Thailand will disagree. They want points for the 4th athlete also, just like the way Boonsak is being regarded.
well, i never said my point system was perfect, at least it present a picture of ranking based on overall medals unlike IOC just based on # of gold and without taking merit of silver and bronze. in chess, if player A has taken opponent's rook and 3 pawns while player B had taken a bishop, a knight, and a pawn which side is winning? With the point system, anybody can tell which side is winning. Take a guess Just because IOC has held many olympics, it doesnt mean they are knowledgeable or fair. Just look at all the controversies popping up at each game, it goes to say IOC policies are old and antiqued. They have held many successful Olympics, and I believe the Olympic system as chosen by the IOC in a democratic process, has been agreed to bya majority of the competing countries successful?? LOL, drug scandals, corrupted judges, official taking kickbacks (cash, citizenship, tuitions for their kids, etc) agreed to by a majority of competing countries?? LOL look at how many countries lodging complaints to the IOC, LOL I'm beginning to see u as a Mr. Yes man Yes, Mr Yonex, Yes, Mr IOC
agreed to by a majority of competing countries?? LOL look at how many countries lodging complaints to the IOC, LOL I was referring to the IOC's use of the Olympic medals ranking system as one that was chosen by a majority of the competing countries. The issue of some countries lodging complaints is another matter. Why is it being dragged into this? Is it to refute the legitimacy of the IOC's ranking system just because of complaints which are not related to the choice of the medals ranking system? I'm beginning to see u as a Mr. Yes man Yes, Mr Yonex, Yes, Mr IOC Well, Cooler, lets see some cool.
sheesh....even the BBC is using the offical system it makes more sense, just say who has won more golds, and then silver and then bronze. It's the gold which is the most important for comparing. using the total number is only good for russia (mainly) who would probably get 2nd place overtaking china into 3rd. USA will probably always come first (unless china doesn't lose the racket sports golds, diving, and beats the usa to the gymnastics) whatever method is used.
Yah, i shouldn't associate tournament complaints to this. Its current ranking system was an accepted one. However, there are alway a better ranking system out there
Update China: 63 Medals (32, 17, 14) Russia: 92 Medals (27, 27, 38) If we go by cooler's point system of 5 for gold, 3 silver, and 1 bronze China: 225 pts Russia: 254 pts
Any system that gives weighting to silver and bronze medals should also consider the playing of the national anthem, which is going to be tricky. I don't see how you can play three national anthems for one event.
Have you heard the latest? The EU is claiming they are the real no.1 Olympic gold medals winner, far eclipsing the US. Wait a minute. Something is not quite right. For scoring rights to the medals table it is one country, the EU. But how come the EU was allowed to field so many competitors for each event? Or is it one country for medals honour, but EU component countries for eligibility for each event. Cooler, you see the problem?
Under the banner of the now defunct Soviet Union, they were very strong indeed. Russia now seems to be the only country seen to be representing the SU, but if you take the other ex-Soviet bloc countries into account in this Olympics, they will be No.1, even in terms of gold medals won. The disintegration of the SU had certainly weaken their Olympic gold haul!
did you mean, "anybody can estimate which side has a material advantage". There's more to winning than having a material advantage