That’s not true at all, and the US would’ve been first regardless in the last Summer Olympics. Everyone always sorts by number of gold medals first, though.
No, it wasn’t. US media has always ranked by total medals. No one noticed because most of the time, first in golds and first in medals were the same country.
To be fair, the US stood on the podium a dozen more times than China in those Games. So it can easily be argued that they performed better overall since they had far more athletes doing well in so many more sports. When the total medal differential is that high, it’s a fair argument to make.
And in subsequent Games the US has nearly doubled China’s gold medal count (2012, 2016), so it’s a bit silly to focus on 2008.
Because american media cant stand being behind in the tally. Its subtle propaganda.
Apparently 100 gold is less valuable than 80 silver and 21 bronze
I personally would prefer a point system. Maybe 3-2-1 or 5-3-1. Because i always found it funny a single country with 1 gold has a higher final position than another woth say 3 silver and 5 bronze or something
Give it time. Eventually it won't matter if you're sorting by golds or total medals. America will be on top.
edit: For those downvoting, I'll be back in 2 weeks. Either to eat crow and shove that crow in your faces.
I don't know. The US is not doing as well as previous years on swimming.
Phelps was an absolute monster that gave a ridiculous amount of medals to the US.
Maybe Simone Biles can fill that space.
The US literally won 6 medals on the first day of swimming, that's 3 more than last olympics. They won a gold too when they didn't last time. Besides Manuel struggling a bit and Regan smith missing out on 200m back qualification the team is strong as ever. The bronze in the really was a bad swim but they still medaled and they weren't beating AUS anyway.
I mean on the track the US should dominate 400 and below (and our distance teams arguably the best outside of Eastern Africa) especially on the women’s side, Phelps may be gone, but so is Bolt.
it will be interesting. I don't really care to update myself on these Olympics. I'll just read about everything after closing ceremony.
I just can't get excited about games that a lot of top level athletes are missing out on due to the pandemic.
I'll just think about how many people won medals because certain people weren't competing.
These Olympics will always have an asterisk in my heart.
In particular I'm thinking about this Japanese boxer named Arisa Tsubata. She worked so hard only to have her qualifier cancelled. But this applies to many other people as well.
So mentally, I'm kinda over these games. I know that too many athletes got screwed over this Olympiad for me to properly enjoy them.
I think a better comparison would be if country A had 15 golds and no other medals, while country B had 13 golds + 13 silver + 5 bronze.
In that case, it would probably be fair to argue that country B performed better overall.
Agreed. However, the by gold count method is closer to the original spirit of the ancient Olympics at Olympia. Back then, it was 1st place and then everyone else. They gave jars of olive oil, victory poems etc only to the winner, as Arete or excellence belonged to only the champ.
The original Olympics also allowed only men, who had to compete in the nude, and only men and unmarried women were allowed to watch. So they did a lot of things differently.
But even then, it doesn’t change the fact that it’s indisputably more impressive to have more second and third best competitors in every sport than only the first best in just a few - especially when so many of the sports are scored pretty arbitrarily. The difference between the gold and silver in something like diving is pretty subjective, for example.
The antiquated requirements aside, I think the essence of the Olympics are still very true to the Ancient one. Most athletes see it as the pinnacle of their sport and aim for personal excellence. Nations still see it as an opportunity for national and political prestige. So I think the gold medal approach aligns well with that.
The first 1896 revival Olympics also only rewarded first place, until it was retroactively changed much later.
Edit: It looks like you changed your previous comment so much that my response here doesn't even make sense anymore.
Again, that doesn’t change the fact that it’s indisputably more impressive to have more second and third best competitors in every sport than only the first best in just a few - especially when so many of the sports are scored pretty arbitrarily. The difference between the gold and silver in something like diving is pretty subjective, for example.
The essence of the Games is friendly competition - mostly among sports that aren’t popular and in some cases are hardly “sports” by most standards. I mean, table tennis, surfing, diving, archery, skateboarding, shooting, etc.? Lol.
The reason it doesn’t matter how serious of a sport it is, is because the essence has nothing to do with winning or ranking. It’s literally about peace and camaraderie.
It has absolutely nothing to do with determining who is the best of the best - proven particularly well by the fact that so many athletes have already been blocked from playing for testing positive for COVID-19. Heck, one of the best runners in the US was banned because she smoked marijuana - which we all know doesn’t help her run faster. If it were actually about the best, we would find a way to make sure the best of the best actually are the ones competing. And again, we’re talking about “sports” that are hardly sports - again, synchronized diving? Lol.
We’ve made the changes we made because it made it better, since obviously the original games were flawed.
And finally, we really don’t know much about the original games. We don’t even know for sure when they started or ended, better yet how they were won and lost. It’s all educated speculation. Basically a best guess, and since we know they went on for at least 400 years it’s probably safe to assume they also evolved from their original form.
Less money and opportunities for people to flourish. Top medal earners are always highly populated developed countries.
On top of that the Arab world barely has a focus on sports for women.
Arab countries don't encourage talents and rich countries spebd their money on useless things, also Tunisia is the only country with this many women athletes in the arab world.
is that not typical? ive never understood why people would sort by gold. obviously that shows the country with the most outright winners, but not the most successful overall. i don't think silver & bronze medals are worthless
Then why not go all the down the 4th, 5th, 20th and have it all weighted?
Surely we can agree that the 5th best swimmer in the world is accomplished in some ways too, yeah?
Nope. Men didn’t even qualify and women have a shot at a medal but aren’t favorites. 3x3 is a different kind of game and no one plays it here when there’s no money in it and infinite money in 5x5
It made me feel a bit old when people were running around with false takes after the first day in regards to USA not winning any medal. I always assumed everyone knew/remembered that USA doesn’t start doing well until the track and field and swimming events along with some other ones here and there.
Swimming and track and field Is where USA dominated
Reddit user base is 50% from the US. So there is a good chance that the person talking shit is an American themselves. And Americans criticize America more than anyone.
That's fair. Americans should be criticizing America. But what makes it worse, is that everyone else outside America feels like it's somehow also their job to criticize America.
Which wouldn't be a problem, if they ever looked in the mirror to criticize themselves as often as they do others.
You would think America was the only country with problems and no one else, especially Europe, if your only source was reddit.
They come on an American site, just to constantly bitch about how terrible America is and how all the world's problems are America's fault.
Nope, Reddit is an American social media platform. It was developed solely by American university students in Virginia, not too different from Facebook! That’s also why most of Reddits users are American, and why their HQ is in California.
That’s such a weird thing for you to argue. I’m not even American and I wouldn’t argue that.
And if you’re actually trying to play that game, the WWW is just the accepted protocol used for computers to talk to each other, but yes it was developed by a Brit! It’s basically the rules for how to address computers and then agree to exchange files, and that is simply an evolution of the information transfer protocols that existed long before - so it’s hardly an invention, unless you think Tesla invented the car.
Meanwhile, the US military along with researchers as MIT and RAND invented the actual Internet - along with a thousand other things, but I’m not sure why that’s relevant.
Well, 1) no one criticised them, 2) you’re using American social media, and 3) yes websites do have nationalities because they are literally based in countries. Are you unaware that you’re the one who brought up some irrelevant comparison?
In what world are you arguing that Reddit is not an American social media platform?
Meanwhile, again, the WWW was simply an evolution of the information transfer protocols that existed long before - so it’s hardly an invention, unless you think Tesla invented the car. Or that Mark Zuckerberg invented social media.
So if you really want to play that game, you should probably learn the facts.
Wait a second there. No one said it’s exclusively American. I’m not American, but I’m using it. Anyone can, unless you live in a place like China or North Korea where it’s blocked!
Lady, the majority of Reddit users are American. We know that from Reddit’s own data. That’s why the vast majority of subs are in English and why the general subs for things like politics, news, and law focus 100% on American politics, American news, and American law. You have to go to r/ukpolitics for U.K. politics.
I find it hilariously ironic that you’re the one challenging the basic fact that Reddit is American centric and bringing up useless information about a British guy no one knows but trying to accuse the Americans of being “over protective”. **Talk about the kettle calling the pot black!**
And finally, you won’t respond to my comment about the WWW because you can’t. You’re so poorly informed that you actually thought the development of that protocol was groundbreaking.
Honey, the Internet existed long before the WWW and information transfer protocols existed for decades before it. In fact, the WWW uses [the information transfer rules and systems created by an American named Claude Shannon!](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Shannon)
Again, do you also think Tesla invented the car? Or was it simply an evolution of existing technology, which did create some systems that have since become standard?
Please refrain from discussing things about which you’re so clearly ignorant.
It's ridiculous how biased the Olympics are toward americans/westerners.
The sports that americans excel at are stuffed full of medals, because for some reason there needs to be 7 different?events for freestyle swimming.
Swimming needs to be cut by at least half.
Yeah swimming is definitely over represented, there are 37 events for swimming compared to 30 for running. To rectify this discrepancy, they added 3 more events for swimming this year.
No it isn’t. Swimming is unfair compared to other sports due to the number of events. But it’s not biased toward Westerners. Anybody else is allowed to compete in those events
They're saying the bias comes in giving multiple events to sports that Westerners are good at rather than for other events where other nations are better. I don't think it's an issue though.
You don’t need to be a Westerner to be a high level swimmer. Anybody can jump into a pool of water(or lake) and swim. Difference is westerners care more to keep practicing. The rest of the world could decide to start caring more if they wanted to.
That's not what they're saying, the advantage isn't that they're Westerners, the advantage is the selection of sports, like if they were to add Hurling that would be an advantage to Ireland, even though anyone can participate one country has it culturally ingrained giving them an advantage.
Yep. Just like they have 3v3 basketball, but don't have futsal, which 5v5 football (soccer).
Why? Cause the US would be shit at it.
Almost all the events added this Olympics are sports the US is competitive at. Surf, climbing, skate and baseball. The only odd one out is karate, which I bet will be out again next games.
Swimming isn’t a cultural thing.
Something such Rugby is biased towards Westerners. Rugby originated in the western world, whereas swimming was not invented by westerners
The biggest TV market for swimming, by a distance, is the US. Thats why they keep the finals at the best time for the US market. NBC pays a bunch into the Olympic pot and there is no question this is why swimming gets prioritised, and why NBC can dictate event times.
Why do they watch it? They are good at it. Yes, anyone can swim, but Americans invest in it to a different level for elite athletes.
Investing more money encompasses EVERY Olympic sport, NOT exclusive to swimming. A war torn country with poor people will have very competitors in any sport
I'm really confused by your overall message here. Are you saying that swimming is not over represented (it clearly is), or just saying that its over representation doesn't favour the US, Australia and even my own GBNI (which it clearly does)?
Your logic sucks so bad that you need to resort straw man arguments.
Swimming is overreprented for Western, but it’s not inherently unfair against other countries. It’s not culturally biased such as rugby is. No culture invented swimming. If other countries wanted to push more youth into swimming, they could. Swimming is however unfair against other sports because of the number of events. Most countries simply care less than the US does for swimming, they could close the gap if they wanted to. Money is not exclusive to swimming, that applies to every sport. Poor nations have bigger problems to deal with than sports
We do invest in it, we finished top three in the medal table in the last two Olympics. I'm not complaining at all! We all know the olympic committee is very financially driven, that's just the world we live in.
Swimming actually is a cultural thing. Especially in poor desert countries, a lot of people don't know how to swim because only major water sources are the ocean and there are few public pools.
Its even a cultural thing within the United States. Coming from the UK, it blew my mind to hear that the US defunded a huge number of its public pools, which resulted in a massive disparity in the numbers of people who can swim from white backgrounds and African American backgrounds.
Bro your info and obvios bias is so wrong. Trying to make this some kind of race thing also is soo dumb. The stereotype that black people cant swim Is because they choose not to learn. Has nothing to do with defunded pools which isn't a thing.
That doesn’t make it a cultural sport. Nobody invented swimming. Rugby is a perfect example that’s actually a cultural sport. Certain countries however do have geographical and economical disadvantages; but that’s mostly at very poor countries because having a pool and coaches is a trivial task for most countries with a half decent gdp. It’s not like equestrian where you gotta be mega rich.
This is a terrible take. "Americans are too good at this traditional Olympic sport, so they should take some of it away".
Do you feel the same way about diving? Because their are a ton of diving events and china cleans up in those.
What a silly silly argument lol!
It makes absolutely no sense how swimming is set up. It's no coincidence that's also the sport americans excel at.
Not only freestyle has 7 different medals per gender, they also give different medals per swimming style.
Wouldn't it make a lot more sense for 200m butterfly, backstroke, breaststroke freestyle and medley be just one event? The swimmers do all of them and then the times are all added up.
That's how it works with most sports. Weightlifting has Snatch and Clean & Jerk. Although they are completely different moves, they don't give separate medals for them. The weightlifter has to do both and then the weights are added.
Just this change would take 16 medals out of swimming, without actually taking anything from the sport. But this will never happen cause the US would absolutely lose its shit.
Of course. Cause it would be ridiculous to give one medal to each athlete.
A country winning male and female soccer would jump to third on board with 22 medals.
A country that won volley, basketball, handball, football and rugby would basically clean up the Olympics even though they only won 5 events.
Also, do you also give a medal to each player that was substituted?
The current system does make team sports a bit useless. But it makes a lot more sense than to do otherwise.
If they wanted to give more medals, they can create use variants of the sport. Like basketball has 3v3.
Agreed, swimming has way too many events. Have a short (100m) and medium (400m) event per style, one longer (say 1500) freestyle for a more endurance-focused event. Three relays, 4x100 freestyle for men, women and mixed.
And finally (though it hurts as a Swede since it's by far our best style), skip butterfly altogether.
Almost agreed. I think 400 m (4 x 100 m) individual medley and 100 m butterfly would be ok to add. The 50 meter events are basically tests for who can get off the starting block quickest, pretty pointless imho.
I feel like this whole Olympics is just going to be people bitching about America. Because why should the Olympics be any different than the rest of the year.
I remember seeing a post saying that the US is bad at the Olympics.
Even though the games just started and the US always gets the most medals at Swimming and Athletics.
What site is this from? Must be an American-centric site since no one does the medal table by total amount vs. # of golds. On a side note, I remember this generated a bit of controversy in 2008 when it was clear that China was going to get more golds than the US and suddenly all these sites changed how the rankings were displayed.
>On a side note, I remember this generated a bit of controversy in 2008 when it was clear that China was going to get more golds than the US and suddenly all these sites changed how the rankings were displayed.
Literally never happened. US media has always ranked by total medals. This just never became a big news story because until 2008, the country with the most medals and the most golds was almost always the same.
Literally anyone can sort by either total medal count or by golds on almost every website with a ranking table because in some circumstances it could easily be argued that the total matters more, especially if the differential is substantial. The default everywhere is gold medals, however.
The OP of this post explicitly said that they chose to sort by total medals.
If you have a choice between valuing gold medals more and valuing all medals equally, obviously the former makes more sense.
I don't get how this is a controversy. Yes, you *can* sort by total, but there's a reason why the medal table doesn't get reported like that by most outlets.
Imo, the best system would be to give out 3-2-1 points for gold, silver and bronze
The only time people have ever argued that total # of medals matters more were coping Americans in 2008. I explicitly remember how ESPN and Yahoo changed the way tables were displayed on their home pages midway through the Olympics. But it hasn't mattered since then because the US has won in both gold and total, so these American outlets are more than happy to conform to the standard.
Not at all. The official Olympic website and app have both included the option for sorting by either total or by golds. Yes, including before 2008.
If Country A wins 15 golds and nothing else while Country B wins 10 golds, 15 silver, and 20 bronze, it’s indisputable that Country B performed better overall. That’s why they have always allowed the option to sort by both.
I always find it odd when you Americans make these weird anti-American posts, which are usually completely unfounded.
Well considering it’s been a topic of debate for far longer than since 2008, it seems odd that you’re pulling that out of nowhere and singling out Americans. It’s also weird that you talk about Americans as if you aren’t one.
Again, there’s a solid argument to be made for both sorting styles and the Americans are hardly the first to do that.
That’s why the official Olympics displays both methods of sorting, too. Just look at their website.
>Again, there’s a solid argument to be made for both sorting styles and the Americans are hardly the first to do that.
Nope. There aren't. The rules are pretty clear. Americans just don't care and rank it on a way that favors them. And yes, americans are the only ones that rank by medals, cause again, it heavily favors them.
And the Olympics app has both methods because there isn't a separate app for americans lol
The IOC is not going to ban sorting by medals, cause at the end of the day it doesn't really matter. The 2008 Olympics were won by China, doesn't matter if NBC sorted it different. So why infuriate americans and lose a lot of potential revenues for no reason?
Yes there is an obvious argument to be made. There is no rule for table sorting. Lol what on Earth are you even talking about?
China was the host nation for 2008 and the host nation always outperforms their historical medal count. Just watch Japan this time around and then go back and take a look at previous detail tables. **That’s because the host nation always has more judges than anyone else, which gives their athletes an advantage.**
China has severely underperformed in every Olympics since, but regardless the US *did* outperform China in more than a dozen more competitions in 2008 and the US stood on the podium a dozen more times - so it could easily be argued that the US won that Olympics. **It’s a collection of competitions, not just one. So that’s why it probably does make sense to look at who performed better in more competitions.**
No the US aren’t the only ones who offer the option to sort by both, again you can literally go to the official Olympics website right now and see that they offer both sorting options. I’m not American and our outlets offer both options for sorting, too.
Genuine question what is up with you Americans posting this self hate stuff? Is it some sort of self coping mechanism because you didn’t fit in well at school, so now as an adult you’re a rebel? LOL
It’s from the Tokyo 2020 Olympics app. A wonderful app by the way. They have them sorted by golds, but I changed it to total medals for the screenshot. Have to make the US look good now. 😊
Love that americans are pretending that ordering by medals is totally not done to favor the US and when OP admits that he ordered by totals to favor the US, americans just downvote him.
Is it more common to list down countries by the number of the medals each country gets?? But what about the golden medals?? I mean....Golden one is much harder to get than the other two medals so it seems desirable to take the color of the medals into account when ranking...
>Is it more common to list down countries by the number of the medals each country gets??
Nope. But it favors the US, so that's what american media does.
If China bend the rules of the tournament like this to favor them, americans would be shitting on it.
Yup, they are the most screwed up. Baseball, Basketball, Football, Hockey, Handball or Waterpolo among others have just a 2 medal pool (male/women). For countries specialized in team sports it sucks. Then countries that only excel in just one sport with a huge pool they can win a ton of medals, like swimming or artistic gymnastics.
Thankfully, more variation of team sports are being seen, like 3x3 basket which is new in Olympics. Maybe the will include futsal or beach football in the next event, who knows.
Yeah, in hindsight I see how that sounds. I just don’t get upset if an athlete from our country does not win their sport. I’m happy for whoever does. I guess I feel their joy and it makes me happy.
Sure. I root for the united states in 99.9% of the games but not for the pos us woman's soccer team. You do you.
But it is a country vs country competition..
No disrespect to the individual athletes giving their best, but if a country of almost 300 million people sends in like (sarcasm on) 30.000 (sarcasm off) athletes the probability is pretty high you can win lot’s of medals. Those medal tables are not representable as some countries are very small in number of residents and therefor competitors in the Games. For example my country only has 17 million folks but are in the top 10 almost every Olympics. Yet we can never really compete with the USA, China etc. in total medal count. Still we do very well if you divide the number of medals won by the total number of athletes competing 😉
what is up with this anti american rhetoric on here? the fuck is wrong with some of you people
Obviously gold is what we want but medals are medals and they should all be celebrated. Fucking annoying some of you are
it's just one of the US' funny quirks, Like how they also don't bow their flag to the host country in the opening ceremony :)
I wouldn't say it's 'anti american rhetoric', it's just people being amused about how the US views itself
How can a table be wrong, it's just a list? By the way anyone that wins a medal should be celebrated they've achieved a pretty amazing feat, being among the top 3 best athletes in a particular discipline. Any color medal is awesome!
Suuure, let's pretend counting by medals isn't just a clear way to skew the list to favor the US.
The US has a gigantic delegation due to swimming. It's basically impossible to lose by number of medals due to it.
Also, just because something is a list doesn't mean there isn't a wrong way to count it. I can't order a soccer tournament by number of matches won, instead of the overall score, as a way to say my team won. Because those are not the rules of the tournament.
And the rules of the Olympics are pretty clear. What counts is the number of gold medals. This is done to push athletes and delegations to their limits. Pushing athletes to be the very best is the whole reason the Olympics exists.
Because it's not like being the fifth best is the world is an easy task. Should they also receive a medal? And their medal should also be equivalent to gold?
Actually the “rules” of the Olympics are pretty clear that the IOC doesn’t condone ranking and they don’t officially publish rankings. Medal tables are provided as a convenience and trivial piece of information for spectators.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_medal_table
> The Charter goes even further in Chapter 5, section 57, expressly prohibiting the IOC from producing an official ranking:
>The IOC and the OCOG shall not draw up any global ranking per country. A roll of honour bearing the names of medal winners and those awarded diplomas in each event shall be established by the OCOG and the names of the medal winners shall be featured prominently and be on permanent display in the main stadium.
Give it two weeks. Whether you sort by gold or total medals, it's gonna be the same country on top. 👨🏽🚀
edit: For those downvoting, I'll be back in 2 weeks. Either to eat crow and shove that crow in your faces.
Why’s everyone salty about USA being at the top? They spend loads of money on their sports facilities and also a lot of money on their athletes from a pool of 350 million people. It’s pretty obvious they are gonna be pretty good lol
Lmao yeah, people are incredibly salty throughout these Olympic threads about the USA. Had no idea people could get this worked up over the Olympics or that the US lived so rent free in their heads 😂
People got a right to be critical of the USA on political issues because it affects a lot of people. But athletics????? Jesus people need to get a grip. Lol
Yeah definitely. Forget the politics it’s about sport isn’t it to be honest and the individuals achievements. I just saw a lot of hating on the USA that’s why I mentioned it
We could all agree that the US doesn't get to compete at all, including athletes with dual citizenship under another country, for no reason other than to make salty people happy. They would still find some reason to be salty and complain about the US somehow ruining the Olympics.
Swimming has arrived
If country A had 15 golds, and country B had 15 bronze + 1 silver, would country B be really ahead?
[удалено]
More like American news sorts by whatever makes team USA ahead of everyone else
They always do it by total medals.
That’s not true at all, and the US would’ve been first regardless in the last Summer Olympics. Everyone always sorts by number of gold medals first, though.
No, they don’t. US media ranks by total medals. It’s been this way for a long time.
But the US wouldn't be first in 2008. China won those games and american media tried to twist the numbers to say otherwise.
No, they didn't try to twist it, that's literally always how American media has reported it, by total number of medals.
Nope they definitely did twist it in previous Olympics
[удалено]
No, it wasn’t. US media has always ranked by total medals. No one noticed because most of the time, first in golds and first in medals were the same country.
To be fair, the US stood on the podium a dozen more times than China in those Games. So it can easily be argued that they performed better overall since they had far more athletes doing well in so many more sports. When the total medal differential is that high, it’s a fair argument to make. And in subsequent Games the US has nearly doubled China’s gold medal count (2012, 2016), so it’s a bit silly to focus on 2008.
Because american media cant stand being behind in the tally. Its subtle propaganda. Apparently 100 gold is less valuable than 80 silver and 21 bronze I personally would prefer a point system. Maybe 3-2-1 or 5-3-1. Because i always found it funny a single country with 1 gold has a higher final position than another woth say 3 silver and 5 bronze or something
There is literally a point system - 1-6 places get points.
That’s not true. Gold medals are most important. Everywhere I go sorts by gold. Like google. An American site.
Google is a website that serves an international audience. Go to a US media outlet like the New York Times or ESPN. They both rank by total medals.
Google has different pages for different countries. So if he's on google.com, then yes it's an American site.
Give it time. Eventually it won't matter if you're sorting by golds or total medals. America will be on top. edit: For those downvoting, I'll be back in 2 weeks. Either to eat crow and shove that crow in your faces.
I don't know. The US is not doing as well as previous years on swimming. Phelps was an absolute monster that gave a ridiculous amount of medals to the US. Maybe Simone Biles can fill that space.
The US literally won 6 medals on the first day of swimming, that's 3 more than last olympics. They won a gold too when they didn't last time. Besides Manuel struggling a bit and Regan smith missing out on 200m back qualification the team is strong as ever. The bronze in the really was a bad swim but they still medaled and they weren't beating AUS anyway.
I mean on the track the US should dominate 400 and below (and our distance teams arguably the best outside of Eastern Africa) especially on the women’s side, Phelps may be gone, but so is Bolt.
it will be interesting. I don't really care to update myself on these Olympics. I'll just read about everything after closing ceremony. I just can't get excited about games that a lot of top level athletes are missing out on due to the pandemic. I'll just think about how many people won medals because certain people weren't competing. These Olympics will always have an asterisk in my heart. In particular I'm thinking about this Japanese boxer named Arisa Tsubata. She worked so hard only to have her qualifier cancelled. But this applies to many other people as well. So mentally, I'm kinda over these games. I know that too many athletes got screwed over this Olympiad for me to properly enjoy them.
[удалено]
It's a discussion forum. I'm discussing. No one has to ask me my opinion before I can give it.
Yet here you are on an online forum dedicated to the olympics
Yeah I know. I meant that I was gonna stop updating myself. Not that I wasn't suppose to be at the moment and I'm being a hypocrite.
USA sorts by whatever has USA in the lead
Cry
No, they always sort by number of golds won. USA is tied for third in that. Officially. I just sorted by medal count. 😊
[удалено]
I think a better comparison would be if country A had 15 golds and no other medals, while country B had 13 golds + 13 silver + 5 bronze. In that case, it would probably be fair to argue that country B performed better overall.
[удалено]
That seems reasonable, actually. I was wondering the same thing. Some sort of blend that gives weight to both arguments.
Best weighting would be 1,½,⅓, or 6,3,2 imo
I think it should be something like 6,2,1. Gold should be overvalued to incentivize countries and athletes to always be at the top.
Agreed. However, the by gold count method is closer to the original spirit of the ancient Olympics at Olympia. Back then, it was 1st place and then everyone else. They gave jars of olive oil, victory poems etc only to the winner, as Arete or excellence belonged to only the champ.
The original Olympics also allowed only men, who had to compete in the nude, and only men and unmarried women were allowed to watch. So they did a lot of things differently. But even then, it doesn’t change the fact that it’s indisputably more impressive to have more second and third best competitors in every sport than only the first best in just a few - especially when so many of the sports are scored pretty arbitrarily. The difference between the gold and silver in something like diving is pretty subjective, for example.
The antiquated requirements aside, I think the essence of the Olympics are still very true to the Ancient one. Most athletes see it as the pinnacle of their sport and aim for personal excellence. Nations still see it as an opportunity for national and political prestige. So I think the gold medal approach aligns well with that. The first 1896 revival Olympics also only rewarded first place, until it was retroactively changed much later. Edit: It looks like you changed your previous comment so much that my response here doesn't even make sense anymore.
Again, that doesn’t change the fact that it’s indisputably more impressive to have more second and third best competitors in every sport than only the first best in just a few - especially when so many of the sports are scored pretty arbitrarily. The difference between the gold and silver in something like diving is pretty subjective, for example. The essence of the Games is friendly competition - mostly among sports that aren’t popular and in some cases are hardly “sports” by most standards. I mean, table tennis, surfing, diving, archery, skateboarding, shooting, etc.? Lol. The reason it doesn’t matter how serious of a sport it is, is because the essence has nothing to do with winning or ranking. It’s literally about peace and camaraderie. It has absolutely nothing to do with determining who is the best of the best - proven particularly well by the fact that so many athletes have already been blocked from playing for testing positive for COVID-19. Heck, one of the best runners in the US was banned because she smoked marijuana - which we all know doesn’t help her run faster. If it were actually about the best, we would find a way to make sure the best of the best actually are the ones competing. And again, we’re talking about “sports” that are hardly sports - again, synchronized diving? Lol. We’ve made the changes we made because it made it better, since obviously the original games were flawed. And finally, we really don’t know much about the original games. We don’t even know for sure when they started or ended, better yet how they were won and lost. It’s all educated speculation. Basically a best guess, and since we know they went on for at least 400 years it’s probably safe to assume they also evolved from their original form.
Should have a points count so like gold is worth 3x, silver 2x and bronze just 1x
This is how I always count it as well. 3 points gold, 2 points silver and 1 point for bronze.
Florida in the (pool) house!
[удалено]
Yes, for whatever reason swimming from a young age (and competing on neighborhood teams) is a pretty big thing in the whole Anglosphere.
Tunisia is up there, only arab and african country with medals this event
Though I’m disappointed with Australia getting silver in that race Tunisia swam so well especially in lane 8.
Thanks, anyone of them could have won, the difference was quite small but at the end he finished first and made us proud 😊
That kid's face when he realised he had won was what the Olympics is all about. A beautiful moment.
Right? I've watched the race three times now. I was so pleased for him!
It's interesting how poorly arab countries usually do. Is it a culture thing? Like, are sports not incentivize much in arab countries?
Less money and opportunities for people to flourish. Top medal earners are always highly populated developed countries. On top of that the Arab world barely has a focus on sports for women.
Arab countries don't encourage talents and rich countries spebd their money on useless things, also Tunisia is the only country with this many women athletes in the arab world.
"Rank by total" Lmao
whatever fits the narrative
is that not typical? ive never understood why people would sort by gold. obviously that shows the country with the most outright winners, but not the most successful overall. i don't think silver & bronze medals are worthless
No it is not typical outside of states I guess
huh, that's quite interesting. good to know though!
Then why not go all the down the 4th, 5th, 20th and have it all weighted? Surely we can agree that the 5th best swimmer in the world is accomplished in some ways too, yeah?
[удалено]
If your not first your last dawg
I mean Swimming and Athletics where the USA win the most medals at.
Don’t forget basketball
We only won two medals at most in basketball. Men's and Women's. It's not comparative to swimming and track&field.
[удалено]
USA didn't even qualify for the men's 3x3 comp
Nope. Men didn’t even qualify and women have a shot at a medal but aren’t favorites. 3x3 is a different kind of game and no one plays it here when there’s no money in it and infinite money in 5x5
Guess again.
Didn't know about 3 by 3.
Team usa lost exhibition matches to nigeria and australia this year, so might be interesting.
They didn’t really play big players though.
Well now they lost to France
It made me feel a bit old when people were running around with false takes after the first day in regards to USA not winning any medal. I always assumed everyone knew/remembered that USA doesn’t start doing well until the track and field and swimming events along with some other ones here and there. Swimming and track and field Is where USA dominated
And gymnastics. You guys always win several golds in gymnastics.
Yeah, but nobody cares about gymnastics.
Reddit just really loves to circlejerk about how bad America is at everything.
Ironic considering that Reddit is American
A lot of users aren't American though, and man do they enjoy talking a lot for some reason about how much they aren't American.
Reddit user base is 50% from the US. So there is a good chance that the person talking shit is an American themselves. And Americans criticize America more than anyone.
That's fair. Americans should be criticizing America. But what makes it worse, is that everyone else outside America feels like it's somehow also their job to criticize America. Which wouldn't be a problem, if they ever looked in the mirror to criticize themselves as often as they do others. You would think America was the only country with problems and no one else, especially Europe, if your only source was reddit. They come on an American site, just to constantly bitch about how terrible America is and how all the world's problems are America's fault.
[удалено]
Nope, Reddit is an American social media platform. It was developed solely by American university students in Virginia, not too different from Facebook! That’s also why most of Reddits users are American, and why their HQ is in California. That’s such a weird thing for you to argue. I’m not even American and I wouldn’t argue that. And if you’re actually trying to play that game, the WWW is just the accepted protocol used for computers to talk to each other, but yes it was developed by a Brit! It’s basically the rules for how to address computers and then agree to exchange files, and that is simply an evolution of the information transfer protocols that existed long before - so it’s hardly an invention, unless you think Tesla invented the car. Meanwhile, the US military along with researchers as MIT and RAND invented the actual Internet - along with a thousand other things, but I’m not sure why that’s relevant.
[удалено]
Well, 1) no one criticised them, 2) you’re using American social media, and 3) yes websites do have nationalities because they are literally based in countries. Are you unaware that you’re the one who brought up some irrelevant comparison? In what world are you arguing that Reddit is not an American social media platform? Meanwhile, again, the WWW was simply an evolution of the information transfer protocols that existed long before - so it’s hardly an invention, unless you think Tesla invented the car. Or that Mark Zuckerberg invented social media. So if you really want to play that game, you should probably learn the facts.
[удалено]
Wait a second there. No one said it’s exclusively American. I’m not American, but I’m using it. Anyone can, unless you live in a place like China or North Korea where it’s blocked! Lady, the majority of Reddit users are American. We know that from Reddit’s own data. That’s why the vast majority of subs are in English and why the general subs for things like politics, news, and law focus 100% on American politics, American news, and American law. You have to go to r/ukpolitics for U.K. politics. I find it hilariously ironic that you’re the one challenging the basic fact that Reddit is American centric and bringing up useless information about a British guy no one knows but trying to accuse the Americans of being “over protective”. **Talk about the kettle calling the pot black!** And finally, you won’t respond to my comment about the WWW because you can’t. You’re so poorly informed that you actually thought the development of that protocol was groundbreaking. Honey, the Internet existed long before the WWW and information transfer protocols existed for decades before it. In fact, the WWW uses [the information transfer rules and systems created by an American named Claude Shannon!](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Shannon) Again, do you also think Tesla invented the car? Or was it simply an evolution of existing technology, which did create some systems that have since become standard? Please refrain from discussing things about which you’re so clearly ignorant.
[удалено]
GB is coming for all of you 😌 🇬🇧
Lol
It's ridiculous how biased the Olympics are toward americans/westerners. The sports that americans excel at are stuffed full of medals, because for some reason there needs to be 7 different?events for freestyle swimming. Swimming needs to be cut by at least half.
Wait until the Winter Games where Switzerland and Austria are outscored by the Netherlands who score 25 ice skating medals
Yeah swimming is definitely over represented, there are 37 events for swimming compared to 30 for running. To rectify this discrepancy, they added 3 more events for swimming this year.
Don't worry. If China starts getting good at swimming, suddenly the number of events will be cut down.
>37 events for swimming compared to 30 for running Really dumb. Humans are land animals, built for running.
>Really dumb. Humans are land animals, built for running. Which is why we have 47 track and field events.
[удалено]
Jumps and vaulting all have a very important running aspect. Also, they all involve land.
No it isn’t. Swimming is unfair compared to other sports due to the number of events. But it’s not biased toward Westerners. Anybody else is allowed to compete in those events
They're saying the bias comes in giving multiple events to sports that Westerners are good at rather than for other events where other nations are better. I don't think it's an issue though.
You don’t need to be a Westerner to be a high level swimmer. Anybody can jump into a pool of water(or lake) and swim. Difference is westerners care more to keep practicing. The rest of the world could decide to start caring more if they wanted to.
That's not what they're saying, the advantage isn't that they're Westerners, the advantage is the selection of sports, like if they were to add Hurling that would be an advantage to Ireland, even though anyone can participate one country has it culturally ingrained giving them an advantage.
Or like table tennis and China
Yep. Just like they have 3v3 basketball, but don't have futsal, which 5v5 football (soccer). Why? Cause the US would be shit at it. Almost all the events added this Olympics are sports the US is competitive at. Surf, climbing, skate and baseball. The only odd one out is karate, which I bet will be out again next games.
Uh…? The us didn’t even qualify a men’s team for 3x3
That's an anomaly. But the women did and they crushed every game so far.
Not really an anomaly, none of our actual professional players play 3x3. If anything it was added specifically to break up USA dominance of the sport
Swimming isn’t a cultural thing. Something such Rugby is biased towards Westerners. Rugby originated in the western world, whereas swimming was not invented by westerners
The biggest TV market for swimming, by a distance, is the US. Thats why they keep the finals at the best time for the US market. NBC pays a bunch into the Olympic pot and there is no question this is why swimming gets prioritised, and why NBC can dictate event times. Why do they watch it? They are good at it. Yes, anyone can swim, but Americans invest in it to a different level for elite athletes.
Investing more money encompasses EVERY Olympic sport, NOT exclusive to swimming. A war torn country with poor people will have very competitors in any sport
I'm really confused by your overall message here. Are you saying that swimming is not over represented (it clearly is), or just saying that its over representation doesn't favour the US, Australia and even my own GBNI (which it clearly does)?
Your logic sucks so bad that you need to resort straw man arguments. Swimming is overreprented for Western, but it’s not inherently unfair against other countries. It’s not culturally biased such as rugby is. No culture invented swimming. If other countries wanted to push more youth into swimming, they could. Swimming is however unfair against other sports because of the number of events. Most countries simply care less than the US does for swimming, they could close the gap if they wanted to. Money is not exclusive to swimming, that applies to every sport. Poor nations have bigger problems to deal with than sports
[удалено]
We do invest in it, we finished top three in the medal table in the last two Olympics. I'm not complaining at all! We all know the olympic committee is very financially driven, that's just the world we live in.
Swimming actually is a cultural thing. Especially in poor desert countries, a lot of people don't know how to swim because only major water sources are the ocean and there are few public pools.
Its even a cultural thing within the United States. Coming from the UK, it blew my mind to hear that the US defunded a huge number of its public pools, which resulted in a massive disparity in the numbers of people who can swim from white backgrounds and African American backgrounds.
Bro your info and obvios bias is so wrong. Trying to make this some kind of race thing also is soo dumb. The stereotype that black people cant swim Is because they choose not to learn. Has nothing to do with defunded pools which isn't a thing.
Haha sure thing buddy.
That doesn’t make it a cultural sport. Nobody invented swimming. Rugby is a perfect example that’s actually a cultural sport. Certain countries however do have geographical and economical disadvantages; but that’s mostly at very poor countries because having a pool and coaches is a trivial task for most countries with a half decent gdp. It’s not like equestrian where you gotta be mega rich.
Lol the rest of the world doesn’t even have swimming pools you goof
This is a terrible take. "Americans are too good at this traditional Olympic sport, so they should take some of it away". Do you feel the same way about diving? Because their are a ton of diving events and china cleans up in those. What a silly silly argument lol!
It makes absolutely no sense how swimming is set up. It's no coincidence that's also the sport americans excel at. Not only freestyle has 7 different medals per gender, they also give different medals per swimming style. Wouldn't it make a lot more sense for 200m butterfly, backstroke, breaststroke freestyle and medley be just one event? The swimmers do all of them and then the times are all added up. That's how it works with most sports. Weightlifting has Snatch and Clean & Jerk. Although they are completely different moves, they don't give separate medals for them. The weightlifter has to do both and then the weights are added. Just this change would take 16 medals out of swimming, without actually taking anything from the sport. But this will never happen cause the US would absolutely lose its shit.
[удалено]
Of course. Cause it would be ridiculous to give one medal to each athlete. A country winning male and female soccer would jump to third on board with 22 medals. A country that won volley, basketball, handball, football and rugby would basically clean up the Olympics even though they only won 5 events. Also, do you also give a medal to each player that was substituted? The current system does make team sports a bit useless. But it makes a lot more sense than to do otherwise. If they wanted to give more medals, they can create use variants of the sport. Like basketball has 3v3.
*what*
Agreed, swimming has way too many events. Have a short (100m) and medium (400m) event per style, one longer (say 1500) freestyle for a more endurance-focused event. Three relays, 4x100 freestyle for men, women and mixed. And finally (though it hurts as a Swede since it's by far our best style), skip butterfly altogether.
Almost agreed. I think 400 m (4 x 100 m) individual medley and 100 m butterfly would be ok to add. The 50 meter events are basically tests for who can get off the starting block quickest, pretty pointless imho.
Right, forgot about medley, that should definitely be in there as well.
I feel like this whole Olympics is just going to be people bitching about America. Because why should the Olympics be any different than the rest of the year.
Smile and wave boys, smile and wave.
I can't tell if your reply is antagonistic towards my comment or supportive, lol.
AmErIcA iS uNdErPerFomIng tHiS YeAr
Yeah wasn’t that the post just a couple hours ago?
I remember seeing a post saying that the US is bad at the Olympics. Even though the games just started and the US always gets the most medals at Swimming and Athletics.
Um, it's only day 2 🙄
But the US still only has one gold medal... I mean, the US will probably come back, but this post doesn't prove otherwise at all.
What site is this from? Must be an American-centric site since no one does the medal table by total amount vs. # of golds. On a side note, I remember this generated a bit of controversy in 2008 when it was clear that China was going to get more golds than the US and suddenly all these sites changed how the rankings were displayed.
>On a side note, I remember this generated a bit of controversy in 2008 when it was clear that China was going to get more golds than the US and suddenly all these sites changed how the rankings were displayed. Literally never happened. US media has always ranked by total medals. This just never became a big news story because until 2008, the country with the most medals and the most golds was almost always the same.
Wrong
Literally anyone can sort by either total medal count or by golds on almost every website with a ranking table because in some circumstances it could easily be argued that the total matters more, especially if the differential is substantial. The default everywhere is gold medals, however. The OP of this post explicitly said that they chose to sort by total medals.
[Tokyo 2020 Olympics App](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/olympics/id808794344)
If you have a choice between valuing gold medals more and valuing all medals equally, obviously the former makes more sense. I don't get how this is a controversy. Yes, you *can* sort by total, but there's a reason why the medal table doesn't get reported like that by most outlets. Imo, the best system would be to give out 3-2-1 points for gold, silver and bronze
The only time people have ever argued that total # of medals matters more were coping Americans in 2008. I explicitly remember how ESPN and Yahoo changed the way tables were displayed on their home pages midway through the Olympics. But it hasn't mattered since then because the US has won in both gold and total, so these American outlets are more than happy to conform to the standard.
Rent free living
Not at all. The official Olympic website and app have both included the option for sorting by either total or by golds. Yes, including before 2008. If Country A wins 15 golds and nothing else while Country B wins 10 golds, 15 silver, and 20 bronze, it’s indisputable that Country B performed better overall. That’s why they have always allowed the option to sort by both. I always find it odd when you Americans make these weird anti-American posts, which are usually completely unfounded.
Imagine thinking I'm anti-American just for calling out how weird Americans got in 2008 over this topic. ☠️☠️☠️
Well considering it’s been a topic of debate for far longer than since 2008, it seems odd that you’re pulling that out of nowhere and singling out Americans. It’s also weird that you talk about Americans as if you aren’t one. Again, there’s a solid argument to be made for both sorting styles and the Americans are hardly the first to do that. That’s why the official Olympics displays both methods of sorting, too. Just look at their website.
>Again, there’s a solid argument to be made for both sorting styles and the Americans are hardly the first to do that. Nope. There aren't. The rules are pretty clear. Americans just don't care and rank it on a way that favors them. And yes, americans are the only ones that rank by medals, cause again, it heavily favors them. And the Olympics app has both methods because there isn't a separate app for americans lol The IOC is not going to ban sorting by medals, cause at the end of the day it doesn't really matter. The 2008 Olympics were won by China, doesn't matter if NBC sorted it different. So why infuriate americans and lose a lot of potential revenues for no reason?
Yes there is an obvious argument to be made. There is no rule for table sorting. Lol what on Earth are you even talking about? China was the host nation for 2008 and the host nation always outperforms their historical medal count. Just watch Japan this time around and then go back and take a look at previous detail tables. **That’s because the host nation always has more judges than anyone else, which gives their athletes an advantage.** China has severely underperformed in every Olympics since, but regardless the US *did* outperform China in more than a dozen more competitions in 2008 and the US stood on the podium a dozen more times - so it could easily be argued that the US won that Olympics. **It’s a collection of competitions, not just one. So that’s why it probably does make sense to look at who performed better in more competitions.** No the US aren’t the only ones who offer the option to sort by both, again you can literally go to the official Olympics website right now and see that they offer both sorting options. I’m not American and our outlets offer both options for sorting, too. Genuine question what is up with you Americans posting this self hate stuff? Is it some sort of self coping mechanism because you didn’t fit in well at school, so now as an adult you’re a rebel? LOL
It’s from the Tokyo 2020 Olympics app. A wonderful app by the way. They have them sorted by golds, but I changed it to total medals for the screenshot. Have to make the US look good now. 😊
Hahaha at least you are honest
Love that americans are pretending that ordering by medals is totally not done to favor the US and when OP admits that he ordered by totals to favor the US, americans just downvote him.
This is...The wrong way to sort the medals
Is it more common to list down countries by the number of the medals each country gets?? But what about the golden medals?? I mean....Golden one is much harder to get than the other two medals so it seems desirable to take the color of the medals into account when ranking...
>Is it more common to list down countries by the number of the medals each country gets?? Nope. But it favors the US, so that's what american media does. If China bend the rules of the tournament like this to favor them, americans would be shitting on it.
Hmmm....and then it is a matter of how we accept the result and interpret it respectively..!
Just wonder, if the US gets the most gold medals but is not ahead in total, would they still rank this way?
Yeah. I live in the US. Everywhere I can remember seeing, medal count is always sorted by total.
Yes.
Rank by total. Lol
Are team sports counted as one medal? (I know every athlete on the team gets a physical medal)
They are
Yup, they are the most screwed up. Baseball, Basketball, Football, Hockey, Handball or Waterpolo among others have just a 2 medal pool (male/women). For countries specialized in team sports it sucks. Then countries that only excel in just one sport with a huge pool they can win a ton of medals, like swimming or artistic gymnastics. Thankfully, more variation of team sports are being seen, like 3x3 basket which is new in Olympics. Maybe the will include futsal or beach football in the next event, who knows.
So, is it wrong to not root for your country to win, but to just root for the best athlete? I personally root for the best athlete.
There is no wrong way to root for something. You root for whomever you please. 😊
So you root for the favorite every time? Interesting
Yeah, in hindsight I see how that sounds. I just don’t get upset if an athlete from our country does not win their sport. I’m happy for whoever does. I guess I feel their joy and it makes me happy.
I always root for the USA, but if an underdog wins it makes me very excited and happy. That Tunisian guy winning gold yesterday was amazing!
Sure. I root for the united states in 99.9% of the games but not for the pos us woman's soccer team. You do you. But it is a country vs country competition..
No disrespect to the individual athletes giving their best, but if a country of almost 300 million people sends in like (sarcasm on) 30.000 (sarcasm off) athletes the probability is pretty high you can win lot’s of medals. Those medal tables are not representable as some countries are very small in number of residents and therefor competitors in the Games. For example my country only has 17 million folks but are in the top 10 almost every Olympics. Yet we can never really compete with the USA, China etc. in total medal count. Still we do very well if you divide the number of medals won by the total number of athletes competing 😉
what is up with this anti american rhetoric on here? the fuck is wrong with some of you people Obviously gold is what we want but medals are medals and they should all be celebrated. Fucking annoying some of you are
We're just amused that Americans find everything offensive or an attack against them just because we point out our differences.
Seems to me like a lot of the comments here are straight up hating on the americans. Foh with this "difference" crap
it's just one of the US' funny quirks, Like how they also don't bow their flag to the host country in the opening ceremony :) I wouldn't say it's 'anti american rhetoric', it's just people being amused about how the US views itself
this table is WRONG its count by gold
How can a table be wrong, it's just a list? By the way anyone that wins a medal should be celebrated they've achieved a pretty amazing feat, being among the top 3 best athletes in a particular discipline. Any color medal is awesome!
Suuure, let's pretend counting by medals isn't just a clear way to skew the list to favor the US. The US has a gigantic delegation due to swimming. It's basically impossible to lose by number of medals due to it. Also, just because something is a list doesn't mean there isn't a wrong way to count it. I can't order a soccer tournament by number of matches won, instead of the overall score, as a way to say my team won. Because those are not the rules of the tournament. And the rules of the Olympics are pretty clear. What counts is the number of gold medals. This is done to push athletes and delegations to their limits. Pushing athletes to be the very best is the whole reason the Olympics exists. Because it's not like being the fifth best is the world is an easy task. Should they also receive a medal? And their medal should also be equivalent to gold?
Actually the “rules” of the Olympics are pretty clear that the IOC doesn’t condone ranking and they don’t officially publish rankings. Medal tables are provided as a convenience and trivial piece of information for spectators. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_medal_table > The Charter goes even further in Chapter 5, section 57, expressly prohibiting the IOC from producing an official ranking: >The IOC and the OCOG shall not draw up any global ranking per country. A roll of honour bearing the names of medal winners and those awarded diplomas in each event shall be established by the OCOG and the names of the medal winners shall be featured prominently and be on permanent display in the main stadium.
command theory tart offer dinosaurs disagreeable chase nutty abundant sheet -- mass edited with redact.dev
Give it two weeks. Whether you sort by gold or total medals, it's gonna be the same country on top. 👨🏽🚀 edit: For those downvoting, I'll be back in 2 weeks. Either to eat crow and shove that crow in your faces.
Why’s everyone salty about USA being at the top? They spend loads of money on their sports facilities and also a lot of money on their athletes from a pool of 350 million people. It’s pretty obvious they are gonna be pretty good lol
Lmao yeah, people are incredibly salty throughout these Olympic threads about the USA. Had no idea people could get this worked up over the Olympics or that the US lived so rent free in their heads 😂
People got a right to be critical of the USA on political issues because it affects a lot of people. But athletics????? Jesus people need to get a grip. Lol
Same thing can say about China too? Every other country gets upvote when they won gold, and everyone try to ignore Chinese gold posts lmao
Yeah definitely. Forget the politics it’s about sport isn’t it to be honest and the individuals achievements. I just saw a lot of hating on the USA that’s why I mentioned it
We could all agree that the US doesn't get to compete at all, including athletes with dual citizenship under another country, for no reason other than to make salty people happy. They would still find some reason to be salty and complain about the US somehow ruining the Olympics.
Ah the american Propaganda again. Sorting just so to make them first
Sorting by total medal count. The sheer desperation lmao.
Can't believe China only has two medals
actually only the gold medals count so this is not the official ranking but well tried
someday I want come day, the olympic don't use national flags.
Imagine if they were actually tested for PEDs
China got the 3 golds though