Which is more important to you? Total gold medals, or overall medal count?

As of today, the U.S. has a total medal count (which includes gold, silver and bronze) of 65. China is currently at a total medal count of 61.

But consider that China has an astounding gold medal lead over the U.S., 35 to 19.

So which do you think defines Olympic success for a country? The total amount of combined medals, or how many gold medals you win?

I would say the amount of all medals...

but today's society doesn't care about anything but the top. Whenever you are second they count you in as the first loser...nobody thinks that you are better than 7 billion -1.

Especially in the USA you are considered a failure if you don't win gold. Its the same here as well....we need to accept that second or 3rd or even 4th is a damn good result considering thats the world elite right there. How many people can do things better than everybody else in the world except maybe 2 or 3 guys?

I said USA because they have a vocabulary that doesn't even exist in german or many other countries...

everybody wants to be a hero....words like clutchness, killer instinct, big points, against the odds, dedication, commitment...everyone in sports wants to be assossiated with those words...but as soon as you are second, you are mentally too weak to get over the top, you are unclutch, you can't deliver when it counts, you are a complete failure and should jump off the bridge. thats the society today.

BUT considering how many foreigners play for every country, I would say eff it and nobody should care about the country valuation. We have so many athletes that play for a foreign country, it destroys the competition between the nations.

Its no different with soccer or many other sports...when you play against people from your own country in another jersey, its ridiculous.

JR Holden for example, the PG of the russian national basketball team...a dark-skinned american plays PG for Russia? Kaman plays C for Germany? and about 1000 other cases...

I'd imagine most people would say total medals. However, when the total medal count is that close, the big lead China has on Golds is impressive. Moreover, China's medal distribution is more well rounded. 31 of US's 65 medals are from swimming.

two0one7 wrote:I'd imagine most people would say total medals. However, when the total medal count is that close, the big lead China has on Golds is impressive. Moreover, China's medal distribution is more well rounded. 31 of US's 65 medals are from swimming.

take away Phelps and USA would pretty much have half of their gold medals

KB24@CL wrote:

two0one7 wrote:I'd imagine most people would say total medals. However, when the total medal count is that close, the big lead China has on Golds is impressive. Moreover, China's medal distribution is more well rounded. 31 of US's 65 medals are from swimming.

take away Phelps and USA would pretty much have half of their gold medals

Wow. Thats crazy.

BTW maybe people should also take note that China has 1/5 of the world population...its easier to find quality among 1.3 billion than it is to find in other countries with far lesser options.

Here's the medal distribution for those interested.

US: http://www.nbcolympics.com/teamusa/medals/index.html

China: http://www.nbcolympics.com/countries/co ... index.html

China would never win that many medals in weight lifting if the world elite would all be there...some of the worlds best had to withdraw because of injuries...

anyway, impressive for China...but you see they are having their most success in sports that are considered irrelevant in Europe and USA...sports that aren't really popular here nor do the countries try their best to develop those sports...

8 golds in badminton? 8 golds in shooting? 9 in weight lifting?

I consider myself a sports freak...I watch pretty much everything and among my friends, I'malways considered a freak that knows everything and every athlete in every sports..lol

I couldn't name you a SINGLE athlete from badminton, shooting or weight lifting...I couldn't name you ONE NAME out of those 3 areas...that's gonna show how much attention these sports get here...

Neither really. Medal counts mean nothing to me.

golds
duh.

getting a lot of medals means you're pretty good
getting the most golds means you're the best.

I'm just wondering if the US can catch up to China in gold count.Track and Field???

I think Medal count. Gold can prove you are the best on the day and is the top prize. Take for example that China's "He" won the womens uneven bars Gold even though she and Luikin (US) had the exact same score. They used some complicated tie-break system that they are still trying to explain to give He the medal.

The fact is that China has benefited from some home cooking as most host countries tend to do but overall the Americans have medaled in nearly every style of event. Lets not devalue what CHina is doing because the 1st place finishes is overwhelming to see.

puffyusaf#2 wrote: the Americans have medaled in nearly every style of event. Lets not devalue what CHina is doing because the 1st place finishes is overwhelming to see.

uh what
let's see

US golds - gymnastics, rowing, swimming, shooting, road cycling, fencing, equestrian, tennis, and two track and field events

china golds - archery, gymnastics, badminton, diving, sync diving, fencing, judo, rowing, shooting, swimming, table tennis, trampoline, weightlifting, wrestling.

i think it's pretty obvious china is getting more golds in more sports, hands down so "medaled in nearly every style of event" is BS. they're not even winning the medal count significantly.
china has 67 medals
US has 72
china is +17 on golds

halekulani wrote:golds
duh.

getting a lot of medals means you're pretty good
getting the most golds means you're the best.

So if country A has 3 gold medals, and nothing else, are they better than country B who has 10 silvers, and 10 bronze?

Yeah, the badminton medals should put things in perspective.

Others that make me laugh:

Shooting.

Trampoline! wtf?!?!

Maybe there should be a "per athlete" score...like if you have ten compete against a country with 1 and you get the silver and bronze, but the other team gets the gold, it seems like they're better.

Maybe a 5-3-1 count

Yeah, a 5-3-1 count would really be helpful. But why not make it even simpler and go 3-2-1.

Silver and Bronze are just the first and second losers....

leakbrewergator wrote:Silver and Bronze are just the first and second losers....

thats BS...second means you are the second best at what you do...

let me ask you this question...

is there ANYTHING in your life, that you can say you are among the one million best? I don't think so...but these people can say I can do "------" and there is only one guy better than me at it...

if they are losers, what are we then?

KB24@CL wrote:

leakbrewergator wrote:Silver and Bronze are just the first and second losers....

thats BS...second means you are the second best at what you do...

let me ask you this question...

is there ANYTHING in your life, that you can say you are among the one million best? I don't think so...but these people can say I can do "------" and there is only one guy better than me at it...

if they are losers, what are we then?

People who are too cool to even try.

leakbrewergator wrote:

KB24@CL wrote:

leakbrewergator wrote:Silver and Bronze are just the first and second losers....

thats BS...second means you are the second best at what you do...

let me ask you this question...

is there ANYTHING in your life, that you can say you are among the one million best? I don't think so...but these people can say I can do "------" and there is only one guy better than me at it...

if they are losers, what are we then?

People who are too cool to even try.

Well China can put any member in any event that they want, so they should have more chances to win the gold. And they put their best athletes in the events that they no US can't compete in.

But total medals matter the most.

LDR wrote:

halekulani wrote:golds
duh.

getting a lot of medals means you're pretty good
getting the most golds means you're the best.

So if country A has 3 gold medals, and nothing else, are they better than country B who has 10 silvers, and 10 bronze?

what?
1. we're talking about the most golds, not just some golds
2. nobody cares if some country A only won 3 gold medals.
3. try applying logic to the CURRENT situation at hand. china has the most gold medals and only falls behind the US by 5 medals total. let's see, your +5 bronze/silvers vs +17 gold medals. let me think about which is more important. on top of that, china has gold medals in a much larger diversity of events.

trodgers wrote:Yeah, the badminton medals should put things in perspective.

Others that make me laugh:

Shooting.

Trampoline! wtf?!?!

yeah
because obviously the sports the US can only compete in are the only things that matter.