Originally posted by eamon oby that logic, a population of 2 people that won 1 gold is the winning country? Uh...no.
when you factor-in the population of the countries ?
ie -gold medals / head of population.
surely thats the true decider
That means that certain countries with big populations can never win if countries with tiny populations get even just a few medals.
Originally posted by forkedknightWhy wouldn't they be equal? There is only one gold medal awarded in each. However, the single events do present the opportunity for the same country to score 3 medals, whereas the team competitions only allow for one medal.
What about weighting the team sports vs individual? Is the Gymnastics team gold worth the same as the Pommelhorse gold? I don't think so.
Originally posted by uzlessThe number of golds is what the table should be based on. Although, it's fair enough for countries to compare the total number of medals won too. But in those tables there'll only ever be two winners - China (with the heighest population) and the US (3rd heighest population?).
by that logic, a population of 2 people that won 1 gold is the winning country? Uh...no.
That means that certain countries with big populations can never win if countries with tiny populations get even just a few medals.
However, calculating the medals/golds won per head of the population is perfectly reasonable for the other countries to gauge how they're performing against each other.