Olympic Medals - A Realistic Approach

Ever since I began following the Olympic Games in earnest – the boycotted 1980 Moscow Spectacle – I have always wondered why the games have not adapted a more realistic evaluation criteria to compare the medal performances for the different countries. Comparison by the number of medals won makes no sense as Gold is clearly a higher achievement than silver which of course is greater than Gold. Listing by Gold medals won distorts the table and virtually negates all other medal accomplishments. Clearly a better system is needed. One that is simple apply but at the same time yields data that is worthy of comparison. So here it is: The Worldoreason Medal Analysis

Criteria – 3 Points for a Gold  - 2 Points for a Silver - 1 Point for a Bronze

Based on these parameters here are the scores for the top 10 countries as of August 6th 2012.

1. China – 145 (kudos to the Chinese for continuing their Beijing trend)

2. US – 136 (need to up their haul in Track and Field - and diversify a bit more)

3. GBR – 87 (the true stars of the games...incredible)

4. Russia - 73 (how the mighty have fallen)

5. France – 51 (about where they should be..)

6. S. Korea – 49 (excellent...must love the fact that they are ahead of Japan)

7. Japan - 44 (need more Golds. Strong in silver and bronze)

8. Germany – 42 (Disappointing if you consider historical performances)

9. Australia – 38 (Have crashed down to Earth...Population game has caught up with Aussies)

10. Italy – 37 (Could up it a bit..but are on target)

Where does my home country of Canada fit on this list.- Answer 20th - behind Kazakhstan, Hungary, Belarus and Denmark.