PDA

View Full Version : A Proposal for Calculating Medal Standings



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10

milanessa
08-03-2012, 09:03 PM
OMG, I'm so incompetent, I had North Carolina on my list but neglected to type it in. I had NC tied with FL & MI at the 8th spot on the list with 4 points (dog only knows how I got that :saint: )

North Carolina doesn't count for anything.

skipaway
08-03-2012, 09:04 PM
OMG, I'm so incompetent, I had North Carolina on my list but neglected to type it in. I had NC tied with FL & MI at the 8th spot on the list with 4 points (dog only knows how I got that :saint: )

No problem, neighbor. Yeah for us though! :cheer2:

BlueRidge
08-03-2012, 09:11 PM
North Carolina doesn't count for anything.

Ahem, North Carolina is home of some of the most beautiful Blue Ridges. It more than counts!

milanessa
08-03-2012, 09:12 PM
Ahem, North Carolina is home of some of the most beautiful Blue Ridges.

As far as I'm concerned there is only one Blue Ridge! :rollin:

maatTheViking
08-03-2012, 09:17 PM
Yep. I cheated. A Brit paper has done all the work. :rofl:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/countries/

And they put purty pictures of the flags on each page which BR didn't do.

Very nice overview of the countries!

nice to know about the flags and national anthems too, and other facts. I didn't know Luxemburg had a 900 man army!

(though they totally neglected the myth, I mean fact, of the origin of the Danish flag!)

milanessa
08-03-2012, 09:23 PM
(though they totally neglected the myth, I mean fact, of the origin of the Danish flag!)

Do tell. :watch:

skatingfan5
08-03-2012, 09:46 PM
oops I'm behind. USA leads in golds and medals. Fred can rest but not so peacefully. :(

ETA: Better yet, but Really's method, China is still ahead. I actually like the cumulative method the best of those displayed so far.USA 21 gold, China 20; total medals are 42 each, but by virtue of more silver, fewer bronze, China's points are 95 vs. 94 for the USA. Hmmm, I wonder if fred would care to adopt Really's method instead of his "Proper Medals Table used by everyone except the USA (and Canada)"? Nah, he'll stick with his Proper Medal Table to the end. Got to give him credit for not retracting in his stance.

BlueRidge
08-03-2012, 09:54 PM
You could also weight Gold significantly more than silver, and silver more than bronze, so as to give Gold more importance. I tried 50 for gold, 25 for silver, 10 for bronze and at the present moment got China ahead despite their being behind absolutely in gold. I don't have a problem with fred's idea of weighting gold much more heavily, I just think silver and bronze should count for something as well. Otherwise, why even award those?

I'm mathematically challenged so I can't really figure out good numbers to use. Maybe Gold 100, Silver 25, Bronze 5? Help me numbers people! :o

Prancer
08-03-2012, 10:04 PM
Got to give him credit for not retracting in his stance.

I believe Emerson had something to say on this subject.

BlueRidge
08-03-2012, 10:05 PM
I believe Emerson had something to say on this subject.

The reason Emerson had that to say was because he was wildly inconsistent in his writings and was annoyed that people hassled him for it. :P

skatingfan5
08-03-2012, 10:06 PM
You could also weight Gold significantly more than silver, and silver more than bronze, so as to give Gold more importance. I tried 50 for gold, 25 for silver, 10 for bronze and at the present moment got China ahead despite their being behind absolutely in gold. I don't have a problem with fred's idea of weighting gold much more heavily, I just think silver and bronze should count for something as well. Otherwise, why even award those?

I'm mathematically challenge so I can't really figure out the numbers. Maybe Gold 100, Silver 25, Bronze 5? Help me numbers people! :oWell if a Gold medal is truly 4X Silver, and Bronze is just 1/20, why even bother giving a bronze medal? It's sort of a slap on the face, innit?

I know that winning Gold means more than the rest. To show how much more valuable and special the GOLD is, I think that the podiums should better reflect the status of GOLD medal winners. The GOLD podium would necessitate at least 50 steps to reach the top, while Silver medalists would have to climb up only 10, and the poor losers who only placed 3rd would actually descend 5 steps below floor level. :P

BlueRidge
08-03-2012, 10:09 PM
Hey I said I wasn't good with numbers! I do think silver and bronze should count. Bronze is important. A lot of athletes are incredibly good and work incredibly hard and only one can win gold; its great that people can feel they also have achieved something if they win bronze. 3-2-1 might not give enough weight to winning (I though that was a USA thing? Winning isn't everything, its the only thing? :confused: ) so maybe there's a better way to weight it. But I don't want to dis silver and bronze!

Prancer
08-03-2012, 10:11 PM
The reason Emerson had that to say was because he was wildly inconsistent in his writings and was annoyed that people hassled him for it. :P

Yes? And you don't think that's applicable?


I know that winning Gold means more than the rest. To show how much more valuable and special the GOLD is, I think that the podiums should better reflect the status of GOLD medal winners. The GOLD podium would necessitate at least 50 steps to reach the top, while Silver medalists would have to climb up only 10, and the poor losers who only placed 3rd would actually descend 5 steps below floor level. :P

:lol:

BlueRidge
08-03-2012, 10:16 PM
Yes? And you don't think that's applicable?





applicable to what?

who's on first? :shuffle:

skatingfan5
08-03-2012, 10:18 PM
Hey I said I wasn't good with numbers! I do think silver and bronze should count. Bronze is important. A lot of athletes are incredibly good and work incredibly hard and only one can win gold; its great that people can feel they also have achieved something if they win bronze. 3-2-1 might not give enough weight to winning (I though that was a USA thing? Winning isn't everything, its the only thing? :confused: ) so maybe there's a better way to weight it. But I don't want to dis silver and bronze!I guess I would suggest 5-2-1 or something like that, perhaps 10-4-2? Who knows? How can one actually quantify such a thing? I think all who reach the podium are winners -- heck, I think all who make it through their national trials are winners. That "Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing" quote is from a football coach (I know that Vince Lombardi said it, but I don't think he coined the phrase). Anyway, I don't believe it -- I don't think winning is the only thing, or everything, even though it's a very important thing in competition. But how you play the game/compete is important too (at least to me). I hope you know that my "bronze medal is for losers" post is an attempt to give a :P to those who believe that sort of nonsense. I certainly don't want to diss silver or bronze (or pewter). ;)