Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Medals

  • 27-02-2002 8:42pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,577 ✭✭✭✭


    I noticed that the counting of the medals order in the media varied substantially in the media for the Winter Olympics.

    Most Irish sources counted gold only in allocating order (would tend to favour countries with a small number of excellent sportmen). http://www.ireland.com/sports/olympics/winter/2002/medals.htm

    Most American sources counted the number of medals (would tend to favour countries with a large number of good sportmen). http://www.saltlake2002.com/x/f/frame.htm?u=/news/slocmain_front.asp

    In particular Norway did very well at getting a large number of gold medals and Austria did very well at getting a large number of medals.

    Whats the opinion on how they should be counted? I can see three ways - total gold, total medals or using a points system (gold = 3, Silver = 2 Bronze =1)


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,577 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    I did a table:

    Norway -v- USA stands out on the left and Austria is the blip in the middle


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,832 ✭✭✭Waylander


    I think the points system would be the fairest way of doing it, as obviously winning gold is more difficult then winning bronze, and hence should be recognised as such in the medals table.


Advertisement