... and it is very clearly the case in Oz that the medal tally is the total number of gold medals, with the minor medals only acting as a tie breaker.
But I have been seeing on the telly here in the US a lump sum medal tally, with a bronze and a gold having equal weight. That is, the medal tally is a Win=Place=Show tally.
So it this the real Gold Medal tally or the total medal tally? You'd think the gold medal tally would be more resistant to having, in effect, far and away the largest team in the Olympics. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
Ah, and the point about team size and Gold Medals holds up, at least marginally.
EU Gold versus China Gold: 170% EU WPS versus US WPS: 254% I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
Does that make the US come out better than Gold > Silver > Bronze?
It is generally the case that the medal table is sorted by metal. A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
And of course, the medal count was the one that put USA on the top. I wonder if the gold vs all medals counts for China and USA were reversing in the middle of the games, they would had changed the ranking strategy as well. It is amusing to see winner-obsessed USA counting silvers and bronzes.
I have no idea how long the US media has been using a faux medal count, since I was in Oz during the last three Olympics. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
