- 5 Aug 08, 08:20 AM
There is no predicting what will happen at an Olympic Games. But that's no reason not to try.
I've spent a lot of time writing reports about British athletes doing incredibly well in a wide variety of events this year, so when UK Sport announced they'd be happy with 35 medals in Beijing (41 at a push), that seemed almost unambitious to me. Clearly sports minister Gerry Sutcliffe agrees - he wants GB to meet, or exceed that target.
I turned to Luciano Barra, an expert at this kind of thing. As a former head of the Italian Olympic Committee, Barra has spent much of his life immersed in four-year Olympiads.
Having taken a step back in the wake of the 2006 Winter Olympics, Barra devotes his time to maintaining a spreadsheet which pools every single world championship result, in order to estimate the Olympic medal tally. He seemed like a good person to call.
When I phoned him up, he was only too happy to explain how he was sat by the side of his swimming pool in glorious Tuscany sunshine - but he did happen to have his chart in front of him.
Let me tell you, Mr Barra knows that chart, and all the nations and sports within it, inside out.
Barra insists these are projections, not predictions - in other words, he's taking data from past world championships and working out what would happen if those results are repeated. He's not saying this is what will happen.
But if Britain's world champions hold on to their lofty positions in Beijing, GB should come home with a rather more enjoyable figure of 48 medals - 18 of them gold, enough to elevate the British to fourth place in Barra's projected medal table. (It's gold medals, not total medals, that decide the rankings, conveniently for Britain.)
You probably need a bit of time on your hands, by the side of a Tuscany swimming pool, to keep on top of that spreadsheet. When I had a couple of hours to find the results of every world championship leading up to Beijing (before I'd had the chance to inspect Barra's version), that proved tricky enough. Trying to "quickly" do the same for world championships held before Athens, by way of comparison, was definitely a challenge.
If you think everything you could ever want to know is now easily accessible on the internet, think again. (Though admittedly, you may never have wanted to know the results from the 2003 World Taekwondo Championships.)
Then there's the small matter of what actually counts as a world championship.
I spent ages staring at Luciano Barra's tables, wondering why on earth my calculations were a few medals out from his, before I realised we were counting different sailing world titles.
The International Sailing Federation held its ISAF Worlds competition last year, with entries in all the relevant Olympic classes (Finn, 49er, 470 etc). I counted those in my table.
But - sailing being a weak link in my Olympic knowledge - I had forgotten that each class then held its own world championship, most in early 2008. (Here's an example.) Barra was counting those, and on balance that made more sense, so I swapped.
Sometimes it does pay to double check, though. Having got down the list to slalom canoeing, I realised Barra's calculations included one result from 2006, not 2007, by accident. Sad to say, in noticing this I may have deprived GB of an extra projected silver medal (Fiona Pennie won silver in 2006, but did not reach the podium a year later). So if the British are now pipped by Australia or Germany in Beijing, you can blame me.
I found it very interesting that Barra, with all his experience in an Olympic Committee, seemed so sure UK Sport were deliberately playing down British chances. Do you think 48 medals, or indeed any tally in the 40s, is more likely than their minimum of 35?
And is Barra right to suggest that British track cycling is the weak link in his projection, needing - as they do - a repeat of seven world title-winning performances just to break even?
Update, 0900 BST
Just in case you're interested, here is where Luciano Barra thinks GB will win medals in Beijing, based on world championship results...
Archery
Bronze: Individual men
Silver: Team men
Bronze: Team women
Athletics
Bronze: Men's 4x100m relay
Gold: Women's 400m
Silver: Women's 400m
Bronze: Women's 4x400m relay
Bronze: Heptathlon
Boxing
Gold: Lightweight
Bronze: Light welterweight
Bronze: Bantamweight
Canoeing
Bronze: Slalom men's K1
Silver: Slalom women's K1 (2006 result)
Silver: Flatwater men's K1 500m
Gold: Flatwater men's K1 1000m
Cycling
Gold: BMX women
Gold: Men's individual pursuit
Gold: Men's team pursuit
Gold: Men's sprint
Silver: Men's team sprint
Gold: Men's madison
Gold: Men's keirin
Gold: Women's individual pursuit
Gold: Women's sprint
Equestrian
Gold: Individual three-day event
Silver: Team three-day event
Gymnastics
Bronze: Men's pommel horse
Bronze: Women's trampoline
Judo
Bronze: Men's 81kg
Silver: Men's 100kg
Modern pentathlon
Bronze: Women
Rowing
Bronze: Men's lightweight double scull
Bronze: Men's coxless pairs
Gold: Men's lightweight coxless four
Bronze: Men's eight
Bronze: Women's double scull
Gold: Women's quadruple scull
Bronze: Women's eight
Sailing
Gold: Men's 470
Gold: Men's Finn
Bronze: Women's Laser Radial
Gold: Women's Yngling
Silver: 49er
Swimming
Bronze: Men's 1500m freestyle
Bronze: Men's 100m backstroke
Silver: Women's 200m breaststroke
Silver: Women's 10km open water
Triathlon
Gold: Women
About this blog
Links to the blogs of all the contributors can be found below.
For the latest updates across BBC blogs,
visit the Blogs homepage.
Subscribe to Olympics
You can stay up to date with Olympics via these feeds.
Olympics Feed(RSS)
Olympics Feed(ATOM)
If you aren't sure what RSS is you'll find our beginner's guide to RSS useful.
London 2012
London 2012 from the BBC
Get the latest from the BBC's home of London 2012: News, sport, Olympic torch relay, Festival 2012 and more.
Olympics headlines
Visit the BBC Sport website
Visit the Olympics index
London 2012
London 2012 from the BBC
Get the latest from the BBC's home of London 2012: News, sport, Olympic torch relay, Festival 2012 and more.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
The idea of a politician setting targets in sport is repulsive. Why should there even be a Minister for Sport?
Complain about this comment
Technically, Gerry Sutcliffe did not set the target - UK Sport set the target.
But then, UK Sport is accountable to Parliament, and the appointment of its board members rests with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport.
So it could be argued that the government indirectly set this target, but Mr Sutcliffe probably had little, if any, say in it.
Complain about this comment
Bronze in the lightweight but nothing in the heavyweight 4-?
Complain about this comment
Sorry, Gold I mean....
Complain about this comment
Quote from the above; "I turned to Luciano Barra, an expert at this kind of thing"
Quite strange that an expert didn't pick Phillips Idowu for a medal despite him having the best jump this year??
It does beg the question, where do the beeb get thier experts from and what else do they waste our money on!!
Complain about this comment
No medal in the Women's Marathon. Paula will be disappointed.
Complain about this comment
Following on from Andy Part....Christian Olsen is also out of the triple jump so surely Phillips is in with a shout?.....to be fair to him, maybe the sun was shining on the laptop screen by the side of the pool in tuscany and the triple jump row was obscured on his excel spreadsheet.
Complain about this comment
so, the sports minister 'demands' 41 medals does he?
isn't his job to provide facilities and incentives so more people can get involved in sport? Athletes goals should be left to the athletes and their coaches
Complain about this comment
Andy (5) - Slightly missing the point. Idowu may be world indoor champion, but he is not the world outdoor champion, therefore cannot figure in Barra's projections.
His expertise lies in amassing a wealth of information on world championships in all the Olympic sports, then extrapolating results from that. He is not making a prediction by sticking his finger in the air, he's using hard data.
He knows as well as anyone that every world champion will not defend their title, but it's about the best gauge you can get for quickly assessing a nation's performance in Olympic sports.
The only money spent would be the cost of the call to Tuscany (I tried to keep it brief), although Mr Barra may lament the lost time in his pool!
Complain about this comment
Barra - the ultimate statto...
Is seems Mr Barra doesn't see Mr Idowu's chances as that great...though of course, he was basing his predictions on past outcomes - and Idowu, until recently, just hadn't figured...( that's another medal then to add to the list )...
On a more serious note - not sure how I feel about the strong links between politics and sport...
Is it healthy? Is it healthy to have the sporting bodies and the sporting fraternity in general to have to answer to politicians, more precisely, to the political establishment? ( May be not directly - but certainly as a result of and through the funding mechanisms and structures in place...)
May be its just something that has to be accepted - where lottery money is concerned, there has to be some degree of accountability...
But mixing sport and politics seems sinister to me!!!
Look at London 2012 - LOL...
Come on the 'Jing'...
Complain about this comment
"Barra devotes his time to maintaining a spreadsheet which pools every single world championship result"......no mention of indoor or outdoor in the above
Complain about this comment
Garthy - outdoor world champs for athletics are used, on the basis that track and field events at the Games are outdoors (at Beijing at least... have they ever been indoors? Even Mr Countdown himself, Pete Scrivener, had to think about that one but suggests not). I should have made that a little more clear, apologies.
Complain about this comment
There are several obvious flaws in the projection. Christine Ohurogu is never going to win gold at the olympics, Shanaze Read is only competing in the BMXnot the track so that's another to strike off. Hopefully as many athletes will get unexpected golds to cancel those who don't replicate their performance. I think that 15 Golds is a decent target.
Complain about this comment
There's not much science to this is there? He's got us winning medals based on world championships where the best in the world this year didn't compete!
Surely it's not too difficult to factor in that Sanya Richards didn't run in Osaka, thus repeating our Gold and Silver there isn't going to happen. Preusmably he's got Carolina Kluft down to win the Heptathlon which is why Sotherton's only due the bronze.
Rebecca Adlington has the fastest times in the world this year for the 800m freestyle, but will apparently finish outside the medals.
Can you do me two favours; one, ask any old bookie next time you want info like this, and two, where can you find out if Mr Barra is on bet fair, I could use some drinking money
Complain about this comment
I had seen about Barra's predictions before but I thought they involved a lot more statistical analysis including looking at world ranking, previous olympic performance, home nation factors etc. but it seems he simply regurgitates world championship results. Very simplistic and a bit dissapointing if I'm honest. I hope most other commentators continue to think double figure golds is a success rather than raising the bar too high, especially as I can't see us doing too well in the first week of competition.
Complain about this comment
355gts - I think that's exactly the point. There are obvious flaws because it's such a rigid mechanic that it can't account for athletes dropping out of an event, or athlete quotas, or anything like that.
But at the same time that applies for every athlete and every nation and, as you say, unexpected performances are not factored in.
Complain about this comment
I expect the BBC's coverage of the Olympic to have a bias towards swimming and athletics. Cover of the sailing, canoeing, judo, shooting, archery boxing, cycling etc will be slipped in between ideal chit chat from the presenters about near misses in running and swimming, 2 sports we are unlikely to win anything but the odd medal.
Come on BBC lets concentrate on the sports we are good at and not the ones we are not and never likely to be.
Complain about this comment
As has been pointed out these ARE NOT PREDICTIONS but are PROJECTIONS based on converting recent World Medal results to Olympic Medals.
As some have pointed out we will likely to get medals which weren't won at any recent World Championship and the Cycling Team do have a tall order to repeat the fantastic Medal Haul of the World Championship in Manchester. We won't have home advantage this time (but next time we will!!).
Why not use the PROJECTED along with your personal PREDICTIONS to work out your PREDICTED GB Medal Haul.
Complain about this comment
Cerberus - as a particular fan of the canoeing, and the modern pentathlon come to that, I assure you there will be plenty of attention afforded to sports aside from the likes of athletics and swimming. Cycling, especially, should be a huge event for British interests.
Complain about this comment
An 'Olympic Medal Target' is an utterly ridiculous concept and symbolic of this government's mania with meaningless statistics. What will happen if we fail to meet the targets? Will the athletes be fired? Will they have their funding cut or be made to do punishment runs instead? Or will the 'minister' do the decent thing and fall on his sword? In fact could I propose politicians falling on their swords as an event for the next Olympics - I know I would watch it...
Complain about this comment
"The idea of a politician setting targets in sport is repulsive." Yes, but the great thing from an MP's viewpoint is that someone else that has to chase the target, and so someone else can take the blame. Like hospital waiting lists or SAT tests. (Moderator, omit this post if I'm widening the subject too far.) But for child poverty or global warming, where government action could be a major influence, targets are so loose and long-term that by the time we fail to meet them they'll have been changed and/or forgotten. For a politician setting targets, sports are a nice safe option.
Complain about this comment
What about tennis, andy murray is surely worth a medal.
Complain about this comment
So if this generation of olympians doesn't match some medal target plucked out of thin air then the next generation will be punished for it by having all their funding and infrastructure chopped away? Is that really the message the money-men are putting out?
Surely even the most bone-headed government minister must realise it takes more than 4 years to get a talented kid trained up to win olympic medals?
We have stepped up hugely since our 1 gold in Atlanta, and whether or not we get 35 medals this time, we'll easily have our most successful recent games in terms of finalists and top 5 finishes, so chopping funding right before we host the damn games is stupidity of the highest order.
Surely what they should be looking at when deciding whether to continue funding is how well our juniors are doing and whether there is sufficient strength in depth in the squads that we can cope with some no-shows. I very much doubt the tick-in-the-box bean counters can cope with such woolly concepts.
Complain about this comment
Another target set by this Labour Government... lets hope that team GB doesn't have too many bureaucrats in the Olympic village to check up on the targets!
Complain about this comment
Barra literally just took the results from last years world championships and translated them into the Olympics. E.g. Nicola Sanders won silver in the 400m last year and so this Olympiad Britain will win silver in the 400m again. It has nothing to do with current form, few would predict Sanders silver again and those athletes who have improved considerably, or events where top athletes were missing, were not taken into account proving quite inaccurate.
Complain about this comment
Regarding comment from cesarvillapando at 10.54am today, very refreshing to have a sensible view on sport funding.
In terms of facilities funding, I understand that Sport England will now perform the role of monitoring National Governing Bodies' funding allocations with the funding decisions made by each sport rather than by Sport England.
I believe that this is a big move forward and that clubs rather than schools are where the sustainabilty of sport is managed.
The crucial age for sport in terms of society and maybe for Olympics medals is 16-24 and this is where clubs come to the fore.
And why don't we have Rugby 7s at the Olympics? A great spectator sport.
Complain about this comment
I think the comments about funding are more aimed at the funding provided to individual athletes, i.e. you're receiving all this funding, if you don't produce the goods it will be redirected elsewhere. This seems appropriate to me, we don't want to continue throwing good money after bad on people that aren't performing. Incentivising the process is the only way to ensure value for money.
Complain about this comment
Does Nicole Cooke not figure at all despite her phenomenal record?
Complain about this comment
Very optimistic! Golds I believe that will not materialise
Complain about this comment
Barra obviously reckons that Paula Ratcliffe won't have recovered fully from injury. We shall see, but her bravery should not be in doubt. She got a lot of flak after Athens that she didn't deserve if you understand what actually went wrong, and she was courageous enough to try another event at short notice. This time she is risking running without enough time to get fully fit. Support her, win or lose! If anyone doubts that she is the best, look at her times when she is fit.
Complain about this comment
Some comments above question Mr Barra for not picking certain individuals for medals. Remember that he hasn't 'picked' anyone based on his opinion of them, every medal he has 'picked' is based on performances at the last world championships for each sport (e.g. Philips Idowu doesn't feature). I may be wrong but it is likely that Mr Barra creates a database like this for every major sporting nation, and probably has very little knowledge of each individual and teams chances this time around. Still, an interesting spreadsheet!
Complain about this comment
Excellent, nothing like publishing an article to get everyone's hopes wildly overinflated. If they're projections based on the World championships, and not predictions for Beijing, then what's the point? Did he factor in what happened at the football World Cup in Germany as a guide for what will happen in Beijing, even though almost none of the same players will be taking part.
I like this quote from the original article: "I indicate 48 medals for Britain - it does not mean they will win 48, they could win less or more," Barra told BBC Sport.
Wow, with that kind of insight this guy must be a certified genius. Another 26 pence of licensee fee wasted.
Complain about this comment
Performance projections are a good idea but Barra's approach is not the answer for benchmarking.
Sports funding relies on a large chunk of sponsorship money given solely on the basis that the sportsmen and women perform well, hog the limelight and promote their brands (or maybe just for looking beautiful). If they didn't do that, they wouldn't get the deals.
Taxpayers want to see great sportsman get the funding they deserve and the underperformers getting canned, and they are right to demand performance-related investment just as sponsors do. If you don't perform, the funding dries up. It spurs the athletes on and provides incentive for those trying to break upwards. It's meritocractic - surely that's fair...
Now we all want to see our competitors do well and achieve their potential and beyond, so we do need a reality check here. Not all of our athletes are going to be gold medallists so we should be easily able to judge performances based on current rankings. If an athlete badly underperforms their current "seeding" they should expect to be slated (certainly the press take no prisoners) and any athlete who outperforms their "seeding" should be commended regardless of whether they come 1st, 5th or 28th. This approach would encourage progression and a sense of achievement for all competitors. It would also help to decide how the sports kitty is better redistributed.
Introduce us to seedings and then we can make informed judgements. Barra's approach is obviously crude but surely UK Sport has a certain expectation level for each member of its team. In this modern age where we, the spectator, demand all the information and data at our fingertips, a seeding system would enable us to make a rational assessment of our team, rather than simply ranting and screaming at the TV when we don't haul in medals.
Come on Team GB we're right behind you!
Complain about this comment
Let's see the Government supporting sport, and not just "expecting" medals.
How can you say 3 days before the Olympics starts - We expect 41 medals. It's like not helping your kids and just before the exams saying "You'd better get 10 'A's".
(Am I cynical or is Gerry Sutcliffe passing the blame from himself to the athletes, should they fail).
It's about 2-4 years too late to make a comment like that, based on the training needed.
The athletes hard training is done now and now all they've got to go on is inspired by personal psychological belief, team belief and supporters.
Surely the point is to say - However many medals we win this time we need to build on it by supporting sport: setting money aside and instigating a PLAN.
Complain about this comment
Thanks Ollie, I found this really interesting. Clearly the projections are not going to be completely accurate, but it is worth noting that Barra's "projections correctly ranked Britain 10th in 2004". I think a number of the people who have commented on this need to go back and read the article properly.
Overall it is encouraging that Britain are clearly showing signs of improvement across a wide range of sports, and I'm looking forward to seeing them win a lot of medals in Beijing!
Complain about this comment
18 Golds for GB...that feels seriously unreal but then again a few years back the idea of a guy who was only in GP2 winning the 2008 Formula 1 World Championship was pie in the sky!
Personally, I'll settle for top 10 though. Mr Barra's methods don't look that reliable.
Complain about this comment
Now the Government is setting targets for the Olympic Games.
The Olympic flame is all but extinguished thanks to drugs and politics.
Time for a change in maxim for our athletes:
It's not winning, but rising above drug cheats and political spin that counts.
Complain about this comment
So the Government Minister for sport demands that our sports men and women meet their targets. ok, all for a balanced viewpoint.
I demand that the government meet it's inflation target - fairs fair.
Why this last minute pressure, are they preparing the way to cut funding for this and other bodies, to pay for the latest £500m loss of the Northern Rock fiasco.
We concentrate so much on targets for things which are notoriously unpredictable, when a false start in a race, an injury in a long jump, an unfancied competitor having their performance of a lifetime can easily wreck the best laid plans.
And heaven forbid what happens if we miss this target, our sporting heroes dragged through goverment investigative commisions? fundings cut, calls for heads to roll?
We have sports men and ladies who work fanatically hard at what they do, taking their hearts and minds to lengths the average person couldn't get near. They have a will to win second to none, and would give everything to win for their country.
And we have a minister for sport who sits behind a desk demanding targets. Ok, goverment just keep me informed on your inflation target, same deadline three weeks.
Complain about this comment
Surel we should be aiming for as many medals as possible, rather than setting a target (which is based on World Champ performance).
The problem in this country isn't underfunding - we fund our athletes very well - it's the lack of competitive spirit instilled in our children whilst they are at school. When I was at school we had a sports day where you competed for your house, and won a trophy. It was full on competition! Now, in order to get all children involved, there appears to be no competitive sportsdays, only inclusive ones (i.e. where all children are encouraged to particpate, and there are no prizes). Whilst this method maybe beneficial for encouraging a fit and healthy nation, it does not encourage the competitiveness that, for example, American children have.
Complain about this comment
Guys! You seem to be missing the point about this article!
It's a bit of fun, the title is "The Olympic Projection Game"!
Of course, the predictions are never going to be entirely correct, but its about getting behind our athletes, getting our heads into the Olympic frame of mind. How many medals can we hope for? That's what this projection does, it gives hope - yes based on assumptions, but you only need to look at the predictions for the 2004 games, and Barra wasn't very far off!
And on politics and the demand for hitting medal targets. Two things:
a) The amount of money that goes into training and elite sports men and women is a huge amount. It brings benefits to the country, and helps develop younger athletes and facilities for the future.
If the UK doesn't achieve success, it looks bad and seems like a waste of money, and that IS important.
and..
b) Those of you who do sport - if you are at all competetive you will go into a competition thinking about your individual target. It is no different for a football team, or and equestrian team...you've got to have a target - it gives you that competetive edge.
It is just the same for Team GB, they have that medal target, and they can all be working together, urging each other on.
So a demand for medal tallys is good for the athletes, good for the UK image, good for the future of UK sport....all very necessary.
Finally, Ollie, excellent article as always. Glad to see that the Beeb IS putting money into journalism like this - it is both interesting and entertaining and a pleasure to read.
Thanks.
Complain about this comment
I like the notion that Chris Hoy is sitting at home now, reading the BBC website and thinking, Oh, well if Mr Sutcliffe demands, I'll put down this cup of tea and get back to the rollers in the garage...
Complain about this comment
Thanks Ollie. I am depressed at the number of respondants who are simply incapable of properly reading the article before having a rant, so can't imagine how you feel!
The World Championship list is always useful information for Australian (and more cynical British) friends who are brought up to believe that we are hopeless.
Any chance of knocking up a bit of a TV guide to when these finals are won and lost?
Complain about this comment
I agree with those thinking the target being set is a little too low. Obviously the likelihood is that we will do better in some sports than expected, and vice versa. That will hopefully give us between 12 and 15 gold medals. To my mind, that would be a job well done.
Interesting to read in an Australian paper that they are seriously worried that GB will go ahead of them for 4th position these games. Consequently questions are being asked about the funding being provided by the Australian government which is currently very small compared to the UK's lottery funding programme.
As an aside and looking ahead to 2012, it was disappointing not to read anywhere in the papers of our success in the Junior European Swimming Championships where we ended up with 10 gold medals, a long way ahead of Russia on 6.
These sports need to be accountable for the massive investments being made. I'm happy for that and look forward to the Bejing games showing the returns on those investments and the added motivation it will create for us to do even better in 2012.
Complain about this comment
everybody calm down, if any of you get your hands on the latest Sports Illustrated mag from America, they go through every event and predict 1st, 2nd and 3rd for that event, they have GB 7th overall with 12 gold, 15 silver and 8 bronze, total 35 medals, so your govt predictions are pretty good, I would imagine most countries have expectations by the govt as they generally set the funs for the athletes,
sports illustrated top seven
usa, 45 gold, 44 s, 32 b, 121 medals
china, 49, 28, 25, 102 medals
russia, 25, 28, 22, 75 medals
australia, 22, 14, 18, 54 medals
germany, 15,16, 17, 48 medals
france, 15, 9, 17, 38 medals
Team GB, 12, 15, 8, 35 medals
Complain about this comment
I am fully supportive of Gerry Sutcliffe (and I don’t say that often about many ministers in this Government) and his insistence on return on investment. If we do not want sports to be politicised, fine, but please stop coming round with the begging bowl asking for UK taxpayers hard earned money to be spent on sports facilities, equipment and coaching. Go it alone and enjoy your hobby in a true spirit of amateurism. How many other people have their hobby paid for from Government funding? How many fell walkers have their boots bought for them, or how many anglers are given a lift to the riverbank in a free minibus? For years we have heard the whinging that the reason our sports men and women are so valiantly useless is that, as a country, we don’t care, we under-invest in their future etc. And that we need to encourage them as their success will provide the country with some sort of “Feel Good Factor”. Fine – they have had their cash, while many other causes in the UK have gone without support, while our hospitals, policing and welfare state have gone to pot. So now we should demand to “Feel Good” and that means bringing back gold from Beijing. So “Well Done” Jerry, put these guys and Girls under pressure, (no doubt we have funded a team of sports psychologists to help them cope with it). I only wish he had gone further and suggested that No Gold means no more money.
Complain about this comment
hedropsforglory (42) - We thought of that! Coming very soon to BBC Sport's website, our guide to where the medals will be won and lost each day.
Complain about this comment
Hemsk01 - lots of non sports people have their hobbies subsidised by the lottery, just about anyone with a constituted organisation promoting an activity can apply for grants.
Furthermore, if a successful olympics persuades more youngsters to get off the streets (or their backsides) and try some new sports in the new sporting facilities this money's paid for, then maybe it'll even pay for itself when our next generation doesn't turn into a bunch of Jim Royles and cost the NHS millions with their unhealthy lifestyles.
Complain about this comment
What utter nonsense!
The idea of government targets for the Olympics is odious, and the attempt to predict such successes ridiculous.
Just let the competitors get on with it. In a few weeks we'll know who the medal contenders were.
Complain about this comment
I will however agree with you that the provision of sporting facilities after an Olympics could lead to a healthier nation. I hope that the youth of London enjoy the 5 new venues being built for 2012 (17 out of 22 are either existing or temporary). Here in Scotland we have hosted two recent Commonwealth Games and their legacy is for all to behold, Meadowbank is filled every weekend with happy children throwing the discus, and jogging tenK, and the Commonwealth Pool is overflowing with aspiring Sharron Davies breaking their PBs. Oh hang on, Meadowbank is being knocked down, the Pool is empty and we are still the most unhealthy nation in Europe.
I am sorry but just by providing the facilities, all we are doing is leading the horse to water (no pun intended). What we need to do first is focus our resources on education, that teaches our children (and adults) that exercise is a vital part of daily life, which can be achieved with nothing more than a road to run on or patch of grass for a game of Jumpers for Goalposts.
This all means that we are back to the Feel Good factor – which I have paid for, and want.
Complain about this comment
Cesarvillapando thanks for your help with the lottery application, however since I am not Lord Coe, and do not have a team of legal eagles to help me, I am disadvantaged by not even understanding your criteria for who can receive funding, let alone filling out the application (yes I have tried in the past, and I can assure you that it is not that easy).
I will however agree with you that the provision of sporting facilities after an Olympics could lead to a healthier nation. I hope that the youth of London enjoy the 5 new venues being built for 2012 (17 out of 22 are either existing or temporary). Here in Scotland we have hosted two recent Commonwealth Games and their legacy is for all to behold, Meadowbank is filled every weekend with happy children throwing the discus, and trotting tenK, and the Commonwealth Pool is chockerblock with aspiring Sharron Davies breaking their PBs. Oh hang on, Meadowbank is being knocked down, the Commy Pool is empty and we are still the most unhealthy nation in Europe.
I am sorry but just by providing the facilities, all we are doing is leading the horse to water (no pun intended). What we need to do first is focus our resources on education, that teaches our children (and adults) that exercise is a vital part of daily life, which can be achieved with nothing more than a road to run on or patch of grass for a game of Jumpers for Goalposts.
This all means that we are back to the Feel Good factor – which I have paid for, and want.
Complain about this comment
I think Barra sits by an oudoor pool when looking at his spreadsheet. I know I would. In the Tuscan sunshine.
Complain about this comment
have these predicitions merely been made on the results of the world championships and not on form? considering bbc have a large amount of money (mainly through us in the form of tv license and false phone in competitions!) you would like to believe they could employ better researched "Experts"! Phillips Idowu? on form the best triple jumper in the world this year AND Ollson is injured AND he is most respectable bookmakers favourite for the gold? that list actually angered me!
Complain about this comment
Hemsk, perhaps you think we would be better investing in a top quality masking agent for results that hit the feel good factor spot, fast?
We should measure our olympic success based on targets arisng from a long term strategy and not against current form, which already accounts for recent investment.
Complain about this comment
"There's been massive investment in professional elite sport, the opportunity for athletes to concentrate on their sport and do really well.
"These are very tough contracts between UK Sport and the individuals concerned,"
Gerry Sutcliffe
From this I assume that the expectation of these results has been in place for a while, I doubt the Contracts have been drawn up in the last 2 weeks, but have been in place for a lot longer than the press is now reporting. It would also account for the disparity between the Government's target and that which Mr Barra believes is achievable.
I totally agree that we should not set these targets one week before go-live but it appears they are in place and I agree wholeheartedly in enforcing financial penalty should they fail to be achieved.
Complain about this comment
Another thought -
Would it be better to predict (not project) a very low number, say 10 or 20 medals total, based on the projections and the fact that there are lots of unknowns, like breathing in air that's equivalent to smoking 70 a day.
Surely this would inspire the athletes more.
If they meet and then manage to exceed a lowish target, they're going to give a lot more...
Let's face it there's a great deal of expectation placed on the athletes, based on the projections. Surely now, just before and during the event, is when they need to be as relaxed and focused as possible.
Most of the athletes already place huge expectations on themselves. Just listen to their comments after recent events where they competed disappointingly or only up-to expectation...
Of course I'd love to see team GB come away with 70 medals!
Complain about this comment
How the hell did you miss Rebecca Addlington in the swimming 800 metres free?
You guys have really got your finger on the pulse haven't you.
Get your act together, some of us know our sports and know our up and coming stars.
If you keep reporting like this, I'll stick to the official olympic site or even the Daily Mail.
Complain about this comment
AFormerRower - I know what you mean but I'm not sure setting low targets leads to an improvement in quality... just ask anyone who's accused the BBC of "dumbing down" over the last decade, or
Tomred (and several others) - please, please have a proper read first. Adlington and others have not been "missed".
This is simply a projection based on world championship results, so some athletes are missed out, for better or for worse. But given this method got Britain's position in the medal table spot on in Athens, it's interesting to inspect its conclusions this time around.
Nobody is saying this WILL happen, or that this is exactly what BBC Sport THINKS will happen - but it indicates a very positive trend in British sport in the last four years. Going into Athens we were predicted 9 golds, this time it's 18. The method is rough and ready but I think the doubling of that figure remains an incredibly healthy sign.
Complain about this comment
Apologies, managed to post the above comment before I'd finished writing it... as I was going to say in the first paragraph, it's like "dumbing down" or A levels or anything like that. If you are perceived to have set a lower target, you will be judged by that, and it isn't necessarily conducive to a better performance, even in adverse conditions.
Witness the sailing team, who initially DID set a lower target (three gold medals, despite the expected target of five). They've since bumped that up to four, which I think was the right thing to do.
Complain about this comment
Ollie W -
If you are going to print something make it up to date and sensible.
Most of us can see the flaws.
Do me a favour; ask me to bask in the tuscan sunshine and build a spreadsheet for you.
I can even build databases.
I'm excellent at Business Intelligence (2007 award winner), which you and the beeb seem to lack.
Complain about this comment
People complaining about the predictions are missing the point. There is no judgement involved in compiling the list - it is merely listing the events in which the current world champion (or runner up, or 3rd placed athlete) is British. The interesting thing is how good a predictor this is - I think averaged over the whole olympics the numbers will work out pretty similar, for example I think Britain will win 1 athletics gold, but it is more likely to be Idowu than Oruhuogu. I have Britain down for 14 or 15 golds.
Complain about this comment
#44 i read that piece by sports illustrated. Its shocking what they think we will achieve, one solitary medal at Track and Field (in idowu gold), Hoy losing the sprint in cycling, no golds in the pool, one gold in rowing, etc.
Ask any fan of an individual sport and he will tell you how many medals that Britain should hope to achieve. For cyclist fans, its 8 Golds. For athletics fans, Gold for idowu, a spattering of silver and bronzes elsewhere, and this pattern continues.
Group those together, and i've always felt a target of 15-18 golds is realistic, especially with half of those golds coming from cycling fans. A prediction of 12 golds is negative, especially when considering that there could well be an increase of 5-8 golds in track cycling. If that happened, 12 golds overall would be a massive failure.
Complain about this comment
Not that I'm surprised, but there is no mention of the strong possibility of at least a Bronze at the Mens Individual Foil event in fencing for Richard Kruse (UK No 1), especially as Baldini, the favourite for gold, has been barred for doping. There's also a chance (longer odds, I'll admit) of a medal for our female foilist Martina Immanuel.
Complain about this comment
why wouldnt the taekwondo world championships be of interest to anyone?
seen as we have a genuine chance of atleast a medal in sarah stevenson?
quoted at 2-1 in coral bookmakers and if you speak to mr countdown he will tell you that she will stand a very good chance of winning that title...
the 2 time olympic champion in the weight has been beat by her if you check the results of the final of the takwondo championships...
people like yourself who are ignorant to the minor sports annoy me this is the time for these athletes to have their moment in the un and nobody deserves it more than sarah after what she has achieved...
speak to mr clegg he is a massive fan of hers...
i wont expect a reply...
Complain about this comment
Why does Sutcliffe think that it is vital for the medals won to add up to a certain arbitrary meaningless number?
For each comeptitor or team striving for success, it is vital to them that they do well, but it is irrelvent what a combined total of medals is. The medals table is nothing more than a totally worthless set of statistics.
Complain about this comment
Barro is clearly not an expert on every sport! And we don't need to expect him to be. This list is really no more than an idea of where we might expect to get medals from. I personally only know about athletics so when I'm looking at the other sports I don't really care what they tell me in terms of predictions. I would be just as happy looking at this as I would a full on lengthy analysis of our current crop of athletes. It's just a quick sum up of a few athletes we may want to look at... which the BBC will be doing with their daily look at where we might get medals from.
In athletics we have many more 'medal prospects' than have been shown in the list but neither are a given! Isn't it nice to sometimes not know what's going to happen before it does and enjoy the sport as a bit of a surprise sometimes. Not many people would have predicted Kelly Holmes winning 800m and 1500m last time round but it still happened!
If you want some predictions for athletics here are some of our more likely medal contenders based on current form:
400m: Sanders and Ohuruogu - can't be counted out... they weren't exactly in best form in the run up to Osaka last year either
800m: Marilyn Okoro is 4th/5th fastest lining up for Beijing
1500m: Dobriskey has an outside shot of a medal
LJ: Greg Rutherford could medal if he produces a PB like it looks like he should
TJ: Phillips very likely to medal... he should get a PB and win if he raises his game like he did at World indoors. He looks in 18m shape as long as they get rid of the 1m long jump board from the triple jump runway.
Our other two representatives could maybe get the bronze... don't even write off a british 1-2-3 (although it is highly unlikely). May only take 17.30 to medal this year and all three of our athletes are capable of that.
4x100: men and women
4x400: women
Marathon: Radcliffe if she has properly recovered from her injury.
Heptathlon: Kelly Sotherton... recent PB in the long jump and although a blip at the recent trials she should do well at the olympics.
These are all possibilites but none are guaranteed. We are just as likely getting the predictions right here as much as the 'projection' as you never know how people will perform on the day. At least the projection shows the athletes who did manage to hold their nerve and produce at the right time at the world champs which can be more vital than season's bests and whatnot
Complain about this comment
BenisRight
I've seen Cazeneuve's predictions in Sports Illustrated. He does this before every Olympics and is often wrong. (US biased)
Some notable predictions for GBR medals:
Brabants Gold 1000m and silver 500m Kayak, Tancock a silver in 100m Back. Miley bronze 400 IM, Stevenson a bronze in Twaekondo.
Notable non medals.
Nothing for Sotherton or Radcliffe or our 400 m girl (relay too). No gold in boxing- best Gavin a silver, Women Quads beaten by Chinese- one rowing gold, no medals in judo, gymnastics or Badminton.
Still 12 gold with two thirds coming from just sailing and rowing!
Interesting to see if he is right!
Complain about this comment
robster (63) - I totally agree about taekwondo! If you read the above again, I WAS interested in the World Taekwondo Championships, and entirely agree that Sarah Stevenson is a great medal chance.
I also think Aaron Cook has done incredibly well and will hopefully get more attention as the Games go on.
We've got some great photos of the GB taekwondo team in training on Flickr - follow this link:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbcsport/sets/72157603479190452/
I simply said that "2003 World Taekwondo Championships" is probably not the most popular search term on Google right now. Fair?
Complain about this comment
Nothing for Paula?
She is without doubt the greatest athelete that GB has produced since Daily Thompson.
If she runs, she will win!
Complain about this comment
There no way GB will win 7 golds on Track Cycling..the world track champs is alway much weaker then the Olympics games because so many pro-riders care about olympic gold, they don't care about world champs which is hold every year
Complain about this comment
People seem to be all hett up over the targets. It was on the news recently that Sports UK are viewing Beijing as a halfway stage in their developement. Their target is 8th with a target of 4th in London2012.
Please bear this in mind as the target to hit is 8th or better. What has excited people is the comments by people like the US team performance director saying that teamGB is a dark horse for the 4th place on the tables. Not helpful as people are now thinking this is the GB target.
All the lottery funding is based on the 8 years through to London 2012. There is no situation where the money will be removed if Team GB fail to reach targets. It just means they will have to re-think their plans. BTW it is something like £500m over the 8 years (we are half way through). Still time to improve so just be patient.
Complain about this comment
Think you are right about the cycling. I mean the Keirin win was a surprise. One thing is that the GB cycling squad is probably the best prepared squad in the the competitions, which is a new position for us. I mean Australia has always been right up there, but I understand the other countries view TeamGB as the ones to beat.
Isn't Shanaze Read competing in the BMX (a new one to the Olympics surely) and is considered to be ahead of the copmetition?
Complain about this comment
Sorry for the 3rd post in a row, but can the BBC show more of the so called minor sports? For once cycling will be shown more since we have real talent there , but athletics and swimming will basically fill the schedules. Does anyone else get bored after the nth day of swimming and athletics? Zzzzzz! Show some variety. Whitewater Kayaking, modern pentathlon, archery, shooting, judo, tae kwon do, boxing, triathlon, rowing, flatwater kayaking, marathon, walking, equestrian events, rugby, etc. Just leave out football and tennis as these have more important competitions.
Complain about this comment
Gold in Triathlon? Anyone heard of Emma Snowsill? BMX is anyone's guess and watch out for 'Flyin' Ryan Bailey to make a comeback in Cycling and Anna Meares to make a triumphant return in the Sprint from an injury that nearly left her a cripple only months ago. Katie Mactier also looks good in 3000m, hitting form at just the right time.
Also, the Aussie Pursuit team is loaded and will give GB a run for their money. Sailing is also tough to predict and if anything, the Aussies could win gold in up to six events, if you go by recent form.
Re: Adlington in 800m. Chance for medal but Hoff, Ziegler look tough to beat.
Best chance for gold in pool will come in 4x200.
For positives, Team GB will do well in Athletics, much better than Oz. Idowu and Sotherton look good and girls will medal in 400m behind USAs Richards.
Other question mark is how GB athletes will handle the heat and humidity, which is common in Oz.
If GB do beat Aus in medal count, congrats, although I don't think its likely. London 2012, however, is a different story.
Complain about this comment
Want you excuse my bad English, i’m italian but my soul is british.
The thing most important it will be that any British athlete will be not involved in cases of doping; after all the medals that will arrive (I hope for so many, however one more than Athens will be enough) they’ll be welcome. Main point is to work well for a magnificent London 2012. Thanks
Massimo
Complain about this comment
I know these aren't predictions but so far he has only got 2 medal "projections" correct. This calls into question whether Barra should be referred to as an expert. Nobody should really try to project the result of olympic events or any other sporting occasion.
Complain about this comment
As the article made clear it is a projection which the cambridge online dictionary defines as.
To calculate an amount or number expected in the future from information already known:
Which i would say is more empirical than a prediction.
oznunga: no 44.
The Sports Illustrated prediction made me laugh.
The medal tables have always used gold medals won as a means of determining position.
It was either during the Sydney or Athens Olympics when the USA had fallen behind in the Gold count that the 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.
But the table produced by Sports Illustrated as shown suggests that China will win more golds, so for the USA to shown on top they have gone for total medal count.
Bevan_88. no 75.
I have found the projection very useful as a way of keeping track of what to expect, i didn't fancy slogging through every sport to come up with my own projection.
As of 18/8/08 of the 48 medals projected using world championship results.
13 are still to be decided,
19 have failed to medal,
8 have achieved the expected medal,
5 have a better medal,
4 have a lower medal,
10 have medaled when not expected.
We are also guranteed a bronze in the boxing and a silver in the sailing both not expected. And are one for two golds in the cycling which were predicted.
Not bad at all.
Complain about this comment
Yes its not bad at all.
However the reason I critisize is because if you were to have the same success rate as Barro has, in say a business environment (eg you project the profits of departments within an organisation) if 19 of the 47 projections don't do near as well as you projected while other departments do much better, then your employers would probably turn around and sack you because technically it would be pointless using your projections if they are so way off the mark and therefore you wouldn't be an expert.
This guy isn't an expert at projecting results in the olympics and therefore he shouldn't be referred to as an expert and therefore doesn't deserve the money the beeb probably gave him.
As somebody said any person can regurgitate world championship results, whenever I sit down to watch something I think "ooh this guy won a gold in the world championship he must have a chance of a medal" that doesn't make me an expert and it definately doesn't make Barro an expert.
Complain about this comment
Some incorrect predictions in terms of individual medals aside...overall, you can't say Barra hasn't done well here with his charts.
Barra - 18 Gold, 10 Silver, 20 Bronze, 48 overall, 4th place.
Actual - 19 Gold, 13 Silver, 15 Bronze, 47 overall, 4th place.
Currently a much better return than I ever could've hoped for.
Complain about this comment
Yes its good but the Barra's projection of overall medals at the end of the olympics was only validated by the fact that half the medals came from events he didn't project (in our favour), which made up for all the other eventshe got wrong.
When it comes down to being an expert, there should be a bit of accuracy throughout his projections, not just the overall at the end.
Thats like me projecting that in the world cup qualifiers England will win 5 games and specify which games they will win. Then when the world cup qualifiers are finished they have won 5 games, but only one of the games that they won was projected by me. If that happened then I wouldn't consider my projections valid at alland therefore would not refer to myself as an expert.
PS: saying he uses charts is an overstatement, all he did was regurgitate world championship results, I could do that with the help of wikipedia. If he had taken into account things like:
1) Recent performances (Eg season bests)
2) Injuries/withdrawals of opposition (Prior to games beginning)
3) Form compared to opposition's
4) Throw in a luck/good performance range (eg Bronze give or take 2 places)
And I'm pretty sure there could be a formula derived, that could project accurately what would happen in each olympic event. Obviously there will always be incorrect projections but I don't think on the scale that was seen with Barra.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS