I enjoy watching the Olympic events that do not require judges, or urine tests. Always found it difficult to accept the score of some judge or a lab to decide the event and career. Anyway, just read something interesting in The Economist about the Games.
“When the Olympic Games get underway in Bejing on August 8th, the medals tables will be everywhere, and it will have a distinct whiff of the cold war, with major powers dominating – some even say that China will come out on top for the first time.”
At the Athens Olympic Games the top 3 Medal winners were USA 102, CHINA 92 and RUSSIA 63, with Australia and Germany at 49 each, Japan 37, France 33, Italy 32, Korea 30 and UK 30. Not sure about Canada, but Athens was a summer olympics.
The article then goes on to ask the question “What would happen if the population of the countries was taken into account?”
Well, I guessed the answer! Sort of, I figured Jamaica.
Medals per Million of Population: BAHAMAS 6.2, AUSTRALIA 2.4, CUBA 2.4, ESTONIA 2.2, SLOVENIA 2.0, JAMAICA 1.9, etc. No China, USA or Russia in the top 10. Jamaica should be moved up because they have so many running for other countries, like Kenya does. The only country in both top 10s, Australia.
I also just read about the american girl playing for the Russian basketball team – this could not happen in golf, can Stephen Ames play in the World Cup for Canada? I think because he played for T&T he can’t, but maybe if golf was in the Olympics, he could. (that’s why golf should never be in the Olympics, it’s too pure a sport).
Anyway, maybe McLean’s can do a similar study of the Winter Games, bet Canada is in the top 10, both ways.
Is the Olympics a world wide movement, or is it a most successful private corporate entity?
I would prefer to see it wide open, athletes competing as individuals. But who would pay, and who would prosper? What would all the blazer makers do?