- 21 Aug 08, 06:08 PM
Beijing
Once upon a time Britain's rivalry with Russia was referred to as the "Great Game", Asia was the playing field and India was the prize. Now, Asia is still the playing field, India's nowhere and the prize is a great Games.
With three days left and 63 gold medals still to be decided, Team GB are going head-to-head with Russia for third place in the Beijing medal table.
After Super Saturday, Splendid Sunday and Terrific Tuesday, the impossible seemed possible: Britain's Olympic team really could finish as high as third in the Olympic standings for the first time in 88 years.
But then the track cycling, rowing and sailing finished, and sightings of a suddenly rampant Russian bear were spotted in venues across town. We're in front at close of play on Thursday, but there's only one gold in it, 17-16, with the Russians leading on silvers and bronzes.
Hold on to your laptops, ladies and gentlemen, this one is going to the wire.
First, the good news: the Australians aren't going to catch us. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport can get that GB vest in the post to Aussie sports minister Kate Ellis now.
And, to paraphrase the great Barry Davies, where are the Germans? Frankly, who cares? At least they turned up, has anybody seen the French?
Having won eight gold medals at the weekend, Team GB chipped in with a cycling gold on Monday, before hitting another four on Tuesday. This took us up to third, a spot on the medal table we haven't seen since 1920. Our best post-WWII finish has been eighth, and that was in 1956. Need I remind anybody that we were 36th in Atlanta, only 12 years ago?
Now the bad news: the Russians are coming. They won three gold medals on Wednesday and three more today - a burst that has taken them from sixth to fourth. We have won one gold medal in the last 48 hours and our six-gold advantage has almost disappeared entirely.
The pedal-powered, oar-propelled, sail-billowing surge that saw us bounding up the ladder past our traditional Olympic betters has petered out. Russia, on the other hand, has started to hit its straps, picking up golds from the Bird's Nest to the Water Cube, and in sports from modern pentathlon to Greco-Roman wrestling.
We came into Thursday evening's session at the athletics having inked in Phillips Idowu's triple jump gold, while hopes were perilously high for something out of the ordinary from the likes of Martyn Rooney and Goldie Sayers. All three performed admirably, and can go home with thoughts of London 2012 in the heads, but only Idowu has a medal and it's not gold.
Raised expectations are a bugger, aren't they? Perhaps we all got a bit giddy up there. Suddenly, all reasonable medal chances were nailed-on golds and the Americans were in our sights.
The last two days, however, have seen a growing realisation that we need to hold what we have, convert every serious medal prospect and hope the Russians come a cropper in the women's handball. Who would have thought we would ever be looking for a result there? Get in there Gro, is all I can say.
But that's enough negativity; let's get back on the good foot with more gold. And for that we must look to the good doctor Tim Brabants in the men's 1,000m kayak race, Crewe's 19-year-old BMX bullet Shanaze Reade, our three remaining boxers, our two female modern pentathletes or Taekwondo star Sarah Stevenson. There are silvers and bronzes for others to shoot for but those eight represent are best hopes of adding to our 17 golds.
Because Russia will win at least a couple more golds. They've got three decent boxers of their own, the aforementioned handball team, some good canoe/kayak hopes and more to come in track and field.
All that said, whatever the outcome, these have been remarkable Games for the British team. Beijing was supposed to be a "staging post" towards the real "stretch target" of fourth in the medal table in London.
Coming into these Games, I thought seventh in the table would be a great result and eighth more likely, particularly after a few injury knocks to key performers. I now can't see us finishing worse than fourth, which means that 2012 target will need to be stretched further.
So hats off to two men who saw Britannia's rise: United States Olympic Committee chief of sport Steve Roush and former head of the Italian Olympic Committee Luciano Barra. Both men tipped us for fourth. Barra, however, also tipped the US to thrash the Chinese in the medal table, he got that wrong.
An expert who called that one more correctly is Sheffield Hallam University professor Simon Shibli. He predicted China would win at least 46 gold medals and top the table. They've already met the first half of that tip and will undoubtedly manage the second.
These have been disappointing Olympics for the mighty US team. If it wasn't for the continued prowess of their swimming programme that second spot really might still be in play.
As I write this, the Americans have actually enjoyed one of their better days.
They continue to progress towards double basketball success, their women's football team just beat Brazil in extra-time for the gold, their women's beach volleyball pair defended their title against the hosts and their women's indoor volleyball team will also meet Brazil in the final. You can probably add to that list a softball gold and the men's baseball, beach volleyball and indoor volleyball teams are all still in the hunt.
It is in the more periphery events that they have been routed by the Chinese. If anything, the hosts have got better in their traditional strengths of badminton, diving, gymnastics and table tennis, and they have destroyed the Americans at the shooting and weightlifting. In these six sports alone, the Chinese lead the US 34-6 in gold medals.
And any American hopes they would claw that back on the track have been irreparably damaged by a Lightning Bolt.
No, the race for gold in Beijing has been settled already, only the scrap for bronze remains to be decided. Come on GB!
BBC Sport The Olympic Broadcaster
React to comment, analysis and opinion from BBC Sport experts at Beijing's Olympics and Paralympics.
Interactive Beijing map
Meet Monkey
Latest Photos
Clicking on any of these photos will take you to an external site.
Recent Comments
- SimonTheKid on Taekwondo needs to move with the times
- MariaFalouri on The odd couple unveil new shoes
- Ranga2522 on Hunt is on for Paralympic talent
- The-Shed-Bar on London confidential
- fionnualadooley on Which sports would you add to the Games?
Topics
Podcast
Download or subscribe to this programme's podcast
Fun and Games
Olympic standard
Do you have what it takes to excel at Denise Lewis' heptathlon?
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
Agree with your assessment of our remaining medal chances, Matt, with one omission. I seriously think that Lisa Dobriskey is talented enough to win gold in the 1500 metres if she will only believe it herself.
On the face of it, the race has no outstanding favourite and Lisa looked remarkably polished in her semi. However, her interviews are so self-deprecating ("I'd be delighted with any medal", "there are dangers everywhere" etc) that you want to shake her.
She's obviously a delightful, modest woman. Just for four minutes on Saturday, a touch of devil would be in order.
Complain about this comment
How we have done so far is amazing. I doubt we'll never beat the Russians - I don't think anyone was ever suggesting that we would - but the fact there is now a hope is amazing. Given as you noted that our target for 2012 was fourth, to be competing for third now is something special.
If we do want to continue taking this 'medal table competition' seriously, then we really need to look towards challenging the Russians, which means investment into sports such as weightlifting, gymnastics, shooting and wrestling where there are a number of medals available but few if any British challengers.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Whoa. I'm removed?? for what? I stated a simply that the IOC is investigating the ages of Chinese gymnast, that they are pulled from families at age 3... All facts.
Complain about this comment
It doesn't matter if Russia, or anyone for that matter, overtakes us. Our games have been a huge success.
Complain about this comment
TeamGB are doing brilliantly with 17G 12S and 11B.
Its worth noting that in 2004 we got 9G,9S and 12B so our current total is a major step forward.
If one ignores Cycling medals the stats for 2004 were 7G 8S 11B and 2008 are 9G 8S 9B (so far) which puts into perspective that Cycling has been the real source of this major step forward.
If one knocks out Cycling, Sailing and Rowing we have 2004 4G 5S 8B and 2008 3G 5S 6B (so far) .
If one knocks out Cycling, Sailing, Rowing and Swimming we have 2004 4G 5S 6B and 2008 1G 3S 4B (so far) .
There are 31 Olympic sports. I guess the good news is that inspite of this mega medal haul there is certainly room for other sports to step up and make 2012 even more successful.
For any anoraks out there :-
Cycling (18 events): 2-1-1 (2004) up to 8-4-2 (2008) with maybe more to come.
Sailing (11 events): 2-1-2 (2004) up to 4-1-1 (2008)
Rowing (14 events): 1-2-1 (2004) up to 2-2-2 (2008)
Swimming (34 events): 0-0-2 (2004) up to 2-2-2 (2008)
The most obvious place to get extras medal is Athletics with a whopping 47 events.
Complain about this comment
Just glad we're close to confirming what we all knew... we're better than the Aussies at sport!
Complain about this comment
I reckon the Russians will overtake us, but we should be good enough to hang on to 4th and cap a truly phenomenal Games for us.
Kate Ellis of Australia should hardly be panicked yet though - remember, the bet was over who got the MOST medals, not who got the most Gold. And in that respect we are only 2 ahead of the Aussies at the moment!
Complain about this comment
Amazing and unreal.
You can not complain on the Chinese tactics in how they chose to win their medals, yet you can obviously "blog" on how great their olympians are. Are you kidding me?
BBC=hyprocrit.
Complain about this comment
Yes we've done well but the assumption on 3rd place is based on saying the only medals that count are gold. surely that is disrespectful to those who have achieved silver and bronze and therefore our achievement should be measured on total medals. In which case we are 4th and fighting it out with Australia for that place.
Complain about this comment
BBC moderators - what was the reason for jamesjacobs1's second post being taken for moderation please? I read it before moderation and he was asking why his previous post had been removed. He noted that in his initial post he'd questioned the legitimacy of the Chinese Olympic team's gymnastics medals after the investigations into their contestants' ages. I just checked the house rules and I struggle to see how this second post broke them.
I'm a bit concerned with the level of censorship here. Posts with similar sentiments have been on other blogs I've seen (national broadsheet sites) and didn't seem to require moderation. Why is the BBC deeming them to be so objectionable?
I know it says moderators don't make posts, but then perhaps could the editor explain this?
I've seen a lot of heavy moderation on these BBC blogs recently and have now got annoyed enough to create a membership to make my point. I think it's all a bit much really. Let people have their say so the issue can be debated - on another blog a Chinese poster eloquently put his side of the argument and taught some seemingly overly-suspicious posters that there are two sides to every story. If the original posts had been moderated then the issue would have gone undiscussed and potentially narrower-minded types would never have been able to see things from the other side.
There. That's my 2 pence worth. Kick it to me moderator boys.
Complain about this comment
There's alot of talk regarding the medal table as absolute totals. But....
China - 46 Golds - population of 1,322million
USA - 26 Golds - pop of 301million
GB - 17 Golds - pop of 60million
Russia - 16 Golds - pop of 141million
Germany - 11 Golds - pop of 82million
So that's ...
China - 0.35 golds per 10million of pop.
USA - 0.86
GB - 2.83
Russia - 1.13
Germany - 1.34
Need I say more? China's really not doing that well at all.......and we are doing spiffingly!
Yet, though I'm a brit.....
Australia - 11 Golds - population of 20 million
New Zealand - 3 Golds - population of just 4 million!!!
So that's.....
Australia - 5.5 golds per 10milllion of pop.
NZ - 7.5!!!
Our southern cousins should feel mighty proud. You could also look at this weighted by GDP/capita......
Complain about this comment
India's nowhere ????
Ha haa... Take my word, You will repent this statement, a few years down the line !!!
-- A confident Indian youth
Complain about this comment
Thank you.
I stated facts that were apparently denied in the editorial. It is all over the papers on the harsh conditions of the Chinese government treatments and the underaged children. I have not stated anything that is lying or such.
Complain about this comment
jamesjacobs1
To be honest I have no idea whether the Chinese Government have done anything or not really. But it can't be denied that it's been reported on widely and I just don't see why we can't talk about it, it might throw up some info or opinions we hadn't heard before.
not loving the moderation.
Complain about this comment
#10 - Bronze isn't worth the same as Gold. No 'disrespect' to anyone, but it's just not.
#12 - So what about Jamaica then? 5 golds, population 2.75 million = 18 golds per 10million of pop! (closely followed by Bahrain, on about 17)
Complain about this comment
excellent. moderators have enough time to censor posts within seconds of them appearing but not the capacity to reply to a genuine question on the free speech issue.
i know you're there and i know you read what i wrote. the silence speaks volumes.
very disappointing BBC.
while i may disagree with what you say, i'll defend to the death your right not to be allowed to say it (sic)
Complain about this comment
Let's face it, we should be ahead of Australia at every single Games - they've got only a third of our population. The reason it's taken this long is because we did what they did but 20 years later - react to a dismal Olympics performance (Montreal in their case, Atlanta in ours) by completely rethinking our approach and spending serious cash.
The ones we should be comparing ourselves to are France, Germany and Italy who have finished ahead of us in the medals tables for as long as I can remember (I can't be bothered to go to Wikipedia). And this time our cyclists have more gold medals then the entire French nation.
Complain about this comment
As long as we beat the Aussies. Nothing else matter.
Oh, we already did...
Complain about this comment
Why are we talking about the fact that many of our medals have come in cycling like it's an issue?
USA won even more golds from a single person, never mind from a single sport.
Obviously spreading the medals around would make the overall tally safer for the future, but looking at the ages of most of the cycling team, we will be at least as dominant come 2012, maybe even more so if we find some distance racers for the track.
Complain about this comment
And what's up with South Africa?
Rugby fans can confirm that the Saffers can play sport a bit, on a good day like, so what are they doing with a single solitary silver?
Complain about this comment
i reckon the location helps too though. most of australia's population lives on the coast in a decent climate which would give them an advantage per capita.
also i'd guess they may have more access to sporting facilities per capita?
p.s. BBC - I would still like to be able to discuss the legitimacy of some of the performances/ judging in this (and other) Olympics. Is that allowed?
Complain about this comment
Censori, you can probably discuss the legitimacy of the judging, so just go ahead and post - the worst they can do is take it down.
But (and this is unbelievably shameful) the BBC outsources moderation/censorship to a private company. So don't expect to get any sensible answers about moderation/censorship policy - in fact they tend to take down any post here or on 606 that questions or even mentions the moderators.
Complain about this comment
good knowledge baron_d.
that is truly shocking. shame on you BBC. how can you not even be the guardians of your own definition on what is and what isn't ok to print? you are a news agency. weak.
anyway, back to the games. on the whole i've been impressed with Chinese performances and despite the controversies you can't deny they've had some great showings. but i do get the sense that the drive for golds has got a bit manic in China (and in GB as well to be fair). who knows what has and hasn't been fully above board in all countries' performances.
and i still like to see a few plucky losers at the Olympics and that's what i've missed most at Beijing 2008.
Complain about this comment
couldn't agree more captain carrantupmyhill,
but I'm gutted we aren't winning more medals
50 was in the bag
Dwain Chambers would have been bronze in 100m if he was there, and ditch Pickering for Chambers in the relay
likewise Long Jumg Ginger Boy
likewise Rooney
50 medals was on!
now it's 47
20 golds though! kiss my kippers baby!!!!!
Complain about this comment
hmm, got carried away a bit with my ire there and dropped in a couple of typos. should read 'guadians of your own decision' in the second paragraph.
and what i meant at the end is that with the increased qualifying standards and the BBC coverage i'm not getting my eric the eel/ eddie the eagle/ pacific islands hurdler bloke fix. :(
Complain about this comment
The medals per population does cause problems because of the finite number of medals available. For China to win at the rate GB have won, they still wouldn't acheive that had they won every medal if I've done my sums correctly.
Complain about this comment
what's that rule about every time you try to correct something you compound the error by putting a mistake in the correction?
i give up.
big thumbs down to BBC tonight.
spaters.
Complain about this comment
I read this table standardised for population earlier: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/its/intranet/projects/webdev/sandbox/matmannion/sandbox/olympics
Complain about this comment
#20: I wasn't making a deal of the no. of medals won by the cyclists, merely having a dig at the French - a much more honourable pursuit
Complain about this comment
WHO agrees with me that Australia without swimming are nothing more than a Canada in terms of Olympic medal prowess??
Complain about this comment
"Perhaps we all got a bit giddy up there. Suddenly, all reasonable medal chances were nailed-on golds and the Americans were in our sights."
Speak for yourself. It was obvious team GB had done the clever thing and targeted a few particular skills in which to dominate all events. It was clear once the cycling and sailing were over we'd be picking up scraps here and there, and there's nothing wrong with that.
Complain about this comment
#27 - your sums are correct. The Chinese would need 36 gold medals to equal us, and over two thousand gold medals to beat the Jamaicans.
Bunch of losers, really.
Complain about this comment
Oops that should be 368 gold medals to equal us.
Complain about this comment
China - 1.3 Billion
USA - 304 Million
Russia - 141 Million
UK - 62 Million
Now which is the most succesful country per capita?
Complain about this comment
Which is the official medal table? Because if you view American sites they have themselves on top (obviously) and we are in fourth, as they go by total medals.
And have you noticed that this year most of our medals have been won with the aid of machinery where they can sit down (cycling, sailing, rowing), whereas they used to be mainly in athletics? Not many runners winning medals for us anymore.
Complain about this comment
Before the start of the Olympics certain countries were dishing it to the Chinese, for the emphasis they were placing on winning medals.THe Brits and Germans were the worst. Seems to me you Brits are beginning to place and exaggerated status on the medal count.
Anyway the ancient Greeks only acknowledged the winner, the second and third place getters were regarded as also rans and ignored.
AS for the age of the Chinese gymnast, I think its just sour grapes on the part of the Americans... Kayroli? especially and anyway its only speculation
Stuart KIm an expert developmental biologist at Stanford, said people age at different rates and there was no possible full proof way of determining chronological age.
Even if she was 14/15 How old is Daley? and how about that 12yr old that was allowed to compete in the swimming.
Eyeswiredopen. New ZEaland
Complain about this comment
The reason why the Chinese are interested in Africa is not the minerals, but the people. They can tap the native population for athletic talent so they can boost up an area in which they are traditionally weaker.WAtch out USA UK in future Olympics.
Eyeswiredopen N.Z.
Complain about this comment
Who cares where we finish now!!!
All I can say is I've been extremely proud of our athletes during these games.
They have all been an absolute credit to the country. Roll on 2012!!
Complain about this comment
#36, the official IOC way of working out the medals table is the way the BBC have it. The Americans (who lets face it have to be different) have always done it based on total medals. Not just this year to be ahead of China ;-)
Complain about this comment
It has been commented on a points system for medals as opposed to measuring by golds. Poster #29 provides a link to a table that gives five for gold, three for silver and one for bronze.
This may sound reasonable but I do not think it is reasonable in practice. By this measure two silvers would be better than one gold. My gut instinct would be that if you asked an athlete what they would rather win - 2 silvers of one gold, it would an almost certain answer of "one gold."
The value of a gold medal cannot be overestimated. As such I think it is correct to wait medal tables by the amount of golds won.
Complain about this comment
I've been following the British team from Ireland. It's a great performance, congratulations! Many of the TV interviews with the medal winners have been great to watch, great people with great spirit and determination and not a trace of the old superiority the made it difficult for a near neighbour to give support to GB in the past. So hats off, great team and of course great coverage.
Complain about this comment
if it comes to per head of population then surely Jamaica and possibly Cuba are the winners.
Jamaica pop 2.5 million golds 5 ( all in track sprints). I am not sure about the Cuban medal haul but it should be substantial after their boxing haul.
The British team did well but a closer inspection shows that GB track and field is a let down, as per usual.
Complain about this comment
Eyeswideopen your post at 38 what absolute rubbish. You can only get a Chinese passport if you are chinese, so I doubt if we'll see any africans running for China anytime soon.
Complain about this comment
We need to be better all-round. We need people playing in the handball, volleyball, basketball, gymnastics, synchro swimming and such. We have shown we can ace the sports we are traditionally good at but we need to be broad as well as deep to really stay where we are.
As my boyf is part Russian and part Welsh he will be happy with whatever happens, but I am all British (English, Scottish, Irish in there and "made in Wales" lol) so I can't be so even-handed. But even if we come fourth behind Russia I'll be happy for his sake :).
Complain about this comment
You mentioned 'India is Nowhere'
The answer is simple? India's total budget for sports is a meagre £60 million (approximate) while UK spends approximately £200 million per annum. Factor in the size of population and you get the picture.
It would be interesting to see how many millions have the Chinese/Americans/Russians poured into their sport budgets.
Give India another 8-10 years and like 'Corus', 'Jaguar' and the rest, it will take away your medals too. Enjoy it till it lasts..
Will this be published?
Complain about this comment
Skite all you like, but remember two years from now is the Commonwealth Games in New Delhi. One again you will face Australia and then you will once again learn who is the top sporting nation. You will never learn poms, don't you remember the euphioria when you finally retained the ashes, then the big let down in Australia - 5 nil. Annoy us and we will always make you pay. Bing it on I cannot wait.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Since everyone seems to be so obsessed with medal table rankings, how about this one?
Rank the number of golds won per tax dollars spent. In that case the U.S. wins easily...
29 golds so far, for a grand total of $0.00 spent.
That's a pretty good bargain if you ask me.
Complain about this comment
ianeholmes #47
Commonwealth games doesn't count .
Only Australia takes it seriously.
And I wouldn't bet on Aus domination anyway,though the cycling medals will be shared between England/Scotland/Wales/IOM there.So that might give you a chance :-)
Until then : Suffer :-)
Complain about this comment
The table is called a medal table. If silver and bronze don't count, then call it a "gold medal" table.
I just don't think that Americans are that hung-up on "winning" the medal count.
Complain about this comment
If these olympic games do not encourage the government / UK sport to invest more money into our athletes then i do not know what will. We have performed fantastically well at these olympics, only way GB will be better is with more funding, otherwise this is about as good as it will get given the current level of funding.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Congratulations to team GB who has achieved a histrorical height in Olympic! The thing sounds a little bit disappointing is that London doesn't seem to be confident to exceed Beijing 2008. I think you just have to tell a true story and draw a true picture to the world, showing what a true London is like-- that is pretty enough. London obviously does not have to show off its wealth like a parvenu.
Complain about this comment
#49 is correct.
"The USOC is unusual within the international sports community in that it is funded by contributions from private citizens and by major support from the corporate community. The USOC, unlike the vast majority of the 198 national Olympic committees, receives no ongoing government subsidy." America.gov
Complain about this comment
In Atlanta when GB got one gold all the doom-mongers couldn't wait to point out that we came 36th overall. Now all of a sudden we have so many golds there's an eagerness to change the ranking system!
As for Billy2USA (comment 51) who thinks that silver and bronze are worth as much as gold, fine, think that way if it eases the pain of the US being beaten by China.
Personally I think gold is worth more. I would have thought that was obvious, but clearly not. There's a reason they don't play the anthem for silver and bronze medallists...
Complain about this comment
glade4me.. Chinas minority people aren't chinese but they have a Chinese passport. I suggest u read todays BBC article on participating in the Olympics through nation switching.and if u wanted them badly enough one will bend the rules.JUdging winning medals on a per capita basis would also be flawed
Theoretically, If they want to have the most impressive medal results, judged on a per capita basis, they can easily arrange to have all the potential medal winners represent Hong Kong. which is really part of China but are allowed to have their own OLympic team The Uk would have trouble heading of a country (Hong Kong) 6mill/pop? producing over 70 medal winners?
Anyway if u you had'nt realised, having Africans represent China was 'tongue in cheek after reading the BBC article on nation swapping.
Eyes wired open NZ
Complain about this comment
(to comment 56)
I think you are missing the point I was trying to make about the relevance of tax dollars spent on the Olympics effort. I am proud that America's athletes are the product of a grass roots, bottom up system, instead of a machine like, top down system such as that of the Soviet Union and Project 119.
The medal tallies are irrelevant compared to the philosophies behind the two systems.
Complain about this comment
Honestly,I am glad that we have done well, I don't think it matters about where the brits are on the medal table.
Rather we should enjoy the medals we have won.
Complain about this comment
If this is how nationalistic, bitter and petty people become from sport, I dread to think what people of different nations do when it comes to competing in other areas e.g. business, school places, jobs etc.
Oh, and if you wanted a true medal count per population, you would calculate from the number of athletes entered. Considering China and America have roughly the same (~600) and the Uk have half (~300), that would mean Team GB would need around 10 more golds to be on par with China. I'm sure there are other countries with more "efficient" medal tallies.
But seriously, grow up everyone!
Complain about this comment
Even to be competing with the likes of Russia is bewildering. I've no idea how we could keep pace with - never mind shoot ahead of - a country so much bigger than ours. We've got to be the success story of these games, and London 2012 looks very promising now.
I just hope the real McHoy is still on the scene by then, though I confess that I've no idea of the "normal" age for a cyclist hanging up their...er...wheels is.
Complain about this comment
Thank you for you are pay more attention to CHINA AND CHINESE !It's our chinese honest ! But ,pls , i have a question to ask
if you kown more about CHINA AND CHINESE
??and how many time have you been in CHINA and how many chinese's culture do you understand?
This is an old chinese saying goes :Cannot see the wood for the trees.
Complain about this comment
Its a little concerning that most of our medals are in sports that we sit down in.....are us Brits a nation who excel at sitting down????
Complain about this comment
PS for all those who think we spent zero pounds on this....think again the Government has spend over 250 million on atheletes and more with 2012 appraoching... thats the main reason we have done well in these games....and of course such a larger population than places like Australia...of course we should produce better atheletes per head...
Anyway its money well spent - look what it does to our nation....HOPE....
Complain about this comment
Dear Matt,
I am a Chinese who lives in Hong Kong. I just returned from Beijing.
It is not fair to say that the Brits are only good in sports that we sit down. I was at the stadium when Paula Radcliffe finished the Marathon. She did not win, but she was greeted by the audience, mainly Chinese of course, who never saw or heard about her. She was cheered as a hero.She was great.
I am quite sure that China will come first in gold medal tally. There will be a fight to the tape for 3rd place between GBR and the Russians. But, I think a more important point is that GBR will be a more worthy winner when one considers the paltry support the team received as compared to many other countries.
I do ask for some space on your column, Matt to express my disappointment and disgust at the gross misbehaviour of David Davies after he came 2nd in the Marathon Swimming. When he was asked by the officials to head for the stadium, he told him to "Shut up!"
He followed that by throwing the contents of his water bottle at a female official.
This was reported in the China Sina sports net. Can you imagine what the British public will react if a Chinese sportsman do the same to British gentleman and lady officials in 2012?
The BBC only briefly mentioned this, and almost patting him on the back for doing so. Let us not forget that the organizers had a very hard job to keep to the time, maintain order, and protect competitors and spectators alike. Even as a spectator, I felt the pressure. On the whole, the officials did a remarkable job.
I could not imagine man-handling being used by the officials in front of so many people. David might be disappointed at coming 2nd. He might not like being confrontrd by a huge crowd of reporters and officials.But, with the tight schedule, Davies should not take it out on the officials in front of the public.Throwing water at the lady because she reminded him to hurry as the victory ceremony was about to start was a disgrace to himself and the country he represents.
A wrestler had his bronze medal taken away because he threw it down and left the podium. He did not verbally or physically abuse anyone during the ceremony but was handed the penalty. David had better mind his manners and have the sense of decency of sortsmanship to apologize before any uncalled for consequence may follow.
Let us not forget that the next Olympis Games will be in London.The world is watching!
Complain about this comment
Morning all, thanks for contributing to what looks like a fairly healthy debate.
Good shout, re: Lisa D, captaincarrantuohil. In my mental notes she was more of a potential medal than a solid gold chance but I see your thinking and here's hoping.
jamesjacobs, about the under-age gymnasts, I know as much as you and that's only what I've read online. I think it was Associated Press that first picked up on this last week and I now see that the IOC has asked the gymnastics fed to investigate. Let's see what comes of that because, as you say, it would be a pretty serious scandal/embarrassment. As for the whole moderation stuff, I really don't know much about it. As I understand it you lot can complain about each other's posts...this flags them up to the mods. Perhaps a Chinese reader was offended by your first post (which I didn't see, btw)??? It's happened before!!
ryushinku, good spot (although it is a bit unclear as to what "table" the bet is based on...ie the traditional one or the US one).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7548855.stm
If it is total number of medals then I would hold back on sending that vest to Oz just yet...it will be v close.
To the Indian posters, bring it on!!! But you know I was only teasing, don't you? It's actually been a good Games for you too, relatively speaking. Onwards and upwards for you guys, I hope.
All those talking about the population issue...yes, broadly speaking I agree. So we should be doing much better than Australia, we should be on a par with France/Italy, US should be doing much better than us and China much better than them. There are, however, lots of other factors to consider (wealth, % of that wealth spent on sport, climate, non-Olympic sport distractions and so on). I still haven't seen an alternative table that adequately gets all this across so I think you just have to look at the official table and make your own judgements about what is a par score for each country. And that, of course, is endless fun.
As for us v the Aussies at the Commonwealths please see my earlier answer re: India!!! I think what you're seeing here is the fruition of a few years work and there is still more to come. These cycles can take a while to work through so I see the C'wealths being a big success for the UK. Now, whether England will beat Australia is another matter...not sure. Throw in the other UK teams, though, I think it will be a fairly comfortable win.
And finally, for those of you debating the issue of whether the table should be based on gold medals (traditional way) or total medals (US way), I think the gold tally is the better option although I admit it's not a perfect measure of how the countries have performed across the full range of events.
I have two big problems with the US method. First, the awarding of prizes for 2nd and 3rd is a modern phenomenon and actually quite arbitrary if you think about. If 3rd is worth something, why isn't 4th too? Why don't we go to an F1 system and award points all the way down to 8th? Why don't we just take the sailing scoring method and say the country with the lowest possible score across all the sports is the best??
And the second problem is that 1st should not equal 3rd, or 2nd for that matter. The Ancient Greeks had a champion and that's it. Everybody else lost. Aussies have a similar attitude today (when it suits them!). Did you hear what Shanaze Reade said after throwing away a certain silver to attempt an impossible overtaking move in the BMX??? She didn't come here to lose!!! I could also mention the GB women's quad rowing team who were in tears an hour after the race with silver medals around their necks, or the look on Sonya Richards face on the podium after losing to Christine O....need I go on????
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of recognising people who go close, so I have no problem with the concept of silvers and bronzes. But let's not pretend they're worth the same amount as golds.
Perhaps a point system is the best way...but it has to reflect the above. Are two silvers worth a gold? Are two bronzes worth a silver??
Complain about this comment
Check out the medals ranking on CNN to see who really tops the table :-)
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/olympics/2008/medals/tracker/
Although I don't doubt that if the US had more golds and China more medals over all, they'd show the BBC statistic.
Complain about this comment
Hey - whats happened to the 'Free Tibet' media campaign?
Have you all sold your consciences for a few gold medals?
Complain about this comment
Firstly, can I just say it's nice to see a BBC blogger responding to some of the posts. Some don't seem to think it worth reading the comments and explaining their thoughts if someone's got the wrong end of the stick. Aggers for example.
On the subject of the medals table. I completely agree with what you say. It's ranked on the *winners* and that's the way it should be, IMHO.
I think a representation of a medal table that included all factors would be nigh on impossible. What would you include(?) GDP, population, average income, number of cars per houshold...!
Let's face it, the reason we're happy about being in front of Russia is because it means we're puching above our weight. I don't mean because their country is so much bigger, but look at Russia's (and USSR's) previous pedegree (and ours), and we'd never have thought we'd be in front of them for so long, let alone France, Germany, Australia. I actually think Russia will go in front of us today/tomorrow, but even being just behind them would be fantastic. Fourth is the target for 2012, and I think that's based on these three countrys (China, US, Russia) almost being certain of being ahead of us there.
Complain about this comment
Fair-Play_Paul - if that happens in London I'd be disgusted. If some jobsworth was repeatedly grabbing at an exhausted competitor (who was being interviewed by the media) to make them move while yabbering away in English (or in their language in such a strong English accent it may as well be English) in the belief that they should understand them then I'd expect an apology from the organisers. Athletes who have finished endurance races are *exhausted*. If you don't have the wit to handle these people with the knowledge that they have given their all and will be on a short fuse, then you shouldn't be going anywhere near them. You certainly should not be trying to manhandle them. I hope the London organisers will take this on board.
I don't say this because I'm British, I say this because I compete in endurance events, and know how much it takes out of me.
Table - golds first, first and first. The men's eight and Philips Idowu didn't look happy with silver. Shaneze Reade crashed because silver wasn't good enough, she wanted gold. The women's quad looked distraught. The current system - silver as the tiebreaker - looks fine to me. Yes, it's a great achievement to get an Olympic medal, particularly if you're beating people more naturally talented than you. But it's the gold that really counts.
Complain about this comment
Matt - my problem with the US system is that the system based on gold medals won worked absolutely fine for them when they were top of it. Now they're not, and trying to pretend that they're still number 1.
I'm sure the US public isn't fooled for a second, though.
Despite being a notch ahead of Russia in golds won, any reasonable 'points' system puts them out ahead, as they are 10 medals up on us, with a lot more silvers and bronzes.
But come on. Arguing about whether we're third or fourth means nothing. All that matters is that team GB has had a fantastic games, and I'm so proud of all our athletes. I just hope that they haven't got our hopes up prematurely ahead on what should be a great event in London in four years time.
Complain about this comment
SagaciousBrazilian - not quite fair, the Aussies were second to us in rowing and sailing this year, and they used to be very good at track cycling until we came along. But yes, it is quite clear that their strength is swimming over the shorter distances, where a lot of medals are available (it appears we're clearly better at longer distances).
Future advances in GB's tally require us to win medals in events we haven't won golds in before like flatwater canoeing (well, we hadn't until today)
Complain about this comment
Post#71 - bigfluffylemon
thats a good point - and no-one cared about GDP or population when it came to the medals tables for the Olympics before Beijing and now everyone is applying some statistical factor to the table. Why?
Oh yeah - the Chinese have come top. Cant lose face now can we?
:-)
Complain about this comment
Regardless of whether we come out on top of Russia, Beijing has been a fantastic achievement for Team GB. I am immensely proud of what our boys and girls have done. But we need to take this further. We need to pump in more funding, time and energy into our sports scene. Encourage schoolchildren to play sports starting from a very young age. I would rather have GB top medals table at the Olympics than to watch Eng/Wales/Scotland/NI win the FIFA World Cup any day. Go GB!
Complain about this comment
Oh, yes, not logged in has reminded me of something else I meant to say.
Fair-Play_Paul, sorry, I don't agree with you re: David Davies. I wasn't there but have spoken to somebody who was and have also been at the receiving end of similar treatment when trying to do my job. I didn't react like Davies but then I hadn't been swimming for 2 hours, lost a gold medal by a couple of seconds and just got up off an ambulance stretcher!
The Olympics are about the athletes...they've got to be at the centre of everything you do. Sometimes you've just got to let the schedule slide 30 seconds. I'm also told he initially said "Will you shut up, please!" in a fairly light-hearted way but then lost his temper when somebody grabbed his arm and tried to lead him away. Two wrongs don't make a right and all that but in this case my sympathy is with the athlete. And would be if the nationalities were reversed.
Complain about this comment
Has any one been reading Australian press online ?
The level of hypocrisy is breathtaking!
The journalists and contributors to e-mail pages are censuring the poms for taking an unbalanced attitude to sport and lavishing too much money on it,even though Australia ploughed substantial sums of mony into sport following the Montreal Olympics in 1976.Haven't they been boasting about their wonderful facilities and weather for years and years?
Some e-mailers are bleating 'Our medals go twice as far as the poms medals because of the smaller Australian population,ignoring the fact that population figures are only part of the equation for sporting success and that the mobilisation of resources and the application of intellignce count too.
I hope that the australian sporting psyche is not too damaged by the Beijing olympics;beating them at Rugby Union November and regaining th Ashes in 2009 wont feel as good if the Aussies are too easy to beat.
Complain about this comment
Everyone has the right to comment on the OG ! No matter who own the most gold will be happy . But the OG is a world game , the spirit are : Never give up ! more highly !
more farly !more quickly !
So we couldn't make an attack upon !
As a chinese , i am very happy and honoured for CHINA TEAM has own 46 golds !Come on !!!!!
1 ?? 46 15 22 83
Complain about this comment
#13 Jingley 1
#46 Jingley 2
Just a suggestion, your money would be better spent on feeding your undernourished children and empowering your disadvantaged women.
[Source UNHD 2007/2008]
Human Development Index (HDI) = 0.619
Rank 128 / 177
Human Poverty Index (HPI-1) = 31.3
Rank 62 / 108
Gender-related Development Index (GDI) = 0.6
Rank 138 / 156
e.g.
Children underweight for age (0-5 years) = 47% [Only Bangladesh and Nepal have a higher rate]
Complain about this comment
For those China bashers, the Chinese are not doing great at the Olympics? Step back for a minute before you choke on too many sour grapes.
India: population - 1.13 billion; # of gold medals -- 1 (first one in Indian history)
China: population - 1.3 billion; # of gold medals -- 46 and counting
U.S.: per capita income - $45,800; # of gold medals -- 46 and counting
China: per capita income - $5,300; # of gold medals -- 30 and counting
The numbers pretty much speak for themselves. A country's per capita income has a lot to do with the number of medals a country wins, probably more so than population. The size of a country's population can be a factor in the number of medals, but it's not absolute, and the impact of the size of population start to plateau at a certain level, because:
1) Regardless of a country's size, there are only so many teams and athletes you can enter into competitions, because of IOC rules. For example, China is extremely strong in table tennis, and if China can enter as many table tennis as it wants (or proportional to its population size), it can probably sweep all 6 team medals (gold, silver and bronze for men and women), but by rule, China can only enter one team of men and women each, and thus China can win no more than 2 team medals. And you throw in the factor that even the best athlete cannot be 100% all the time and will make mistakes sometimes (Lolo Jones for example), you can argue that to a certain extent, all else being equal, someone from a smaller nation has a better shot at winning medals if that nation can concentrate their resources on certain events or if that person is talented in certain area (Jamaica vs. the U.S. in track for example).
2) There are only so many medals awarded in the Olympics, and for the reason listed above, the effect of population levels off and actually can work against a country after certain point. The population of U.S. is 5 times that of Britain, but its total gold medal haul is not even twice as many as Britain (30 vs. 16).
Regarding the comment that Chinese children are being "pulled" from their parents at a young age, please note that this is not the same as blacks being abducted from Africa to work in plantations in America, and even after being freed still had to drink from a different fountain. Those children's parents have full say as to whether or not they want their children to be enrolled or stay in sports schools. In fact, sports school enrollment is extremely competitive, and many parents have to fight to get their children into those schools (think top-rated kindergartens in New York City). In addition, some of the children are from rural or poor areas, and their life as athletes (and especially a successful ones) are thousands of times better than they would otherwise have. Everything is paid for by the gov., and if they win a medal (regardless of the event), they get a big cash bonus and security for life -- in fact, the life of Chinese athletes specializing in obscure sports is much, much better than their counterparts in the U.S. Michael Phelps might be the king, but who in the U.S. remembers the names of athletes who won trap shooting or fencing gold medals, and who cares that after 2 weeks of glory, these athletes may have to go back to work in Walmart and Home Depot as greeters and security guards? The Chinese, on the other hand, treat all their champions as heroes and a trap shooter gold medalist can get as big a house, as good a job (for life!), and will be regarded as highly in society (also for life!) as a gymnastic champion.
So stop whining and chewing on more sour grapes. Give the Chinese some credit.
Complain about this comment
Just n afterthought on the Australian sporting pysche .
I'm really worried about that nations state of mind.
Remember Evans choking in the Tour de France again,and his antics aftewards?
I see Craig Mottram bottled it in the distance races again.
The australian press are celebrating plucky second placers like Sally Mclellan and gallant losers like the hockey and basketball teams,as well as the coxless four.
Wake up Australia-remember that you used to be British!
Complain about this comment
Oops, my bad. A correction to my previous posting:
U.S.: per capita income - $45,800; # of gold medals -- 30 and counting (not 46 as in the original post)
China: per capita income - $5,300; # of gold medals -- 46 and counting (not 30)
Complain about this comment
Fair Play Paul - don't really live up to your username do you? Even Matt's response at #75 doesn't tell the whole story. This is a summary of the account of a journalist who was there:
Far from resenting being confronted by a large crowd as you suggest, Davies was talking happily to the reporters when the incident began. An official 'barked repeatedly in his ear in Chinese and tried to manhandle him away'.
At that point, Davies said "Will you shut up please?". The official continued to hassle him and bark at him. She then began to tug at his arm. Davies's response was to ask "Will you take your hands off me please?"
?Will you shut up, please?? he asked her at first. More hassling followed. More barking. Then a tug on Davies' arm. ?Will you take your hands off me, please?? asked Davies.
At this time, there were still 10 minutes to go to the medal ceremony, but the official wanted Davies to stop talking to the reporters and go and wait by the podium. Davies continued talking and the official pulled at him again. Davies then warned; "touch me one more time". The official did grab him one more time, and that's when Davies splashed her.
You say that you can't believe an official would manhandle a competitor in front of so many people, but you're very quick to believe the worst of Davies - and very quick to forget the behaviour of the Chinese officials 'escorting' the Olympic Flame in London.
You might also bear in mind that Davies had only moments before been treated for hypoglycaemia - why don't you try googling 'hypoglycaemia' and 'irritability' together and see what you find?
The behaviour of the Chinese official shames China. As you identify yourself as Chinese, your offensive and insulting post also brings shame on China. It is time for you to publish a full apology.
Complain about this comment
Damn those gremlins. Strike out the fourth paragraph of my post above.
Complain about this comment
I've spent countless office hours reading the blogs (FYI... I don't have pending jobs to date)... it really fascinates me on how each people reacts....
Re: Medal standing.... I will still go for the total number of golds won... it is by far the best measure in measuring the counrty's standing... unlike what the US is doing which is like garnishing their dismal performance by showing that they are on top... come on... let's face it... the chinese are doing better now... (FYI... I'm not American nor Chinese).
To produce more medals (or gold at that), it all depends on how much the government is spending... just read an article about an Afghan olympic swimmer, where she only pratices in a 12m public pool... wow... that's what you call sheer determination.... If we just discount that fact that all athletes will receive the same amount of fundings... I think, it will really alter the top 10 standings we have now.
BTW Matt... like it when you you used the phrase of Barry Davies, where are the Germans, who cares? Has anybody seen the French? haha.... although I have a lot of French and German friends... now I have some ammo to taunt them... peace...
Complain about this comment
With regard to the medals table and which we should take notice of... the IOC table is obviously the official one and thus that which we should pay attention to surely?
Someone (I think ashen_sugar) has mentioned that the US has always compiled theirs differently (ie by total rather than by golds).... However, I have read elsewhere on this site that in fact it was only during either the Sydney or Athens games, when the USA had fallen behind in the Gold count, that American broadcasters started to show position by total medal count so that they could remain on top.
As it turned out in both games they did win more golds then any other nation.
Also, there has been a lot of talk re: looking at the results in a different way: eg by GDP or per capita etc... C4 site has an excellent interactive table and blog detailing those very things.......
Complain about this comment
TBH, why are people comparing the population of China? I bet not even the majority of 1.3 billion population gets financial aids from welfare compare to the US and UK. Just give credits where it is due. The Chinese have done pretty well in this Olympic.
Complain about this comment
In reply to my own post above, I've actually just read elsewhere that US tables were first changed when they "couldn't beat USSR to Golds" so who knows when it happened, or in fact if it did or is just in fact some sort of Olympics urban myth!!!
Complain about this comment
Can we all stop joking listing GB as a country and get a bit more serious with the medal count and list;
England
Scotland
Wales
Northern Ireland
I don't see any other countries pooling their medals together teaming up?
GB is only loosely based around political reasons.
What other sports do we compete together?
World Cup - No
Commonwealth Games - No
Complain about this comment
Just to get an idea I've taken the following west european countries to get a similar population total as the us. GB, France, Germany, Spain and Italy.
Total tally at time of looking:
47G 47S 49B Total: 143
This places us handily at the top of the table even ahead of China.
Well done Europe!!!
Complain about this comment
Response to archleftback;
I think you'll find that GB poached about 50 coaches and administrators from the Australian Institute of Sport. Your medal winners these Olympics are due to the sporting Intellect from Australia, cycling for one.
So be grateful that your Tattslotto and Government funding has been the sole reason for your medal haul uplift not your overall sporting talent. Without the massive funding you'd not be able to steal coaches and staff from other countries offering triple their salaries.
I also note that Australia actually has their Team sports in medal contention. Waterpolo, Hockey, Basketball, to name a few. GB not insight in any of the team sports.
And yesterday your BMX Golden girl didn't choke, nor your Triple Jumping guru? Heh
Complain about this comment
I like your thinking Llareggyb, just one small problem:
As GB, France, Germany, Spain and Italy are not in fact competing as a single entity, 'We' get to enter five times as many competitors into any given event as the US or China. This may give your hypothetical Western European block a slight advantage!
Complain about this comment
At the end of the day, it IS all about winning, everything else is a consolation prize. If you accept that then the official IOC rankings are certainly correct .. however it's interesting to look at how each nation is performing across the board. To do that a points system for 1st, 2nd and 3rd is the only sensible answer. Personally I do think that to treat a silver as worth 2 bronze, and a gold as 2 silver is reasonable, so:
Bronze = 1 point
Silver = 2 points
Gold = 4 Points
If you work on that basis the table as it stands right now would read:
1st - 236 points - China
2nd - 224 points - USA
3rd - 116 points - Russia
4th - 107 points - GB
5th - 88 points - Australia
6th - 83 points - Germany
On second thoughts .. that drops us back into 4th again, so forget that idea. Lets stick with the Golds :-)
Ignore all the fantasy stuff above however, because frankly it doesn't matter one iota. Team GB have done fantastically well wherever they may end up on some table. I join everyone I know in being overwhelming proud of them all. Well done all of you!!!!
Complain about this comment
NottsDean,
I agree with your idea but it should be just
3 for Gold, 2 Silver, 1 Bronze.
Would the order change then?
Complain about this comment
I'd hardly call coming off a bike at speed choking - in fact the opposite, it could be said that going all-out to get back in front was her "downfall"...
And who calls Idowu a guru? Besides, coming 3 cm behind the world champion hardly means he choked. It was , disappointing yes but not shameful.
Why so angry and combatative?
Complain about this comment
EPOfreaks .. tried that and it put:
1st - 194 points - USA
2nd - 190 points - China
3rd - 100 points - Russia
4th - 89 points - GB
5th - 77 points - Australia
6th 70 points - Germany
Changed my mind however because I'm pretty sure any of the atheletes would rank the difference between Gold and Silver as bigger than that
Complain about this comment
Baron_Daguerre,
that's exactly why GB should compete as the true four countries they are.
Imagine all the medals or chances a Scotish, Welsh or English have missed out on making the Olympics because they have to field themselves as GB.
Shame on your Queen.
Complain about this comment
beat Russia? day dreaming
golds and overall, on both counts.
it'll be unfair for a country such as GBR to be in the top 3. just doesn't deserve it.
Complain about this comment
.
More rampant nationalism (even racism). Resulting in the usual sniping from contributors.
.
Whatever happened to Sportsmanship ?
.
One World, One People, and then Peace will reign.
.
Complain about this comment
NottsDean,
not when you get your Silver by .01 secs or 1cm.
I think it's far more fairer only 3 for Gold.
Complain about this comment
EPOFreaks - the thing is, if G = 3 and S= 2 then effectively it is saying that 2 silvers are worth more than 1 gold which I would *think* most people would disagree with..
Complain about this comment
One World, One People, No Olympics.
Nationalism brings the excitement to the Olympics.
Well done on GB (England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) stepping up. It's about time you showed some grit.
Complain about this comment
EPOfreaks - I garner an amazing amount of sour grapes in your posts
Ask someone who has won a silver by being 1cm behind or .01 secs behind if they are happy with silver and I'm sure you wouldn't get many
It appears now to be a proven fact that the Aussies no longer think that 1st is everything and 2nd is the 1st loser.
The only thing Australia appear to be good at is coming 2nd or 3rd :D
Complain about this comment
EPO, thanks for that but weren't you suggesting just 5 minutes ago that we had displayed a distinct lack of grit in the last 2 days..? ;-)
Complain about this comment
Of course 2 Silvers are worth more than one Gold. Alot more effort, training, funding support for a country to get two people onto the platform and across different sports..
Look at the minor countries that only get a handful of medals.
Complain about this comment
I see your point - I'm just not sure that most athletes would agree...
Complain about this comment
I've never said that Silver or Bronze is not showing Grit.
You were suggesting the Aussies have been choking in sport mentioning Mottram and Cadel Evans.
I returned your choking claims with suggesting the BMX girl, and Triple Jumper in last 24 hours were similar.
What you don't agree, HEH?
Complain about this comment
Great that we are holding on to third place overall, maybe the government will fund sport in the UK over the next few years - or maybe they'll rest assured that enough is being done through lottery funding and let it decline again?
Another note of caution - third overall, yes, but 8th in the athletics and falling... we are behind Jamaica, USA, Russia, Kenya, Ethiopia, Belarus and level with Cuba...
GB used to be a real force in world athletics, how things have changed. Despite having renowned athletes and World and Olympic champions past in middle and long distance running (Coe, Ovett, Cram, Bedford, Hill, Foster, McColgan, Radcliffe...), the walks (Thompson, Nihill, Mills), throws (Backley, Whitbread, Sanderson, Capes, Hill) etc, we aren't even capable of fielding a full team in 2008. No mens walkers, no mens throwers and few women, no 10,000m runners, one solitary male marathon runner. Athletics is both an individual and a team sport - just look at the European Cup matches for evidence of how this can work. More needs to be done to support our athletes in those events beyond the sprints and jumps.
Complain about this comment
Sorry EPO, is your last post directed at me? I'd never suggested anything at all about anyone choking...
I was just teasing re: you saying that we'd choked and then said well done, that's all.
No malice intended at all.
Complain about this comment
Hey russwyd,
GB has spent loads on funding 3 Billion is a figure I've heard. Expect it to be cut dramatically, especially with a possible recession looming over the next few years.
In regards to Coe, Ovett, Cram 70's80's. You will never get near that type of success in distance running again. The Africans rule distance running. They have the burst of speed over the last 200 metres. AUS and NZ had similar distance running success in the 60's 70's with Elliot, Walker etc but they were the glory years, the Africans have funding now and dominate.
To all GB Athletics supporters. Watch out for Steve Hooker (Pole Vault) and Jarrod Bannister (Javelin) for the Aussies. Both big gold prospects. If they win one of those they will be above you on the Aths Medal Table. And thats without debating your Gold.
Complain about this comment
UtterAmateur,
no malice intended either. I confused your response to archleftback's comment higher up about Aussies choking.
My reponse should of been to him/her not you.
All Country's have chokers, that's the pressure of sport.
Either way I still class the BMX girl's fall as a choke, she also did it in the qualifying rounds.
Complain about this comment
Apparently we are only good at sitting down sports... most of Aussie medals are from swimming... that's lying down! Even worse surely. Haha
Complain about this comment
What's China's total when you take out the gymnastic medals?
Complain about this comment
Nah but the Aussie are lying down in water, that's floating, it's quite difficult. The Brits are sitting down using mechanical equipment to do it, that's real lazy!
Complain about this comment
I agree EPOfreaks, the Africans do dominate (most...) distance running... though a European won the womens marathon, and the USA and eastern Europeans - and even a couple of Aussies _ have been demonstrating that the Africans are beatable recently through hard work and specific training methods.
Paula still holds the world marathon record by a country mile, and as for the other endurance events, it was good to see Kenya represented in the walks at last, but eastern Europe, south America, and now - yep, Australia again! - are showing what can be done. Similarly, Europeans and Asians can mount a significant challenge in the marathon, and the middle distances were widely represented in terms of continents... African dominance shouldn't be taken for granted. Yep, they are phenomenal in the 5000m and 10000m, and the mens steeplechase, but the challenges are mounting. I just regret the fact that Team GB don't seem to want to take up the challenge.
Complain about this comment
I'm also concerned about the signals we send out to young budding sportsmen and women in the UK... if you don't have access to a velodrome and a million pound bike, or an expensive boat, then forget it. Seems we are over-represented in the public schoolboy areas and the 'traditional' British events like dressage and showjumping... not much of an east African challenge in the rowing or the track cycling is there?
Complain about this comment
Oh what short memories many of you have, or maybe too young to remember.
During the run up to the Moscow Olympics, we were all strongly proclaiming that medal tables should be dispensed with and even the flag raising at the awards ceremonies should be a thing of the past as well as laps of honour holding flags aloft.
It was said it encouraged unsavourary Nationalism. ( This wasn't just for the 1980 Olympics it was suggested it should have always been the case, and we were just reluctant participants in such activities.
Funny how suddenly we start putting such emphasis on the medal table. No one can accuse us of hypocrisy!
Complain about this comment
I agree you dominate the public school boy events. Or richer sports that need equipment, rowing, sailing, cycling.
Marathon running has never been dominated by any type of race. Asains, Europeans, Africans it's all a lottery. But from 800m to 10,000m it's just the Africans now in the mens events. And eventually the Afican women will start to dominate more. They may get less opportunity than their men in those countries.
I think if you make a final as a white man in the 800m to 10,000m it's basically a Gold medal if you were 20-50 years earlier.
I see Walking events as more marathon length not involving lactic speed just long endurance.
You should do well in the men's 4*400m. But I think Rooney was silly being so cocksure in the heat. A few of the other teams didn't have their top 4 running.
Complain about this comment
Given that the marathon (and ultra-marathon) races remain pretty wide open, I find it hard to believe that there's some intrinsic, physiological reason why Africans should have an advantage at 10,000m. But even if they do, that's no reason to write off GB's future prospects - there are a few British nationals of African descent.
Complain about this comment
@84 That's blind patriotism for you. People get so worked up over nationalist pride over something that, in the grand scheme of things doesn't affect the ordinary person one jot, you would think we'd all get our priorities right instead of trading below the belt insults.
Complain about this comment
Let's not forget it's not all about medals either. Some great performances by GB athletes back in the lower places, including national records and personal bests. My frustration, in part at least, is that Team GB hasn't even pushed for athletes across the disciplines to participate on the world stage, let alone win.
Yes, BBC coverage inevitably focuses on the sprints and areas of GB success such as the post-Edwards triple jump (an event ignored completely until we got a medal prospect), but that won't change unless we get athletes at least competing in the other events.
Complain about this comment
I have been very disappointed in the scoring system of a lot of sports but most of all the boxing. I don't think that the GB boxers have been worse treated than other teams but some of it has been either blind or downrightright biased. I hope it's the former. When Evander Holyfield scores fights differntly to the judges on a continual basis then you gotta take that seriously.
Complain about this comment
Well done GB on all your success this year.
If ireland was doing as well we'd ram it down everyone throats!!! I suggest you do likewise.
I love all the arguing over the medels table!!! Lest we forgert the olympics is about international competition and is not a love in.
At the closing ceremony the country that wins the most events should get one final flag raising cerempny to celebrate their whole team. So I hope you hang onto third place.
Being from Ireland it will never be us but were just happy if we get anything at all.
2 Bronze in the fighting so far!! Any chance the BBC could put us up on the medels table!! Think we are level with the mighty Afghanistan!!
Brings a tear to your eye!
Complain about this comment
Hey, take a look what your fellow James Reynolds said about China here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/olympics/
Chinese being humble doesn't mean they have to take your bias and craps...
If you don't know much about Chinese, their culture and history, don't jump into conclusion...
It is IOC who set the Olympics rules on metal counts, not China. If you have a problem with the system, go talk to them. If you think you are powerful enough, make IOC to change the rules. But until you can do it, it is CHINA who win!!!
Don't mix Olympics with other BS like underage, judging error, Tibet, population and etc. Every country and system has its pros and cons. You have no right to judge others unitl you fix your own first. So, mind your own business and just play the sport.
If you don't like it, petition your country to boycott the game, or again use your mighty power to make IOC disqualify China. Complaining doesn't get you anywhere, it just makes you look ignorant. Winning speaks for itself!!!
Complain about this comment
Britain for wooden spoon really
Complain about this comment
Australia even with GB on Aths Table.
Oz big threat in Men's Javelin. GB chance in Women's 1500m. Men's 4*400m show down for Silver and Bronze perhaps.
But the one I'll be watching is Lee Troop in Men's Marathon for Oz. GB have no entry so he may help Oz to pip GB in the last event for Aths Table.
What does everyone else think.? GB or OZ.
Complain about this comment
EOOfreaks
Mate,
Another Aussie choker for you.
Angie Hardy who simply stopped in the Modern pentathalon. A bit like 'Lay down Sally' who just stopped rowing in the eight-'Its supposed to be eight,mate' in 2004.
How did Australian sport pick up after Montreal?
Was it by using the same native born coaches who produced that disaster?
Do you really thhik that British sports planners like Brailsford and Tannr lack intelligence?
Mate,
you haven't addressed the hypocrisy charge. How much mony has australia poured into sport since 1976,lottery money or taxes?
Complain about this comment
To the Aussie going on about the Ashes and how losing them in 2005 and then gaining it back in 2007 showed how Aussies bounce back... mate your rugby union team showed absolutely none of those qualities - you lost at home in the 2003 world cup final and then lost again to England in the 2007 quarter-finals. Your boys talked it up and then were right and properly dismantled - both times!
Complain about this comment
Well done, Team GB!
Absolutely fascinated by the medals table discussion. The IOC view of "it's not about the countries but only about the athletes" is of course silly after having the competitors parade behind their national flags at the opening. I mean how dim can you get...?
Not wanting to take anything away from the athletes and their extraordinary accomplishments, many of us do care about the medals tables. If healthy competition in sports can spare us arms races, the world would be a better place, wouldn't it. See how sentimental a hardened cynic can get...?
The system, unique to the US, of preferring a total medals count to the gold medals is promoted by The Associated Press which is the main US international news service, owned by a cooperative of US media organisations. They provide all American media with international news feeds around the clock and it is not clear to me if the US editors are allowed to "correct" AP statistics. Brave New York Times allows discussion about this method on their Olympics Blog but the moderators are keen to point out that AP has been doing this for the past three Olympics at least.
We shouldn't get too wrapped up in this. For the average American television viewer, the Olympics consisted of Phelps performing to script, the men's basketball team in their skirt-shorts on their way to take the gold, with women's beach volleyball filling in the gaps in programming. There were some other sports referred to in quick compilations, but the average viewer would probably not have been concerned about the medals tables. The US were winning everything on television.
Complain about this comment
I dont understand where all this 'sitting down sports' stuff is coming from. It takes immense training, dedication and the ability to put yourself through 4 years of physical exhaustion to get to the level that the cyclers and rowers have done. Id like to see all the negative armchair sports experts on here put as much effort in. And if I remember rightly, the 'sitting down sport' of cycling was where Australia grabbed 10 medals in Athens (5 of them gold?). If they had done that this time around the Aussies would clearly be above GB in the medals table.
Just all seems a bit daft and hypocrytical for me. And whatever happened to friendly banter and rivalry? Im used to Australia whooping us in the Cricket, Rugby and even on occasion the football (our national sports). I and no doubt the majority of Brits just put this down to the fact we were rubbish and the Aussies were better, (well done, good game and hopefully we will beat you next time). But as soon as GB gets some sporting success, theres a backlash of nasty remarks and childish comments coming from the southern hemisphere (such as 'your competing as 4 countries in one team so its not fair and doesn't count' and 'you have got more people than us so were actually above you on the 'per capita' medal table'). Its the IOC medal table that counts, and for nations and their media to start fiddling around with it and making their own interpretation just because their country isn't doing so well stinks of nationalistic machoism that really shouldn't have a place in todays world.
Personally I dont care if Australia, Russia or even the Cayman Islands came above us in the medal table, all im bothered about is the fact we have exceeded expectations as a sporting nation and we should be immensely proud of the efforts of ALL our athletes, giving them the recognition they deserve and have worked hard for.
Complain about this comment
archleftback,
fantastic choking in the relays men's and women's 4*100m and apparently your one of the only Nations that practise Baton changing. Obviously not in front of 90,000 people. Mind you you've had your fair share of luck when it comes to Relays, ie; Yanks dropping the Baton in 04' for you.
Sorry everyone else! archleftback decided to start dropping (batons) calls on the Aussies Olympic campaign, so I think it's worth reminding him of a few the GB team has done over the last few days.
Didn't see Steve Hooker choke on the Pole Vault, the rest of them crumbled. Lucky for GB he didn't, otherwise the Russians would of taken 3rd spot on the table. Thats just around the corner anyway.
Can anyone tell me why team GB (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) could only manage 1 gold (8 medals) in 96' Atlanta? archleftback you seem to know alot about previous Olympic medal tally's?
Let me guess, you had no money to invest in sports and no one was buying Lotto tickets back then? Or was it because you were all more interested in watching Football on TV in the lounge room but then gave that habit up when Seamen choke in the Euro semi's, hence the football dream was over and you realised there was other sports out there.
That reminds me. Why doesn't GB have a Football team in the Olympics? Every other Kingdom sorry Country has. It's really strange because I thought you invented the game? I bet you one thing thou. We will still see Beckham's head on billboard's around London 2012. Ohh I'm feeling sick with that thought.....
Complain about this comment
This is nothing new. The United States media have always gone by total medals when it lists its medal count. However, even when NBC gives the medal count during its broadcast, they always make note that China has far more gold medals than the US.
I don't think most Americans really care if we are beaten by China by gold medals. Mostly, we want to reclaim the basketball gold and do well in other team sports.
Additionally, I think the arguments of medals by population are ridiculous. There is no way that countries like China can compete on a per capita basis. The same goes by combining the total medals for Europe too. If that were the case, then countries like like Germany, Spain, Italy, etc would have to enter less athletes and teams for each event.
Complain about this comment
Oh, Great Britain, what's up with your 4 x 400 relay anchor taunting his opponents at the end of a heat?! This was a heat and not even the finals. He was rubbing it into the Jamaican's face at the end. That's one team that I would not want to upset at these games. I hope they get their revenge in the final.
Complain about this comment
for all you people who rank countries by population, GDP, etc:
sour grapes and sore loser!
I don't hear you talk about this ranking when the US, Russia and GB topped the medal table in the past.
47 gold medals (maybe more) are what you have to stare at and you know full well you will never get there.
Accept the cold facts, folks.
Complain about this comment
haha,my british friends,the GB athletes got a good result in beijing games,the media said gymnastics he kexin underage,ok,no problem ,if any british athlete want this gold medal,we can give him,so that to exceed russian,if want 2give you 2,dont envy , i think its no problem,we not mind how many medal we have ,its no significance,we enjoy the game only ,as jamaican bolt ,Powell,they are great,great ,great ,they shine the bird's nest this night!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!world record ,you can leave,american you can leave,you only idiot ass,haha!
Complain about this comment
i know why country like us,Germany,uk,france,always slanders china,because china exceed them,they envy only,haven't another way,but its no problem,china still developing,only this result,
Complain about this comment
As the Chinese have proved, winning the medals competition is simply a matter of having the government pour money into it. If athletes are provided first class coaching and facilities, and incomes so that earning a living doesn't interfere with training, medals will come. Personally, I'm glad that my government (USA) refrains from doing this. The Chinese seem to feel differently. I say: Go for it. Better to assuage an ego wounded by a history of abuses, real and imagined, with Olympic victories and medals than with missiles, guns and conquered territories.
Complain about this comment
maliang in China writes: "i know why country like us,Germany,uk,france,always slanders china,because china exceed them,they envy only,haven't another way,but its no problem,china still developing,only this result,"
Interesting how many Chinese vacilate between feeling inferior and wanting to prove their worth on one hand and then, othe other, projecting these feelings on everyone else.
Complain about this comment
Weighting the medals as 3 for gold, 2 for silver and 1 for bronze does seem a bit arbitrary. In a dual track meet, first place counts as 5 towards the team score, second as 3 points and third as 1 point. But really, what's the point. How many medals a country accumulates probably doesn't matter to the athletes who are competing; they're only focused on their performance. I used to run competitively and routinely finished behind a runner who went on to set a world record. If I ran my personal best, I didn't really care and I'm sure that a swimmer who performs his personal best is not disappointed to finish behind Michael Phelps.
Complain about this comment
simbole writes: "which is the official medal table? Because if you view American sites they have themselves on top (obviously) and we are in fourth, as they go by total medals."
There is no 'official' medal table. Measure any way you'd like. For what it's worth, I'm 50 years old and from the time I was first interested (1968) the US media has always simply totaled the medals, although I always wondered why they equated a gold with a bronze.
If you really want another way to to measure the totals, try dividing the number of medals (either gold or total medals) by the amount of money governments provide for training facilities, coaching, free travel, free lodging and incomes for athletes so that they can focus solely on training. That would tell a different story, especially if the country has a lot of disadvantaged people and this money wasn't spent on programs to assist them.
Complain about this comment
Afternoon all, some interesting stuff has been added to this debate in the last day or two so I'll just give you a few general thoughts as I have to push on with something else.
There have been a few slightly odd comments from Chinese posters. Who is sniping at China in this piece? Me? I'm also not sure about that parallel between possible cheating in the gymnastics and the 18th century slave trade. Very dubious that one, particularly given China's treatment of "its own" minority groups.
I also find some of the logic used to puff up China's success here a little flawed. Somebody above uses population as a basis for comparison with India because that clearly suits his pro-China agenda, but then switches to GDP (forgetting population) to compare with the US. Hmmm.
I've also seen some wildly inaccurate figures about how much money GB is investing in Olympic sport at the moment. The real figure is £500-600m between 2007-20012, so no more than £120m a year. Simon Shibli (the expert quoted above) has worked out that a Chinese gold medal in Beijing will have cost China 10 TIMES what a British gold medal will cost Britain in London. Just think about that for a while. Some might question if China (which is still a poor country by most per capita measures) really needed to win 46+ golds at these Games at that cost.
I should also point out that the US tax-payer contributes precisely zero dollars to the American Olympic effort. Everything they spend on their athletes they raise themselves. I find that quite impressive.
And re: the Barry Davies comment...I might have paraphrased too soon...the Germans are coming too. By the way, only the German bit of that his (I think it was in a famous commentary he did for an Olympic hockey match but others might remember better than me), I came up with the French line!
Well done to the Aussies in athletics. I mean that genuinely. We've done well too but perhaps should have done better (Sotherton will be gutted, Idowu fancied gold and the 4x100m teams dropped medals too...not golds, though). Here's hoping for something from the 4x400m teams...a couple of bronzes, perhaps?
And to whoever made that strange comment about us not "deserving" to finish ahead of Russia in the table. What does that mean? Why does Russia "deserve" to finish above us. This is the Russia whose entire rowing team was thrown out for doping a few months back and was forced to leave behind half a dozen track athletes for faking tests??? Right. They definitely deserve to beat us.
Complain about this comment
Slater, i'm slating you for some punishment. Is it really in the Olympic spirit to raise all those questionable doping issues, especially since Team GB has at least one athlete (don't remember her name, but she was, i think, in the 4 X 400 relay) who shouldn't be in the Olympics according to Britain's own rules (like Chambers). Yes, Russia's entire rowing was thrown out but they have a new team in these games whilst you have the same. See what i mean? It's not been proven that British athletes are not drug cheats. In fact, such rapid rise in the medals table should really attract some disinterested attention from WADA
Complain about this comment
Regarding #112's questions of What's China's total when you take out the gymnastic medals? Even if you take away all their 9 gold gymnastic medals (including the 7 won by the Chinese men's team that are not contested at all), China's gold count is 38, still way ahead of the second-place U.S. at 31. China will be topping the gold table list (and perhaps the overall medal count) in future Olympics, so get used to it.
You don't have to be joyful about the success of the Chinese, but don't be a sour loser and downplay their achievements, either, especially considering that the Chinese have come such a long way. No, the abuse of China is not imagined, as one MikeInNYC suggested. China was brutalized by Western invaders and their allies for over a century, suffering through atrocities committed by foreign powers on the scale comparable to what the Europeans inflicted on the Mayans, the Incas and other native peoples. Thankfully that the Chinese had good fighting spirit in them, and their civilization, the oldest continuous civilization in the world (and which has made great contributions to humanity, with the invention of paper, compass, gun power, printing, and cast iron, down to pasta, ice cream, and toothbrush, just to name a few) did not crumble like those of the Mayans and Incas. It's finally (and perhaps deservedly) their time to shine again, like it or not. (And the Indians may not be far behind.)
Regarding the comment about the Chinese' treatment of minorities, minorities in China can have more than 1 child, the vast majority of ethnic Han Chinese cannot; minorities get far superior preferential treatment in many areas -- college admission, job assignments, etc.
Complain about this comment
Adrian Childs suggested adding up the points for the medals - 3 for gold, 2 for silver, 1 for bronze. Perhaps he could go further and divide this by the number of residents of each country, giving a medals per capita total. Perhaps we could then be at the top of the table?!!
Complain about this comment
#140 - Matt Slater
You're obviously not too happy about some of the comments from the Chinese. Please try and not be too sensitive. I think they're just pointing out that the discussion on medal tables is pointless.
You can argue about population, GDP and how much has been invested per medal all day long. At the end of the day, if a country values a gold medal they will have to invest in it. I'd much prefer the good old days of 'amateur' sport.
I doubt China will continue to invest in Olympic sports for much longer. You'd find that when a country has to host the games, they will put money into it. Who wants a party in own their town when they cant join in?
I'm sure GB will do the same for 2012. They've already started - you can see that in the medals tables :-)
Complain about this comment
This discussion is pretty amusing. On the on hand I see people arguing that only Gold should matter, and that Silver and Bronze shouldn't count because only winning is important. Some have go so far as to question why medals are even given out for second and third. Then, I see one poster after another crowing about the fact the GB is third in the medal table. If you really believe that only first place matters, then the entire idea of a medals "table" should be irrelevant. All we should care about is which country leads the table, not who is in third.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
EPO freaks,
Mate,
What are you doing typing comments on the web at 00.45 am?
i imagine you typing there,fuming as you realise that Australia cannot now overtake Britain in the Beijing medals table!
You inadvertantly reinforce one of the points in my argument,by the way.
You write that Britains poor showing at Atlanta was due to lack of such funding as that provided by the lottery.
Of course! Britain has only trailed behind Australia recently on Olympic medal tables because Australia has temporarily been able to punch above its sporting weight due to significant investment in sport motivated by Australians need to express their fragile sense of national identity by neurotically obssessing with outdoing Britain at sport,given that heir country lacks cultural,economic and political significance in the world.
Now that Britain has decided to take sport seriously and channel significant funds into sport, Britain will continue to outdo Australia in sport.
Furthermore, the British success at Beijing is no flash in the plan. British sport recovered from the Atlanta disaster at Sydney and Athens,won the rugby world cup in Australia and won the Ashes in 2005.
Even though the ashes were lost in 2006/7 a trend seems to be emerging,doesn't it?
Did you ask why the UK is treated as a single country? its because its four componen countries share common institutions and bcause its sporting bodies distribute funds across all four countries.
Dont bother replying tonight,mate. Go to the pub and watch Olympic highlights featuring Britain's boxing Gold.
Mate,
I note that Aussie Jared Bannister choked in the javelin final. You could say that bannister's campaign went off the rails!
Complain about this comment
Dear Sirs,
I see that my critical message was removed from public display after a short time. Obviously, the British public is so sensitive that it cannot stand a point of view which is not supporting the current infantile rise of British nationalism in the wake of some minor success at the Olympic games of Beijing.
Yours sincerely
Complain about this comment
EPO freaks,
Here's another one for you,mate.
Lee Troops may 'troop' in last'!
FYO,
Dan Robertson is competing for Britain.
Your old mate,
Archleftback
Complain about this comment
Dear Mr Slater,
Your article emphasizes one particular English trait: utmost arrogance based on minor success in some sport events that is not understood in the rest of the world. Nearly all gold medals of the UK have been won in only 3 disciplines: cycling, rowing and sailing. These are sports which are prone to doping or simple luck as in a lottery (e.g., sailing). Thus, it is a great pleasure to see that Russia finally performs better than your nation in Beijing. Interestingly, the UK failed completely to win any medal in team events. Only sports that require massive doping, such as cycling and rowing, do mention your country in the records. This fact could mean that most of your athletes were doped for the Olympics.
Please, excuse my simple ideas, but they are just appropriate for your primitive way of writing.
Best regards.
Dr. Peter Goettig
Complain about this comment
Dear Dr G, I clearly have much to learn from your polished pen. Doubly shaming for me, I assume, because English isn't even your first language. So well done for the purple prose...must try harder on the content, though.
I can't be bothered to challenge your hilarious comments about GB doping in track cycling, rowing and sailing. Particularly when you are comparing us to the Russians. The Russians!!!
Likewise your equally daft comment about luck in sailing (that's why there's more than one race, doctor) as opposed to luck in any other event....the women's 4x100m, for example?
As for "minor success in some sports event that is not understood in the rest of the world"....minor success?? This is the Olympics and we have topped the medal table in three of the 28 sports. How many have Russia topped? Cycling a minor sport that the world doesn't understand? Sailing? Rowing? The Russians have never had any problems with that in the past...ahhh, but then we know why that is, don't we?
I could go on but I've got work to do. Thanks for trying, though.
Complain about this comment
Excellent response Matt.
Complain about this comment
On paper, Russia is hot favourites to win 2 more golds on the final day. Athens champion Tischenko in 60kg boxing and the rhythmic gymnastics team should also finish first in the team event led by individual gold medallist Kanaeva and world champion Kapranova. The World no. 2 ranked men's volleyball team should see off the challenge of world no. 10 Italy in the bronze play-off. So Team Russia should finish with a final tally of 23 golds and 72 medals in total if everything goes according to form. 4 golds down from Athens and a 20 medals plunge from their 92 medals haul four years back.
Complain about this comment
# 151
May I remind you that "doping" is definitely an English word, and doping seems to be another one in the long list of questionable British inventions (together with concentration camps - invention by Kitchener).
According to wikipedia, the first use of doping in modern times was in 1807 by a British long-distance walker (and it only went worse from then on).
Complain about this comment
I found that your article on alternative medal tables (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7576446.stm) puts all this in a nice perspective. Came across this cool little interactive chart widget that shows medals count per country, by population size and by GDP - North Corea of all nations was one of the most successful: http://www.youcalc.com/apps/1219242654520
Complain about this comment
70-72 medals haul for Russia although a big decline is still a highly respectable one. It is premature to compare Britain to them as 70-72 medals means about 25 more podium-finishers which can be seen as 25 more top level world class athletes even though the final gold difference is only 4 (max.) Also, Russia medalled in more sports than Britain and I think so did Germany and Australia. So while Team GB did prove themselves as masters of sitting-down sports in Beijing, it wasn't quite a true reflection of their all-round sporting prowess. Of course all that could change four years from now on home turf.
Complain about this comment
Was curious to know whether China would have topped the Soviet Union had that nation still existed. Yes, she would have in the race for gold. The CIS gold tally comes to 43 to China's 51 but in the total medals count, the former CIS countries put together won a whopping 171 medals!! To China's 100. However, today China has 5 times the population of the former-Soviet states put together and several times more state funding and far superior infrastructure.
Complain about this comment
Indiananalyst,
In terms of gold medals Australia succeeded in seven sports: swimming (6),rowing,(2)sailing (2),canoing (1),triathlon(1),diving (1)and athletics (1).
Britain's golds came in :cycling (8), Sailing (4), rowing (2), swimming (2),athletics,(1), boxing (1),canoing,(1).
Each country gained golds in seven sports.
42.8% of Australia's 14 golds came from swimming;36.8% of Britain's 19 golds came from cycling.
Australia seems to be much more heavily dependent on one sport for its sporting success than Britain
Complain about this comment
archleftback,
That's true in terms of golds. Britain's golds are better spread out than Australia's. But in terms of total medals won, Australia won medals in few more sports than GB which displays better all-round prowess as a sporting nation atleast imo.
And regarding doping, well this olympics saw the most rigorous dope testing ever and I don't think any athletes from GB, Russia, US or China tested positive.
Russia despite the doping suspensions in track and field managed to win 6 golds and 18 total medals in athletics to finish 2nd behind the USA. That's 7 more medals than what they won in the previous IAAF Worlds with those tainted athletes!
Complain about this comment
Indiananalyst,
Would you please present a statistical breakdown substantiating your claim that Australas 46 medals were drawn from more sports than Britains 47?
Complain about this comment
GB won medals in 11 sports - athletics, boxing, canoe, rowing, cycling, sailing, equestrian, swimming, artistic gymnastics, modern pentathlon, taekwondo.
Australia medalled in 14 - athletics, basketball, canoe, rowing, sailing, cycling, diving, shooting, equestrian, softball, swimming, hockey, triathlon, water polo.
Complain about this comment
Indiananalyst,
I haven't much to do this morning so I 've made a rough calculation.
Australia's medals came from 13 sprts and Britain's from 11.
That doesn't seem to me to be a decisive margin in Australia's favour
and when you take into account that britain won 47 medals to Australia's 46,and won 19 golds to Australia's 14,I believe that a case may be ade for Britain exhibiting more 'all round sporting prowess' than Australia.
if one widens the perspective to include non olympic sports one should remembr how Australia's much vaunted rugby union team has capitulated twice to England in successive world cups.
By the way, have you or anyone else heard from EPofreaks this morning.
It would be instructive and enlighening as ever to read his analysis of Australia's failure to overtake Britain in the overall medals table or in the Athletics tabl.He had particularly high hopes of Australian athletes Jared Bannister in the Javelin and Lee Troop in th marathon. Niether athlete won a medal.I do hope that Australian sports minister Kate Ellis does not accuse them of succmbing to pressure or 'choking' to use the colourful Australian word.
perhaps you could do the analysis relating to Germany's 41 medals in relation to Britain's 47?
Complain about this comment
Russia 72 medals from 19 sports - archery, athletics, basketball, canoe, cycling, boxing, weightlifting, wrestling, diving, shooting, fencing, artistic gymnastics, swimming, rhythm gymnastics, synchro swimming, handball, tennis, volleyball, modern pentathlon.
Complain about this comment
There is no doubting that GB has done extremely well in this olympics surpassing everybody's expectation even their own but to cement a reputation as an all-round sporting power they must at least repeat a similar performance in few more olympic games otherwise their recent performances could be seen something as a flash in the pan.
Complain about this comment
Indian analyst,
I forgot the waterpolo but dont think that this underines the point I made earlier.
Complain about this comment
Germany 41 from 19 - canoe, cycling, athletics, rowing, weightlifting, sailing, wrestling, diving, equestrian, shooting, fencing, swimming, football, artistic gymnastics, hockey, table tennis, judo, triathlon, modern pentathlon.
Complain about this comment
Indiananalyst,
If one takes a slightly longer historical perspective one will realise that Beijing is not a 'flash in the pan'
At Atlanta in 1996 Britain won a single gold medal.
In 2000, Britain won 11 golds and in 2004 won 9 golds,and more medals overall than in 2000.
In 2003 England won the Rugby world cup and in 2005 regained th Ashes.
In world sporting championships in 2006/7 Britain finished at or near top of the table,ahead of countries like Russia and Germany and Australia.
There seems to be a sporting trnd emerging
Oh,by the way,doesn't Britain rank third among nations competing at olympics ince 1896?
Complain about this comment
EPOfreaks,
Mate,
I've just been reading that august organ 'The Australian' online!
I remember hat you said you fancied Lee Crook.
It seems that he came 60th in the marathon.
The Australian athlete said that he wasn't injured.
To what can one attribute this disappointinfg performance?
Mate ,
he seemed quite emotional after the race and is planning to quit the sport.
Did he pressure gt to him?
hope kate ellis isn't to hard on him but we know what she thinks about chokers.
Complain about this comment
archleftback,
Yes GB is third all-time but most of that success came in the first half of the 20th century. Competition in the 2nd half as we know intensified far more with more nations and athletes participating.
Having said that though, yes you are right there is a sporting trend emerging in Britain but I'm not sure whether we can already call Britain a sporting power. We might have to wait for that for a few more years.
And what is the world sporting championships?
Complain about this comment
Yes, Britain is higher ranked than Russia, US, China, Germany, Australia in football. And England is right up there in Rugby Union. Also 4th out of 10 in test cricket. However, what is GB's global ranking in sports like basketball, handball, volleyball, tennis, table tennis, badminton, gymnastics, wrestling, athletics, weightlifting and the winter sports?
Complain about this comment
Indiananalyst,
The world sporting championships to which I refered include:rowing world cups, Cycling world cups and championships, boxing european amatuer and world championships,Athletics indoor and outdoor world championships,etc, while Britain began 2008 with 7 world professional boxing championships.
Britain performed well in all these -and other-championships in 2006-8
and it was on the basis of these results that American olympic committee member Steve Roush and an Italian statistician predicted that Britain would come fourth at Beijing.
You can find the Italian's finding in a blog by BBCcorrespondent Matt slater on the Ashes.
you ask about Britain's stature as an Athletics power.
at Beijing the finished equal eighth in a sport in which more countries compete than in any other. after Russia,they were the leading European natioand Britain's men won the European athletics cup in 2008, doing quite well in the medals and placings table in IAAf world indoor and outdoor champonships-see IAAf website for details.
Britain won a bronze in a male gymnastic discipline at Beijing and Beth Tweddle who finished fourth in a womans gymnastic discipline won a world championships gold before Beijing where injury hampered her prformance.
I believe that Andrew Murray is within he worlds top ten at tennis.
It seem to me that you are setting mposible standards by which to judge Britain's sporting stature and potential. No country excells at all sports;most excell in core sports.
How many boxing medals did the USA,Australia or Germany win in Beijing,for example?
You write that Britains olympic all time postion in medal table rests on early 20th acheivements but should note the trend between 2008-2008.
Complain about this comment
Of course no country excels in all sports. When did I ever say that? But success at the highest level over several sports should count for something because that's what reflects all-round sporting prowess. Britain is catching up no doubt with the top contenders but isn't there yet. You mentioned cycling and rowing. Yes, Britain is perhaps the leading nation in those two sports. Not sure about most others though. You mentioned the amateur boxing championships. Well in the last worlds in Chicago in '07, Russia topped the medals tally with 3 Golds and 8 medals followed by Italy, US and China. England came in joint 5th. Cuba didn't participate. And in the last IAAF (athletics) worlds, USA, Russia and Kenya were the top three finishers. So it's still sit-down sports where Britain's been dominating. :)
Complain about this comment
indiananalyst
You seem to have missed my key point.
you originally stated that britains undisputed dominance in a number of sports did not entitle Britain to be regarded as a world sporting power.
I replied that in addition to sports that britain clearly dominates britain als performs creditably in several other sports the results of which Ireferred to in an earlier comment.
This record entitles britain to be considered a world sporting power.
You ask above 'When did Isay that a country should excel in all sports' to be regarded as a world sporting power, or words to that effect.
The tenor of your earlier post and the current one suggests that you must believe that for britain to be regarded as a world sporting power it must excell at all sports;otherwise you would accept that outright doinance in a number of sports and creditable performances in others entitles Britain to be regarded as a world sporting power.
If Britain does not deserve to be so regarded,then who does? Only the USA,Russia and China?
France,Italy,Germany or Japan,though only Italyof these won agold in the world sport of athletics,with Germany,a nation of 80 millions winning only a solitary bronze?
with regard to Cuban boxing-how many golds did Cuba win in boxing in Beijing? the same number as USA,Germany,Australia and Japan-none.
Your reference to 'siting down sports' leads me to suspect that although you declare yourself to be an 'analyst' there is more than a hint of subjectivity in your comments.
Are we dealing with post colonial sour grapes here?
Complain about this comment
Nah, no sour grapes. Britain is far superior to India when it comes to sporting matters. My point is this:
All the top sporting nations excel in their core sports. Britain does too. But there are at least 5 nations who perform creditably in more number of sports besides their core sports than Britain.
Britain put together is a strong sporting entity but not yet a powerhouse. My opinion.
Complain about this comment
Indian analyst,
i think tat you need to achieve greater clarity in your definitions and terminology.
you say that there are five nations that perform more creditably than Britain beyond core sports. I take it that you mean China,USA,Russia,Germany and Australia?
Even if one were to accept Germany and Australia in this list for the sake of argument-though this is highly debatable-this still leaves Britain within the worlds top ten sporting nations.
Its diifficult to say why you originally wrote that Britain is not a world sporting power,unless you feel such status depends on excelling in all sports,though I note that you now concede that 'Britain is a strong sporting entity' but go on to say 'not yet a power house'
Whats the difference between a 'world sporting power' and a 'strong sporting entity'?
Are Germany and Australia -who both secured less golds and less medals of any colour than Britain in Beijing so far ahead of Britain that they belong to the rarified categoy of 'powerhouse'?
Do they really belong in the same category as China ,Russia, and USA,
rather than on a par with Britain,or slightly behind Britain?
Remember Germany's poor record in Athletics,a truely world sport and its lack of achievement in boxing,another world sport;remember Australia's lack of achievement in the latter sport,too
Complain about this comment
At The Seaside
(1)
When I was down beside the sea
A wooden spade they gave to me
To dig the sandy shore.
(2)
The holes were empty like a cup
In every hole the sea camp up,
Till it could come no more.
-----by age of conan
Complain about this comment
#157, you said you were "curious to know whether China would have topped the Soviet Union had that nation still existed? China has 5 times the population of the former-Soviet states put together and several times more state funding and far superior infrastructure."
Well, don't forget, the former USSR states all together get to enter multiple times more athletes than China for each event.
If medal counts have to be due proportional to the size of country, then the number of athletes for any given event must be proportional per a country's population as well, rather than the same for all countries regardless of size. If China were allowed to enter 5 times the number of athletes per event as the former USSR states, and then China might top them in the medal count; and of course India must be allowed to enter 15 cricket teams versus one for UK if cricket were to become an Olympic event, since India?s population is about 15 times that of UK. But, but alas, IOC will have to increase the total medal count to at least 5,000 just to make any direct proportionality (remotely) statistically possible, and the games will have to go on for 2 months.
And in order to have perfect proportionality, the per capita income would have to be same for all countries, as well as funding and public support. And of course the racial composition of each country must be similar as well -- in this PC age, it might be a bit of a taboo to talk about this, but there is no denying that sprinting and diving favour vastly different body types and abilities. (Of course, training can narrow the gaps, and there are always exceptions within any group of people, and with people becoming more and more racially mixed, the lines will become more and more blur. But for the foreseeable future, one's genetic heritage matters a great deal when it comes to sports and the type of sports.) And finally and perhaps more importantly, all nations must have the same drive for winning, hard work, the desire for excellence, and risk and reward, etc.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS