-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
London 2012 Summer Olympics |OT2|
- Thread starter giga
- Start date
- Status
perfectchaos007
Member
¯\_(ツ_/¯
Guess the haters are going to have to use the irrational, country population:medals ratio to downplay the Americans performance now.
IDK man, I see him realizing that he won't be on top like he was back in Beijing. I mean you can see the decline since 2008.
Forget dem Haters ¯\_(ツ
_/¯Ummm, wouldn't that argument make the Americans look better vs China?
Ya but his decline is more because he pretty much quit already. He stopped training for a long time and half-assed it even when he started again a year or 2 back. I hope he takes 2 complete years off and does whatever the hell he wants to enjoy life. He's spent so many hours in the pool that he's missed out on some great shit in life. After that maybe he'll come back completely refreshed. The difference in training between Phelps and Lochte was night and day. If Phelps trained like Ryan did this go round he'd of had another complete olympics of dominance.
Or he'll turn into the next Macaulay Culkin.
perfectchaos007
Member
His mom really wants him to do Rio 2016, but Phelps doesn't. If his mom can persistently pester him about it, maybe he'll compete but I doubt it
planar1280
Banned
Does she have a hair or scalp condition ?
I think he joking said that he would just pay for her to go lol
We got a long way to go to reach USSR level ownage man.
¯\_(ツ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Summer_Olympics_medal_table
Stop jinxing us before we can get there.
I disagree. Most other judged sports do fairly well. There is minor controversial stuff or mistakes that happens but NOTHING like boxing. I mean its literally flat out rigged. Frankly I think its embarrassing the that Olympic committee hasn't stamped this shit out.
perfectchaos007
Member
Yeah vs. China, but not vs. a lot of Euro Countries. The country population:medals won ratio is a flawed system for 2 reasons.
First off, countries are generally only allowed to send 2 teams per event. Our #3 womens volleyball pair, may be #3 in the world, but they don't get to compete in the olympics. Also as we saw with womens gymnastics, Jordan Weiber would have probably medaled in the All-Around, but wasn't allowed to be in the final 24 because she finished 3rd among americans and 4th overall.
Secondly, A country with a few thousand people could win a medal and instantly become unbeatable under that format. No doubt it's more impressive when a small country racks up numerous medals, but any country that has over 25ish million people are nearly on an even playing field.
Still, I'm excited to see a sport where Americans will be major underdogs.
I don't think this will be the case as much as some people may think.
There has been a pretty major renewed emphasis on Rugby at the collegiate level since it was announced as an olympic game.
The US rugby team will obviously be less skilled and experienced for the first couple of olympics, but I think if it can draw enough attention to cause the next group of athletes to move over from football to rugby a few years earlier, we could be competitive fairly quickly.
USA are down slightly but with more gold compared with 2008 after day 7. China up with fewer gold. Do events always play out in the same order?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/dat...g/02/london-olympic-medals-2008-2012-compared
GB are doing well so far.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/dat...g/02/london-olympic-medals-2008-2012-compared
GB are doing well so far.
Makes perfect sense. Good argument.
BertramCooper
Banned
Bob Costas is the worst.
No I'm pretty sure they are going to let pros play, just like in the World Cup.
There will be a women's competition as well.
Are our players who compete in overseas leagues any good?
Hypnotoad
Member
Gamer @ Heart
Member
So are pretty much all the cameras owned and operarted by the IOC then then BBCs and NBCw of the work air and cut what they want from a directors booth or something?
he's pretty bad
fizzelopeguss
Banned
Korea's doing well.
The bigger the population the more elite athletes you will find, all else being equal. So there'd still be an advantage even with only 1 team per event. Richer bigger countries clearly have an advantage over poorer smaller countries.
Tragicomedy
Member
Yep. I am impressed at how crappy their coverage has been tonight. This sort of schlock takes skill.
"Okay guys...here's my pitch: we open with SIXTEEN YEAR OLD gymnastics footage. Draw it out for 27 minutes at the beginning of our primetime coverage. Really get people glued to their sets, ya know?"
Reminds me of last night when they kicked off their primetime coverage with 2,000 meters of women's rowing. I looked over at my wife and said, "Looks like we're in for a super exciting night, huh?" She fell asleep before even seeing Phelps get his medal. Classic.
Victory Red
Member
Why did she do two vaults back to back?
I think they got two attempts, and she went again since she messed up her first one
Apparently her first vault got enough points for them to win though, but they didn't know that at the time. Man, things were shitty back then.
Hypnotoad
Member
Ye Shiwen has been in the top 3 since 2010, too. But that doesn't count, 'cause CHINA LOL.
It's pathetic, isn't it?
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Trampoline is an olympic event?!?!
Yeah Shiwen has been top 3 in the 200 IM, but that's not what people are questioning. It was the 400 IM, while she was #2 at 2010 short course championships, she was 8th at long course world championships in 2011 placing 8th TEN SECONDS slower than she was Sat., while Franklin won the 200 back only a second slower than she was tonight.
Ya, I should have been more circumspect.
Hypnotoad
Member
No, people are making up excuses to question her. She was winning on 400 m with 4:33 in 2010, so it's a progression of 5 seconds over two years, not ten seconds over one year. She didn't do well in the 400 m in Shanghai last year, well she is a human after all, not a Chinese android, so she can have a bad competition too. I think there is an American too who didn't live up to his potential, just this year, I think his name is Phelps or something.
Really, I was just defending Missy and trying to explain why there are so many coaches and people within the sport who have strong suspicions for Shiwen. In the end testing catches up. Blood is held for years and retested when new substances are found. I'm not worried about Shiwen or Ledecky cause if they're doping they will get caught eventually when no really cares and books will change. If they're clean, they'll be even better for Rio.
To be honest I think there was just too much expectation for Phelps, but he does show that even top athlete can have a bad day. I don't think he is really "underperforming".
Shiwen did was spectacular but then, it is not unheard of. If she is the only one being questioned then if it is not racism, I don't know what it is. I wonder how many people actually heard of Katie Ledecky (who improved 39 seconds over 2 years or 15 seconds in 6 months in a 800m event) before July 2012 but that doesn't stop her from destroying her competitors (including Arlington who swim faster than Ryan Lotche in the last 50M free style). I don't see the executive director of whatever swimming association jump out and call her disturbing and has genetic manipulation.
Such mentality is simple and it is due to hatred towards a potential enemy. This is no difference than the US government slamming China for military spending, without mentioning thousands of oversea bases, thousands of nuclear warhead, 10s of carrier groups USA has employed.
perfectchaos007
Member
I agree that impoverished countries are at a disadvantage, but can't agree that population has as much of an influence. It really boils down to whether or not a country can fund training centers for athletes to perfect their craft. The US Olympic training center is in Colorado, and I think there are other satellite campuses in California and New York. So whether or not you're picking from a pool of 25 million people or 300 million people, the training is what makes the athlete, not the pool of citizens. Now if we're talking about a pool of a few thousand, obviously they would be at a disadvantage.
AdventureRacing
Member
That doesn't make sense to me. To be the best at the olmpics requires you need to find people who are simply naturally better athletes. The bigger the population you have the more chane there is of you having those athletes.
Just from a pure mathematical point of view that is going to be the case. I'm not saying that medal tallies should actually be judged that way but you would have to be deluding yourself to think it doesn't have an impact.
Hypnotoad
Member
Well, if you watch where the accusations are going, its one direction, towards China. That has a lot of people not happy, because exceptional athletes everywhere can cast a shadow of doubt. That doesn't change the fact that sport officials and commentators foremost should refrain from making accusations just for the fun of it, cause EVIL CHINA. There had been a precedent two decades ago, but the country has come a long, long way since and, in light of that history, just can't afford to dope on a national scale anymore. With the measures at hand, money and such a large population they can cultivate top-athletes without the need for doping.
Americans just love to fall back to cold-war clichés, but the world has moved on. Doping has too, I don't doubt there are Chinese athletes who do it on a personal level, just as there are Americans, Russians etc. But government-sponsored programs wont work, because China is all about PR these days. I doubt they will even pull a stunt like with the gymnasts 4 years ago after all the backlash they got. And, as I said, they wont need it.
Americans just love to fall back to cold-war clichés, but the world has moved on. Doping has too, I don't doubt there are Chinese athletes who do it on a personal level, just as there are Americans, Russians etc. But government-sponsored programs wont work, because China is all about PR these days. I doubt they will even pull a stunt like with the gymnasts 4 years ago after all the backlash they got. And, as I said, they wont need it.
perfectchaos007
Member
It does have an impact but it's very minuscule. The training is what's most important. India is a good example, as they have the second highest population in the world but only a handful of medals. ( 2 so far in this olympics ).
AdventureRacing
Member
That doesn't mean that population doesn't have a massive impact. It just means that you only see the impact if the country has the means to support it. If 2 countries put in the same leve of funding, facilities and recruitment but one has a population of 25 million and the other has a population of 500 million which do you think will end up with the better athletes? I don't really see how this can be argued.
perfectchaos007
Member
...and I'm not arguing that. Look at the post above yours. The training is by far the most important factor, but population does make a small difference. I'm not willing to accept that a country with 500 million people is 20 times more likely to medal than a country with 25 million all other variables equal.
LizardKing
Member
Also though by this logic, Canada has no business being near the top of the medals during the winter games, yet they constantly are. Population definitely has an effect but I don't think it's just a linear line, like equal funding countries 50m people and 500m people would be a 10x difference. There's also the amount of stones you are leaving unturned in that kind of a population.
Also, Brazil is 6th in world GDP, has 203 million people, a warm climate...... and 6 medals (1 gold).
Good Job Bob
Member
She really blew everyone away in that heat. Damn.
Good Job Bob
Member
Does anyone know how the points system works in Volleyball?
Why does Algeria have one point and Serbia none when they both have the same Match W/L and Set W/L?
Why does Algeria have one point and Serbia none when they both have the same Match W/L and Set W/L?
- Status