China probably will/is going to rig it.
America
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 
China will falter as the Olympics go on seeing as all of their strong sports are at the start. Wait until the Track & Field events start ;]
This is true...kptk92 wrote:
China will falter as the Olympics go on seeing as all of their strong sports are at the start. Wait until the Track & Field events start ;]
but then 4 years from now we'll get ours revoked because all the track & field peeps are juicing.
lulz I hope not I only live 10-15 miles away from Stratford I wanna go to 2012 :3mtb0minime wrote:
This is true...kptk92 wrote:
China will falter as the Olympics go on seeing as all of their strong sports are at the start. Wait until the Track & Field events start ;]
but then 4 years from now we'll get ours revoked because all the track & field peeps are juicing.
China will probably fall back when track and field starts up. All of their strongest events are in the beginning. You never know though.
Damn.. lol. I should have looked at every reply.kptk92 wrote:
China will falter as the Olympics go on seeing as all of their strong sports are at the start. Wait until the Track & Field events start ;]
Xbone Stormsurgezz
lol Australia is ranked 5th.
+2 Us!!!
... What?pierro wrote:
Was there a weighting (gold>silver>bronze) system at any other Olympics?
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Nothing so far for NZ, our medal events are later on in the week really. We've got a few "hopefuls" and one almost certain, (Mahe Drysdale, Men's Single Sculls.) I don't want to get overconfident though, when NZ does that we tend to get our balls handed to us, (see Rugby World Cup 2007.)
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
USA is owning tbh.
For a minute with your phrasing I thought you were asking if this was the first Olympic games where they aware three categories of medal .pierro wrote:
Sorry, what I meant was..."Didn't it used to be they just counted the number of medals won, where two bronzes were worth more than a gold, is it just now when they've started making a gold worth more then 2 bronzes"Uzique wrote:
... What?
I'm not sure actually to answer your question but it makes a lot more sense to give a 1st-place Gold medal more 'worth' in ranking the nations. Making 1 gold worth more than 2 Bronzes makes sense to me... the system seems pretty functional and appropriate in my opinion. Athletes don't compete to come in the top 3 generally- they compete to be the best and come first .
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
from what i can tell that system has china in the lead because they have the most gold medals. earlier south korea was ahead of the usa (4 golds to our 3), but not anymore. china just has it all goofy so they can list themselves first as of now. if you look at the far right you'll see the traditional rank by total medals.
exactly. these games are more political for them than anything else.
I gotta say I don't really understand the weighted thing. At least the reasoning behind it.
Lets say a gold is worth three points a silver is worth two and a bronze is worth one.
If you add it up like that the Chinese have 39 and the Americans have 48 points.
Doesn't that makes sense?
Lets say a gold is worth three points a silver is worth two and a bronze is worth one.
If you add it up like that the Chinese have 39 and the Americans have 48 points.
Doesn't that makes sense?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
They are ranking by gold alone.
Haahaa! We have more gold than Germany. In your face DDR!
Actually America would be 38Kmarion wrote:
I gotta say I don't really understand the weighted thing. At least the reasoning behind it.
http://i38.tinypic.com/xdvw2q.jpg
Lets say a gold is worth three points a silver is worth two and a bronze is worth one.
If you add it up like that the Chinese have 39 and the Americans have 48 points.
Doesn't that makes sense?
USA, obviously. They always do.
UK are doing really well though, is it 3 golds and 2 silvers?
UK are doing really well though, is it 3 golds and 2 silvers?
America is going to destroy in track and field.
US leading thus far by one medal so far so good
Last edited by blademaster (2008-08-12 09:02:50)
beat me to itShem wrote:
Actually America would be 38Kmarion wrote:
I gotta say I don't really understand the weighted thing. At least the reasoning behind it.
http://i38.tinypic.com/xdvw2q.jpg
Lets say a gold is worth three points a silver is worth two and a bronze is worth one.
If you add it up like that the Chinese have 39 and the Americans have 48 points.
Doesn't that makes sense?
Runs_with_sciss0rs wrote:
America is going to destroy in track and field.
"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"
the home country always has an advantagePoseidon wrote:
China probably will/is going to rig it.