,and a woman lifting 3x her body weight? For me they are equally amazing,worth of praise and incredible.And the Olympic medals these women won,are of the same value.
You're not really thinking these comments through.

There is obviously a big difference between soccer and weightlifting. Not all sports are all the same. What is the difference between sailing and skeet shooting....well the only similarity is that both are so-called Olympic sports, but as events or sports or whatever you wish to call them, they are vastly different. Even If you happen to like weightlifting (and I don't care for it), it is certainly not anything like soccer.

And while it may be "amazing" to watch someone lift 3x their body weight, and all Olympians are great athletes, blah, blah, it certainly isn't very exciting or interesting to me, just as ping pong and trampoline are ridiculous.

malakas
08-23-2008, 10:05 AM
You're not really thinking these comments through.

There is obviously a big difference between soccer and weightlifting. Not all sports are all the same. What is the difference between sailing and skeet shooting....well the only similarity is that both are so-called Olympic sports, but as events or sports or whatever you wish to call them, they are vastly different. Even If you happen to like weightlifting (and I don't care for it), it is certainly not anything like soccer.

And while it may be "amazing" to watch someone lift 3x their body weight, and all Olympians are great athletes, blah, blah, it certainly isn't very exciting or interesting to me, just as ping pong and trampoline are ridiculous.

Understandable and that's your personal opinion.But don't make your personal opinion appear as a generally accepted concensus.That's my only objection.

I find baseball extremely boring bordering ridiculous.I don't go on saying winning gold in baseball obviously doesn't hold a candle in winning a gold in sychronised swimming ( which I love watching.)
:)
Anyway,I'm very sorry that the Olympics end tomorrow.:(

[edit btw,olympic football,is one of the least prestigious tournaments in the football world.Hardly any football fan (at least) in Europe ever watches it.And how could it be different when it has got the WC,and CL to be compared to?]

random guy
08-23-2008, 10:19 AM
Numbers doesn't mean anything. Popular culture and state or private inversion is what makes one nation strong in one sport or several. Argentina for instance just won his second medal in football (soccer) and USA win most of the basketball medals since they started playing with NBA players. What does population has to do with that?

random guy
08-23-2008, 10:26 AM
Communism has murdered tens of millions of people and continues to crush people, but...hey, why would I hate such loving regimes?
I agree with you on that. Hope that you got the same outlook on America's contribution to the bodycount in the name of "democracy".

movdqa
08-23-2008, 10:44 AM
"I'd like to see a medal count of all the athletes who live and train in the USA but represent another country."

Me too. The US has some very fine athletic facilities at universities around the country. And very fine sports teams.

Feņa14
08-23-2008, 11:41 AM
I don't believe having 'fun' or 'humour' at someone else's expense qualifies as having a 'great sense of humour'.

And because of the fact that there WAS a JA bobsled team makes it NOT funny. You're trying to continue making a joke when in fact it did happen. You're that guy in the movie that makes a joke and everyone gets quiet bc it did happen.

Off my high horse? I'm the one saying I wish we had good coaches/facilities so that we could compete with the rest of the world. You're an idiot.

You are acutally talking rubbish.

I'm feeling quite embarrassed for you actually. I'm the idiot when you are crying over your lack of coaching and facilities? Get over yourself. Nobody likes to see someone feeling sorry for themselves.

chess9
08-23-2008, 11:54 AM
Jamaica is a statistical outlier, principally because they have one Lightning Bolt. ;)

-Robert

TheNatural
08-23-2008, 06:46 PM
Australia came 3rd in the world in diving these olympics. so If they had China's population, they would dominate China in Diving. They'd have about 130 medals to china's 11 medals in diving if they had the same population as China. :shock:

I don't see Jamaica or Australia dominating in Table Tennis, Diving, Gymnastics, Weightlifting, etc, no matter how much population they have. There are certain sports that certain countries excel.

TheNatural
08-23-2008, 06:58 PM
I dont think theres many from other countries at all that medalled that train and live in the USA except mabe some NBA players that have to live their to play for their team.

You could always check all the events and medal winners and google their names to find out where they live and train and then make a list for us. Out of the 931 medals won so far can you come up with many that train and live in the USA?

"I'd like to see a medal count of all the athletes who live and train in the USA but represent another country."

Me too. The US has some very fine athletic facilities at universities around the country. And very fine sports teams.

movdqa
08-24-2008, 05:14 AM
How about Cavac?

chess9
08-24-2008, 06:27 AM
I dont think theres many from other countries at all that medalled that train and live in the USA except mabe some NBA players that have to live their to play for their team.

You could always check all the events and medal winners and google their names to find out where they live and train and then make a list for us. Out of the 931 medals won so far can you come up with many that train and live in the USA?

A lot of swimmers and track and field athletes train in the USA.

-Robert

TheNatural
08-24-2008, 08:00 AM
Its actually extremely rare for any of the top athletics and swimming medalists from the top nations to reside in the USA.

For example out of about 60 medalists from the top athletics nations like kenya, ethiopia, jamaica, RUssia, Ukraine, Belarus etc etc mabe none reside in the USA,there could be 1 or 2 or something at most. I found 1 Brittish hurdler that did. Its a rarity in swimming too. None of the Australians or swimmers from some of the next top swimming nations reside in the USa

However in the nations where theres just 1 world class swimmer or athlete in the entire country they need to join a good athletics/swimming program so more would reside somewhere like the USA. Eg Zimbabwe, Brazil, serbia's only swimming medalists reside in the USa.





A lot of swimmers and track and field athletes train in the USA.

-Robert

chess9
08-24-2008, 11:06 AM
Its actually extremely rare for any of the top athletics and swimming medalists from the top nations to reside in the USA.

For example out of about 60 medalists from the top athletics nations like kenya, ethiopia, jamaica, RUssia, Ukraine, Belarus etc etc mabe none reside in the USA,there could be 1 or 2 or something at most. I found 1 Brittish hurdler that did. Its a rarity in swimming too. None of the Australians or swimmers from some of the next top swimming nations reside in the USa

However in the nations where theres just 1 world class swimmer or athlete in the entire country they need to join a good athletics/swimming program so more would reside somewhere like the USA. Eg Zimbabwe, Brazil, serbia's only swimming medalists reside in the USa.

Not true. Many swam or ran for USA colleges. Also, Spain's top basketball player plays for the NBA.

-Robert

CyBorg
08-24-2008, 11:17 AM
Australia came 3rd in the world in diving these olympics. so If they had China's population, they would dominate China in Diving. They'd have about 130 medals to china's 11 medals in diving if they had the same population as China. :shock:

No offense, but you're not very bright.

power_play21
08-24-2008, 11:25 AM
this whole population thing is bogus. look at india. no money to fund all these athletes, programs, so they get no good athletes. now if i were to open up a 1000 person nation but train every person highly in different sports, i'd have more gold medals than most 200+million people nation. its about the society/culture and athletic programs available.

Phil
08-24-2008, 11:29 AM
Understandable and that's your personal opinion.But don't make your personal opinion appear as a generally accepted concensus.That's my only objection.

I find baseball extremely boring bordering ridiculous.I don't go on saying winning gold in baseball obviously doesn't hold a candle in winning a gold in sychronised swimming ( which I love watching.)
:)
Anyway,I'm very sorry that the Olympics end tomorrow.:(

[edit btw,olympic football,is one of the least prestigious tournaments in the football world.Hardly any football fan (at least) in Europe ever watches it.And how could it be different when it has got the WC,and CL to be compared to?]
You still don't understand what I'm talking about. And who here is talking about baseball? Where did that come from?

Anyway, synchronized swimming is not a "sport" and should not be part of the Olympics. My opinion on soccer/football seems to be shared by a "concensus" of viewers...most would prefer to watch that over weightlifting! Believe me.

Ignorant Genius
08-24-2008, 11:40 AM
I dont think theres many from other countries at all that medalled that train and live in the USA except mabe some NBA players that have to live their to play for their team.

You could always check all the events and medal winners and google their names to find out where they live and train and then make a list for us. Out of the 931 medals won so far can you come up with many that train and live in the USA?


While I was watching the 100M dash, they said that the Jamaican sprinter who got 2nd goes to college in the US.......I believe they said LSU. So that means he lives and trains in the US for at least most of the year.

So there's one. I'm not interested enough to do a google search on the rest, but I'm sure there are more.

Phil
08-24-2008, 11:43 AM
I dont think theres many from other countries at all that medalled that train and live in the USA except mabe some NBA players that have to live their to play for their team. Out of the 931 medals won so far can you come up with many that train and live in the USA?
I dunno or care, but I do recall reading that the women's marathon gold medal winner (from Romania), lives and trains in Colorado (USA).

chess9
08-24-2008, 12:00 PM
Yup, and plenty of Americans are screaming bloody murder about all the foreign students taking 'American' scholarships. :)

When I was following college swimming a few years ago, on of my daughter's preferred schools had 6 swimmers from outside the USA. S.Africa, England, Serbia, Germany, Canada, and a breaststroker from Japan!

-Robert

malakas
08-24-2008, 01:28 PM
You still don't understand what I'm talking about. And who here is talking about baseball? Where did that come from?

Anyway, synchronized swimming is not a "sport" and should not be part of the Olympics. My opinion on soccer/football seems to be shared by a "concensus" of viewers...most would prefer to watch that over weightlifting! Believe me.


Sychronized swimming isn't a sport??Says who?According to which logic football is and this isn't?:confused:

I said baseball because as weightlifting is to YOU boring and the gold worth nothing,same to me for baseball.It was an example.

Phil
08-24-2008, 01:51 PM
Sychronized swimming isn't a sport??Says who?According to which logic football is and this isn't?:confused:

I said baseball because as weightlifting is to YOU boring and the gold worth nothing,same to me for baseball.It was an example.
Weightlifting is a freak show tainted by drug cheats. Baseball, at least, is a true competition, against competitors who try to deny victory.

Synchronized swimming is a performance. If it is a sport, then so is ballet, dance, being a circus clown or anything else that is rehearsed for years and then performed in front of an audience in exactly the same way that is rehearsed. No unpredictability, nothing. If you're saying that this and weightlifting compare to soccer in terms of competition, then your opinion cannot be taken seriously.

malakas
08-24-2008, 01:55 PM
Weightlifting is a freak show tainted by drug cheats. Baseball, at least, is a true competition, against competitors who try to deny victory.

Synchronized swimming is a performance. If it is a sport, then so is ballet, dance, being a circus clown or anything else that is rehearsed for years and then performed in front of an audience in exactly the same way that is rehearsed. No unpredictability, nothing. If you're saying that this and weightlifting compare to soccer in terms of competition, then your opinion cannot be taken seriously.

A freak show?Because they can lift a lot of weight that makes them freaks?I guess,the man who run 200m in 19 seconds is a freak too.Or the guy who swims really fast..

Yes ballet is a sport-art.A dancer is both an athlete and an artist.And synchronized swimming is definitely not only a perfomance.It is ALSO a perfomance.Which makes it even more difficult.

And Olympic football is definitely comparable to weightlifting competition.

Phil
08-24-2008, 01:57 PM
A freak show?Because they can lift a lot of weight that makes them freaks?I guess,the man who run 200m in 19 seconds is a freak too.Or the guy who swims really fast..

Yes ballet is a sport-art.A dancer is both an athlete and an artist.And synchronized swimming is definitely not only a perfomance.It is ALSO a perfomance.Which makes it even more difficult.

And Olympic football is definitely comparable to weightlifting competition.
Swimming and running are RACES, against other competitors. The athletes can train all they want, for years, but if they cannot defeat their opponents directly, they cannot win. They must actually WIN directaly against other competitors. Hence, these are TRUE competitions and not "judging" events determined by a panel of so-called experts (a joke in itself).

If you're as entertained by weightlifting as you are by soccer, that's your choice, but most people who know sport know that the two are not "the same". I think you do too, but you're just trying to pick a fight that you cannot win.

malakas
08-24-2008, 02:05 PM
Swimming and running are RACES, against other competitors. The athletes can train all they want, for years, but if they cannot defeat their opponents directly, they cannot win. They must actually WIN directaly against other competitors. Hence, these are TRUE competitions and not "judging" events determined by a panel of so-called experts (a joke in itself).

If you're as entertained by weightlifting as you are by soccer, that's your choice, but most people who know sport know that the two are not "the same". I think you do too, but you're just trying to pick a fight that you cannot win.


lol I'm not trying to pick a fight.I am actually astonished that anyone whould think that weightlifting is not a sport but football is.Especially considering that golf in america is one of the most popular sports.

What entertainment has to do to the fact that these both are sports?Entertainment and personal gusto are objective and different to each person.:-?

Yes and sychronised swimming is firstly to being able to perform certain exercises in the water better than your opponent ( in the technical part which is the first part).I guess,gymnastics isn't a sport either.Neither is taekwondo or boxing since you don't have to beat your opponent up but win points according to judges.

I am honestly trying to understand here your perspective.

Phil
08-24-2008, 02:15 PM
Golf is not a sport. Its popularity in the USA does not make it a sport. Poker is also popular in the USA.

Gymnastics is performance, not sport. Boxing and the martial arts are certainly sports, because the competitors compete directly against each other-they actually hit each other. You don't seem to get it.

malakas
08-24-2008, 02:20 PM
Golf is not a sport. Its popularity in the USA does not make it a sport. Poker is also popular in the USA.

Gymnastics is performance, not sport. Boxing and the martial arts are certainly sports, because the competitors compete directly against each other-they actually hit each other. You don't seem to get it.

It certainly seems so.:(