[POLL] How do You Prefer the Olympic Medal Table Sorted by?

[ofan 239]

Gold medals in the Winter Games, and total medals in the Summer Games  I think you can guess why...

[heywoodu 16,431]

2 hours ago, ofan said:

Gold medals in the Winter Games, and total medals in the Summer Games  I think you can guess why...

Because fuck consistency?  

[Monzanator 5,072]

Always by gold medal count. Anything else is just a travesty.

[rajiv 31]

I'd like to see a medal count which combines both the Gold medal count and the Total medal count equally 

 

To do this for the usual case where 3 medals are awarded - one gold one silver and one bronze - 3 points are given for the gold medal and 1 point is given for each of the 3 medals      ie 3 points for both  systems of counting

This means each event is worth 6 points- 4 points for gold ,1 point for silver  and 1 point for bronze would be the usual case 

 

In irregular cases, as in the combative events , where 2 bronzes are awarded -each bronze will be worth 0.5 points 

Similarly a double shared gold medal would be worth 2.5 points 

All events are worth 6 points -giving out 4 or 5 medals or having a tie for Gold makes no difference 

 

The two principles of this system are :

All events have an equal rating and the gold medal count is equal to the total medal count 

Edited September 2, 2019 by rajiv

[Grassmarket 4,245]

13 hours ago, OlympicIRL said:

The only exception for 2 bronze medals should be in sports like boxing.... how can you have a fair bronze medal fight after one guy might get trashed by the champion and maybe injured or badly hurt? It's fairer to have 2 bronze medals for boxing. I don't watch a lot of combat sports so don't know how physical the other sports get,but for sure, if there is no disadvantage then all sports should have a bronze medal match.

 

It’s a rule in boxing that you are not allowed to fight for a certain number of weeks after losing a fight, hence two bronzes. Suppose it is the same in other martial arts.

[heywoodu 16,431]

1 hour ago, Grassmarket said:

 

It’s a rule in boxing that you are not allowed to fight for a certain number of weeks after losing a fight, hence two bronzes. Suppose it is the same in other martial arts.

Not really, since to get bronze you usually have to get into repechages and to get into repechages you have to lose  

[vlad 396]

Great and interesting opinions/points of view from all of you guys. If you ask me, I like the table sorted by gold medals because this is the target for all nations competing in Olympics. Regarding silver and bronze medals, I think these can be considered a motivation to work and to prepare harder for the future, for next Olympics and now honestly, to finish an event 2nd or 3rd at such level can't be a disappointment for any athlete. Of course, the idea to lose the gold will remain in athlete's mind for a long time, but also will show them that exist hopes for better results in next events.

 

PS: Thanks for the votes.

[Olympian1010 8,281]

I think we should also hammer home the opinion that 4th place is the worst by awarding 4th place a bucket of horse **** fresh from the equestrian venue. Talk about a sustainable medal 

[thiago_simoes 1,458]

On 01/09/2019 at 16:29, heywoodu said:

To be fair, everyone is entitled to their opinion right?  

 

Yes, of course. Success is relative and for some nations winning a medal at all is a huge accomplishment. But when it comes to India or Indonesia, it's just terrible management and probably rampant corruption, so opinions here probably mean that people play along with the problems of their nations, which I definitely don't (Brazil is very underwhelming at the Olympics, even at the 2016 edition). But to each their own, for sure.

[Dunadan 1,103]

I voted total medals, I look at total medals first as I feel it's a better indication of a country's overall performance (a points table is even better, as someone else already pointed out).

And I don't think that opinions on this are influenced by people playing along the problems of their countries. The difference between gold and another medal in a single competition in many sports is minimal and luck or chance plays a much bigger part than corruption or mismanagement. India seems to have the best rifle/pistol shooting team right now, next year they might end up with 5 gold medals or with 5 medals but no gold, it wouldn't change much in evaluating their federation's work. And in my opinion, especially in "situational" sports, the difference between medal and no medal is as big as the difference between gold and no gold even for athletes and NOCs.

 

 

Edited September 7, 2019 by Dunadan