• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Curious Olympic stat

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Curious Olympic stat

    There's a curious stat about the Japs and the Aussies.

    44 medals between them so far, but only 3 of them are gold. They can't seem to close the deal!

    Could this point to why the Pacific war in 1945 ran on months longer than the war in Europe, and might still be going on today if not for Enola Gay and her Little Boy?

    #2
    Is it because they are so far from home?

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Doggy Styles View Post
      There's a curious stat about the Japs and the Aussies.

      44 medals between them so far, but only 3 of them are gold. They can't seem to close the deal!

      Could this point to why the Pacific war in 1945 ran on months longer than the war in Europe, and might still be going on today if not for Enola Gay and her Little Boy?
      The Aussies have got their own gold mines - they don't need our impure medals.

      Comment


        #4
        The winners of the pacific war are currently top of the medal table.

        Comment


          #5
          It's cause the Aussies keep coming runners up to Team GB in the cycling and rowing. Muhahahahaha!
          What happens in General, stays in General.
          You know what they say about assumptions!

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Doggy Styles View Post
            There's a curious stat about the Japs and the Aussies.

            44 medals between them so far, but only 3 of them are gold. They can't seem to close the deal!

            Could this point to why the Pacific war in 1945 ran on months longer than the war in Europe, and might still be going on today if not for Enola Gay and her Little Boy?
            What I find weird is that the type of medal is given so much weight in the scoring system, leading to some misleading results. E.g., Russia is only one point behind a third-placed UK at present, yet they're trailing in tenth place, behind North Korea that has less than a fifth of their total points:


            Also, in the all-time medals table, 'Germany' is very highly placed, since their achievements whilst they were a split nation have since been combined. That can't be right. I'm sure many other countries would have higher results too if they'd been allowed to enter two teams for certain events like Gymnastics at points in their history*:









            * That said, splitting the UK into four for the World Cup hasn't done our aggregate stats us much good, now has it?
            Last edited by Gentile; 5 August 2012, 09:58. Reason: typo

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Gentile View Post
              What I find weird is that the type of medal is given so much weight in the scoring system, leading to some misleading results. E.g., Russia is only one point behind a third-placed UK at present, yet they're trailing in tenth place, behind North Korea that has less than a fifth of their total points.
              Ranking on # of golds means ranking on the number of events that country has won. We are miles ahead of the Russians because we've won 14 events so far, the Russians have won 3. It's only if two countries have won the same number of events that the # of silvers becomes a factor, and only if they are equal there do the bronzes come into it.

              It's only misleading if you think the point of sport is finishing 3rd.
              While you're waiting, read the free novel we sent you. It's a Spanish story about a guy named 'Manual.'

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Gentile View Post
                What I find weird is that the type of medal is given so much weight in the scoring system
                Well there is no 'official' scoring system - it's just this way is how the majority of people tend to view it.

                The US mostly use total medals - although cynics would claim this is because they are always top the board under this counting method (they were 2nd to China in 2008 using the Gold-first counting method).

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by doodab View Post
                  Ranking on # of golds means ranking on the number of events that country has won. We are miles ahead of the Russians because we've won 14 events so far, the Russians have won 3. It's only if two countries have won the same number of events that the # of silvers becomes a factor, and only if they are equal there do the bronzes come into it.

                  It's only misleading if you think the point of sport is finishing 3rd.
                  I never thought i would like one of your posts.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Gentile View Post
                    What I find weird is that the type of medal is given so much weight in the scoring system, leading to some misleading results. E.g., Russia is only one point behind a third-placed UK at present, yet they're trailing in tenth place, behind North Korea that has less than a fifth of their total points:
                    Thats simple, because no one remembers who comes second
                    Originally posted by Stevie Wonder Boy
                    I can't see any way to do it can you please advise?

                    I want my account deleted and all of my information removed, I want to invoke my right to be forgotten.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X