If China had 76 Gold medals, and the US had 77 Bronze Medals, would America declare itself top of the table?

Question

Since we seem to go by total number of medals. I think we should stop trying to be different and admit we're in Second place.

Answer 1

No, one gold medal equals infinti silvers and bronzes, so if a China for example has one gold and the US has 10 silvers and 5 bronzes, China will be on top.

Answer 2

China is using gold medals count while US media is using the total medals.

Of course, total medal count doesn't make sense. According to their logic, if China won 10 gold medal, 0 silver, and 0 bronze, and US won 11 Bronze medals, would that mean US is in a higher rank?? That doesn't make sense, does it??

I don't care about the America media, China proved the world that their athletes can do as well as Amercian, maybe even better!

Also, the opening ceremony was breathtaking and the birdnest itself, is modern, clean, and high tech. US will always find some excuses to discredit china.  

Answer 3

USA will top the Bronze Medal Table.

Answer 4

i think the team with most golds should always remain at the top, because who would want to be top of the medal table if their athletes couldn't even come first.

Answer 5

Well, when they calculate medals table, they do like this:

GOLD: 5 points

SILVER: 3 points

BRONZE: 1 point

It's stupid that who wins ONLY 70 golds is behind who wins ONLY 80 bronzes...

Isn't it?

Answer 6

i think both of the US and China are great. it's fool for us to compare which is better.  

Answer 7

If based on medal per population then neither China or  would be top but in fact bottom. It should be based on my decision as I am neutral.

Answer 8

hi,

here is the last overall medal standing that it was declared by International Olympic committee:

http://results.beijing2008.cn/WRM/ENG/IN...

Answer 9

We are in second place in the olympics, just not in the medal count.

Of course, if you gave us credit for all the athletes who train in the US, we'd be competing with China for most gold medals as well.

Answer 10

yea, they would. That's what they are doing.

Can u imagine what the western medias would say about China if these two countries switch places?

Answer 11

I prefer to base on number of population.

Eg:

- Country A has 10 person, 8 of them are still have no food and clean water (struggling to survive), and 2 of them got medals.

- Country B has 20 persons, 17 of them struggling to survive, 3 of them win medals.

Which country is better off ? Country B bcos it has 3 medals ? But, country A has only 8 person struggling, whereas country B has 17 person struggling - to survive...

Turn it around, the less people who struggling for life, is a better country. My view : country A is the winner.

Answer 12

I think you should see the placing instead of how many medals your country have gotten

Answer 13

I'm with you, Ben D. What the heck? All your ever hear about before the games is that it's all about friendly competition and then when the games begin they stop just short of saying, "US 2, Bad Guys 1". I pull for the little tiny countries, too. Who wouldn't have cheered for the Jamaica Bobsled team that year? If it is really about friendly competition, we should be happy with the efforts made more than the results. I hated the Olympics growing up because the USSR couldn't catch a compliment if they won every single event. I think the US should try to be good sports for once.