File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
alright americunts, what do you care about more
america winning more gold medals or america winnning more medals?

i for one care more about the gold medals and i am deeply ashamed of our performance so far in track
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Ohi Europe
>> Anonymous
>>266950
wat?
>> Black ? Star !x8ngkAZjXE
total for me. It's always been total.

Imagine having the 50 gold, 10 silver and 5 bronze while china has 45 gold 40 silver and 60 bronze.


Despite what popular opinion has. Silver and Bronze are pretty important as well.


also I think we will lead in both catagories anyway although it will be close as hell in the golds
>> Anonymous
i too am an amerifag
more gold is what counts better
being 1st is always supposed to count
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Gold > # of medals
>> Anonymous
I mean obviously you want to win golds but considering China's goofy ass "Project 119" initiative, if we hold the overall title in the end it's still a nice accomplishment. There's nothing to be ashamed of trackwise in the 100's, Jamaicans are just fast as shit this time around + Gay was injured. The only thing I find a little questionable is the influx of past their prime foreignors, the older kenyans and shit. Srsly, that's the best we can do? Granted I sure as hell don't watch some boring ass track and field trials (hell I'm not a track fan in general), but with our colleges I find it hard to believe some of these scrubs are the best we can offer, bitches aren't even qualifying for finals. We'll still own hurdles apparently, but other than that, looks like the rest of our golds will be softball, maybe women's soccer if we're lucky sans Wambach, perhaps an indoor volleyball, possible beach sweep there, and of course we've returned to Basketball dominance since we decided to take it srs again. Coach K / Defense FTW.
>> Anonymous
agreeing with all these other fags that say having more gold is better than medal count. to me, it's the value of gaining more gold better than gaining medals all around.
>> Anonymous
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121856271893833843.html

Why the "only golds matter" approach is bad.

Major points:

-why award other medals if Gold is the only meaningful one?
-why not award multiple Golds to countries that 1/2 or 1/2/3 an event, since they would have won it with any of those athletes?
-why participate in sports that you will not get Gold in?

China has a Nazi-like hunger for Gold medals, akin to the 1936 Olympics. They go after obscure medals, or ones they are naturally suited to win, and ignore some of the most popular venues. Countries like AUS, RUS, and the USA instead allow athletes to enjoy participating in events they enjoy.

Do you really want to reward countries that have state-funded programs to medal in irrelevant events? Medals exist for the top 3 for a reason; the Olympics awards depth and spirit, not the unhealthy drive to maximize easy wins.
>> Anonymous
>>266994
How much would each medal count then?
>> Anonymous
>>267003

You're doing it wrong.

The point I hear from most of the LOL GOLDS ONLY people is that medal tables somehow make Bronze medals as important as Gold medals. Logical fallacy right there.

If a country gets the most Golds, but loses the overall medal count, it shows that they're only concerned with easy wins in obscure sports, or they have 1-2 wunderkinds that win shit, with no depth. The total count is more important because it shows that a country has good athletes across the board, and therefore is athletically superior.

Do you really think a country that gets nothing but Golds, say, Track and Field, but no other medals, should be considered greater than a country that has three times as many medals overall?

The Olympics are about OVERALL athleticism, not a few events in which a country stacks the odds or simply funds with national money for easy wins.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>267015

Ah, I see your point there
>> Anonymous
>They go after obscure medals, or ones they are naturally suited to win, and ignore some of the most popular venues. Countries like AUS, RUS, and the USA instead allow athletes to enjoy participating in events they enjoy.

gymnastics, diving, and weight lifting sure aren't competitive. Those alone add up to 18 medals, add in a nice butterfly 200m and they tie the US, then start talking about how they win in sports they invented and viola! they're in first place (shooting helps too).

dipshit.

and yes, gold>medals because it means THEY FUCKING WON
>> Anonymous
not this shit again.

just hide thread and move along.
>> Anonymous
>>266994They go after obscure medals, or ones they are naturally suited to win
Ding ding ding, we have a winrar. Look at the shiz they're winning lately... diving, ping pong, badminton, pft. I don't mind their men winning gymnastics, but the ones their women have won are bogus too, not just the age cheating thing, again, where being a runt helps just like in diving... but the judging/scoring is bogus as hell. Sac was robbed on vault, ROBBED!!1
>> ??
America is the best at everything.
>> Anonymous
i think the point alot of you are missing here is that china is only down in total medal count by what? 6? medal while they lead by 16 gold.

so what alot of you are trying to say is that 16 gold is worth less than 6 silver/bronzes.

if that doesn't spell butthurt i don't know what does
>> Anonymous
>>267015
>three times

too bad you're only up by 4, stop being butthurt
>> Anonymous
>>267031
their is no such thing as obsecure sport you fuck, btw table tennis/badminton is far more popular internationally than american football will ever be so i don't get why you would even think its obsecure.

apparently americafag thinks that obsecure=sports that us sucks at
>> Anonymous
>>267015
>Logical fallacy right there.

yes, yes there is
>> Anonymous
>>267041

>i think the point alot of you are missing here is that >china is only down in total medal count by what? 6? >medal while they lead by 16 gold.

>so what alot of you are trying to say is that 16 gold >is worth less than 6 silver/bronzes.

>is worth less than 6 silver/bronzes.

>is worth less than 6 silver/bronzes.

>is worth less than 22 silver/bronzes.
fix'd

lrn2math
>> Anonymous
>>267072
no you dumbass i meant what i said.
>> Anonymous
>>267072
that still sounds bad btw 16 gold is far greater than 22 silver and bronze would ever be.
>> Anonymous
Eurofags, Chinks, and the rest of the haters, see:

>>267015
>>267015
>> Anonymous
>>267075

hey retard, if China is leading by 16 gold, but the US is leading in total medal count by 6, as you said, then the US makes up 16 gold difference with 16 silver/bronze, and then have an extra 6 silver/bronze to lead in the total count.
16 + 6 = 22
Can you comprehend that? Probably not.

I'm not saying that this means US still isn't losing to China (>>267078), total gold > total medals, but it is damned impressive to place 2nd or 3rd in ONE OF THE BIGGEST INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIONS, BEATING ALL OF THOSE OTHER PEOPLE EXCEPT ONE OR TWO, so give credit where it is due.
>> Anonymous
There are valid arguments for both.

Just go with Gold=3 Silver=2 and Bronze=1

That way a team with both the Second and Third best athletes in their sport are equal with the Gold.

Remember though that being silver means you're the second best and still better than like 5,999,999,998 people.
>> Anonymous
>>267121

Yes but that's just another arbitrary rankings system.

How you rank has everything to do with your philosophy and outlook.

If you favor maximizing easy wins and not even TRYING to field athletes is more competitive venues, you will aim for more Golds.

If you want to show off depth and the overall athleticism of your country, you will go for more medals.

Having the top 3 athletes in nearly EVERY fucking event is far more impressive than getting first in sports that are only popular in your region.
>> Anonymous
America ruins the Olympics because they have people from around the world plus a bunch of mixed races and halfies. Most people don't know what the fuck and so there insecurity about national identity leads them to want America to win.
The chinese on the other hand also ruin the olympics and are on a quest to prove they are the purest race but FAIL MISERABLY ala HITLER because you can't win track and field or swimming ya chinks.
Eurofags are too gay to care about the olympics so instead just have buttsex and try to troll other countries.
TL;DR: fuck the Olympics. its for gay fuckin greeks anyway. also USA #1
>> Anonymous
>>267144

/thread

USA
USA
USA
USA
>> Anonymous
>>267144

America is a melting pot country you bitch
>> Anonymous
>>267150

Precisely why America wins. While the rest of the world turns up their noses about how they are pure, ethnically superior tossers, we mix all the genes together and produce pure WIN.

China is so fucked this century. One child per family = ballooning elderly population, disproportionate gender ratios (they dump female babies in wells), and genetic stagnation. I hope we can witness another Japan vs. Korea vs. China of some variety, love me some Asia wars.
>> Anonymous
>>267154

What do you want? For China's overpopulation problem to get even more out of control?

Genetic stagnation? So what you want them to import black people to be more diverse or what.
>> Anonymous
>>267159

Well, that's the problem. The one-child thing was a last resort to solve a problem that was out of control. Instead of overpopulation, they'll have too many elderly in a country that doesn't even offer suitable pensions. Basically, hundreds of millions over age 80 in a few years.

It basically makes the Baby Boomer problem look like shit in a landfill.
>> Anonymous
>>267160
>>267160
>>267160

at least they are doing something about it.

Just look at india. That is a shithole.
>> Anonymous
>>267162

Well, yes, but India is weird. Technically, they have more freedom than the Chinese, but the caste system fucks them hard.

India is going for the "fast growth, but with greater future stability" approach, and China is going for the "super fast growth, but with a questionable future" approach. I think India would doing very well if the caste system was dismantled after the Brits left.
>> Anonymous
>>267165

The caste system IS dismantled, but it's still ingrained in their society unofficially. There's still discimrination against the lower castes from the high castes.

And I don't know about the idea that India has greater future stability. Just wait until their population exceeds China's. They have no One Child Policy to control it.

I think China would be pretty happy if they could get their population down to a nice even 1 billion. Once they grow economically, they won't even need the One Child Policy anymore, because wealth and low birth rate go hand in hand. Want proof? Just look at Hong Kong, which has the lowest birth rate in the world. If China wants to take the next step economically, they need to start privatizing all the state owned enterprises.
>> Anonymous
>>267165

the caste system was dismantle. India denied about it. but everyone know it exist. the caste was more of a religious & cultural thing that will stick as long as Hinduism exist in india. You can never dismantle that.
Furthermore the"greater future stability" in for the people in the top caste. they couldn't care less anyone below it. they are like flies cleaning your waste for you.
>> Anonymous
>>267173

We'll see how China transitions from a manufacturing company to a 1st-tier nation. Everyone is convinced that it will be magical, but as soon as China becomes truly wealthy, their Totalitarian shit is going to implode.

China has to respect its people if it ever expects to sit on the same level as the West, let alone the US.
>> Anonymous
>>267182

Yes, that is true. But what a lot of people fail to realize is that you need to do changes like this GRADUALLY. Otherwise shit happens like Russia economically imploding when the USSR was dismantled.

China isn't ready for democracy yet. Do you really think that the uneducated farmers in the rural countryside that make up a good chunk of the population are ready to make decisions about the country yet?
>> Anonymous
>>267198
Uneducated farmers voting? SHIT THATS LIKE HALF OF AMERICAN HISTORY.
>> Anonymous
so stupid people cant run a country????
flaw in logic
they are called politicians
>> Anonymous
>>267198

Oh I agree, which is why I think everyone who says that China is going to overtake the US by 2050 is stupid.

China cannot overtake the US until it drops its USSR-lite bullshit, but it will collapse if they do not make a gradual transition. There exists a limit of growth that China can experience while still a Totalitarian nation with piss poor commoners.
>> Anonymous
Also another funny thing. China can't convert to democracy until they complete their assimilation of Tibet and Xinjiang. Otherwise the two regions would vote to secede and China would lose a huge chunk of territory.
>> Anonymous
>>267208
Russia still beats them
>> Anonymous
China isnt a commie country. It is 100% capitalist country with a Totalitarian Government. So it would never collapse like USSR. As long Globalization exist China will strive.

China will only collapse when Globalization ended.
>> Anonymous
>>267223

Countries cannot become truly wealthy in the 21st century if their people are left to be poor and oppressed.

Why? Educated + productive public > Factory workers and farmers

Totalitarian shit just won't work, unless you plan on attacking your neighbors for resources and territory.
>> Anonymous
>>267228

Tell that to singapore.
The place have no freedom, yet they become a 1st world country in less than 30 years.

As long as they know how to control the public and incite fears on them, It doesnt matter whether the population is educated or not. They will do what you ask them to do.

That what China and many countries are doing right know. Controlling the population.
>> Anonymous
>>267238

Singapore pulled a Taiwan and went for the tech sector. It worked for them, but it won't work for the world's largest country.
>> Anonymous
>>267238
This is true.All media is owned by government and anything that's against the government is clamped down on.still a good place to live if you don't cherish freedom of speech.Shit they're coming for me.
>> Anonymous
>>267208

If they did that though they might gain Taiwan, And Taiwan actually has stuff in it. Good stuff, like large, technologically advanced cities. Unlike Tibet, which is just a mountainey shithole anyway.
>> Anonymous
>>267238

yet Singapore is the least corrupt country on earth. Its also a tiny island governed by a really smart guy (Lee Kuan Yew) So they could micromanage things and make it work. China is too big and we'll probably see China end up like S.Korea (authoritarian until 88) and Taiwan (until 96). go from manufacturing -> services while political reform starts bubbling up gradually. We already see this with village elections and it will probably move on to township and county elections in the next few years.
>> Anonymous
>>267238

LIKE AMERICA AMIRITE
MCDONALD CONTROL COUNTIREY
DISGUSTING PIG
YOU WANT RONALD?
YOU WANT CHICKEN?
>> Anonymous
>>267256

GRIMACE IS THAT YOU? LEAVE THE FRYKIDS ALONE
>> Anonymous
>>267255

how can you say your govt is not corrupt when
they are not transparent and the most secretive about their monetary activities.

You can always called yourself clean but hide your dirty underwear where no one can view or smell it.
>> Anonymous
Fucking LAUGHO at anyone who thinks Singapore is a good country
>> Anonymous
>>267246

Pity Taiwan is also a shithole now.
>> Anonymous
>>267328

CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR VICTORY Taiwan.
>> Anonymous
>>267328

How?
>> Anonymous
>>267280

How is singapore not transparent. All of the government policies are stated clearly. All of the budgets are in the public domain. All of the court decisions are released to the public. Lee Kuan Yew lived in a tiny house for all his life. You are going to deflame the government, you should atleast have some reasonable evidence for it.
>> Anonymous
>>All of the government policies are stated clearly.

They sure can be when the country's an effective dictatorship!

You think the Baath Party had any PR worries under Saddam?
>> Anonymous
>>267362

Give me a break. State some specifics about what they are doing you think is bad. Or you are just some angry /b tard with some axe to grind.
>> Anonymous
Prefer gold metals BUT....

a) China's cheating.
b) Some of these events are not sports.
c) Some of these events aren't scored right.
c) There're, what, 1500 different swimming events? When one person wins eight golds, that's not a record, that's redundancy.

Besides, the only purpose of the Olympics is for Russia to invade a country.
>> Anonymous
>>267408
you are an idiot.
>> Anonymous
China wins Amerifags, stop bitching about it. You lead China by around five overall and are getting buttraped on gold medal count. You whine about obscure sports but these same 'obscure' sports were here last time, and China won most of them then. Accept that you have been superseded. The thing is, America would give a shit about these sports if they were any good at them. Eight of America's 11 golds are from one athlete aswell.

Happy Eurofag.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
o hai yurop and oz
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>267415

lulz yurop
>> Anonymous
>>267415

>My country or continent can't come close to competing with the U.S. in the Olympics so I'll just hide behind China, the only one who can possibly beat the U.S. this year

fix'd
>> Anonymous
>>267418
We have 11 gold, obsolete and crappy image is obsolete and crappy. And winning 8 competitions, when they're all so homogenous, is not that great an achievement.

Just checked.Must be well over a third of USA's medals coming from one event, swimming, where everybody knows there are too many different competitions with small variations.
>> Anonymous
>>267421
I don't care about winning, I just enjoy watching it. I was just responding to some Americunts trying to denigrate China's achievement.
>> Anonymous ??
>>267408
>a) China's cheating.

agreed.

>b) Some of these events are not sports.

agreed.

>c) Some of these events aren't scored right.

agreed. if anybody watched boxing or judo, and knows anything about both, you will agree too.

>c) There're, what, 1500 different swimming events? >When one person wins eight golds, that's not a record, that's redundancy.

Michael Phelps is god.

>Besides, the only purpose of the Olympics is for Russia to invade a country.

lolwut?
>> Anonymous
>>267423

Eurofag must not know anything about swimming.

It's very rare for someone to be talented enough to excel at all the strokes, as Phelps does. That would be like a track star winning the 200m, 400m, all the relays, the steeplechase, and the 400m hurdles...

Idiot.
>> Anonymous
>>267431
There are still too many codes in swimming and it's a bit of an anachronism. Any country/athlete that excels at it has an unfair advantage. Look at cycling, you could create a million different variations there, but they show some restraint. Boxing/weightlifting are the only sports where it's justified.
>> Anonymous
>>267352

oh really???

oh why then when your ex president ask for details for the national reserve, a job which he is task to do, ur lee kuan yew ask him to keep quiet. LOL

And selling a national bank without the approval of the president?? want moar??
>> Anonymous
>>267445

Yep. Your average 4channer can name more martial arts than are "official" sports in the Olympics.
>> Anonymous
>>267431
Comparing distances is an incorrect analogy - by your logic, Phelps should be excelling in the 1500m and 10k swims.
>> Anonymous
>>267466

Are you stupid?

Swimming-Track equivs.
100m free = 200m
200m free = 400m
200m fly = 400m hurdles
400m IM = Steeplechase

etc etc
>> Anonymous
>>267471
I like how you put in the 'etc etc' as though those comparisons reflect anything resembling a coherent order.