Never quite understood the Olympic medal count. Shouldn’t gold count for more than silver or bronze?
After all, the objective is to win the gold, not finish second. The silver medalist is like being the Super Bowl runner-up; nice try but quickly forgotten.
This ain’t no apples-to- apples comparison. Gold is the silver dollar; silver the 50-cent piece, and bronze the quarter.
So why not weigh the medal count?
For instance, going into Tuesday’s action in Beijing, the United States has 72 medals to China’s 67. So the red, white and blue is leading, right.
Hold on. Let’s give three points for a gold medal, two points for a silver and one for a bronze. Based on those numerics, China (39 gold, 14 silver, 14 bronze) has 159 points; the USA (22 gold, 24 silver, 26 bronze) is second with 140 points.
These calculations also change the dynamics for third place. Russia currently has 36 medals to Australia’s 33; however using the SportsLifer equation the two countries are tied with 65 points.
Something to think about. It could influence whether the United States or China claims bragging rights in these Olympics.