Gold medals or All medals?

Havre

Registered User
Jul 24, 2011
8,459
1,733
Why even have a podium with more than one athlete?

I don't know why, but when someone in their 60s get interviewed about their career and that person have "won" a bronze medal in the Olympics 35 years ago there is always a lot of pride in winning that medal. I don't think you get the same from hockey players talking about the Stanley Cup final they lost. So the value seems to differ depending on the sport.

Personally I care only about gold medals - but I recognize most seem to talk about medals in general. "I came here to win a medal etc." is common to hear among athletes - even those who have won a gold medal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Primary Assist

Eisen

Registered User
Sep 30, 2009
16,737
3,102
Duesseldorf
In the end, it doesn't matter. It's not a competition between countries but between athletes in different sports. We just cheer for the homegrown athlete more because we know them better.
 

Albatros

Registered User
Aug 19, 2017
12,577
8,001
Ostsee
If a swimmer wins butterfly, medley, and freestyle for the same distance do I value those three gold medals higher than a singular marathon gold? Probably not. The same goes for grand totals, context matters.
 

BMann

Registered User
May 18, 2006
1,946
503
Watford
I would go with the points system.

But how does one define success. If you look at population numbers, those actively involved in a sporting discipline and also the amount of funding that discipline receives is a better judge. Per capita NZ is the most successful nation at the Summer Olympics or was in recent memory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flyingkiwi

Albatros

Registered User
Aug 19, 2017
12,577
8,001
Ostsee
San Marino (pop. 33,600) just obliterated per capita counts by winning three medals in Tokyo. Other than them it's mostly been Caribbean island countries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dalewood12

garbageteam

Registered User
Jan 7, 2010
1,421
675
It depends on what narrative you want to spin for whatever country you are supporting. Won a lot of medals but few golds? All medals count. etc.
 

Howboutthempanthers

Thread killer.
Sponsor
Sep 11, 2012
16,475
4,246
Brow. County, Fl.
I don't think it's that clear cut.
If your country won a lot of bronze medals and won the medal count. But got no gold metals, is it better to have the higher medal count?
At the same time, if your country easily wins the medal count with all three medals sprinkled in, and loses the gold medal count by one. Are you disappointed?
 

flyingkiwi

Registered User
Oct 28, 2014
4,369
3,577
France
I would go with the points system.

But how does one define success. If you look at population numbers, those actively involved in a sporting discipline and also the amount of funding that discipline receives is a better judge. Per capita NZ is the most successful nation at the Summer Olympics or was in recent memory.
Medals per capita ftw!

I think the vibe in NZ overall is that we follow and celebrate all medals, even though it's the golds that boost our overall standing. Tokyo was our biggest overall medal haul yet, but not our highest gold tally. We have our sports where we expect to medal, but some of the most fun medals were the unexpected bronzes in trampoline and triathlon this year.

I'd say golds are more important to us at the Commonwealth Games. With the US, China, Russia and other big guns out it's a more equal playing field and the rivalries are stronger. For example we're quite happy to see Australia succeed at the Olympics... but Commonwealths? It's ON.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMann

JianYang

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
18,000
16,506
I just take total medals as the main count. I don't have a great reason for it other than we have been conditioned since the beginning of the olypmics that all the medals have meaning.

In most cases, athletes will cherish their medals over time, even if they felt like they should have done better at the time.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad