Olympics: Final 2025 Olympic Medal Table
- Thread starter No Fun Shogun
- Start date
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
First medals ever:
Albania
Cape Verde
Dominica
Saint Lucia
Previously medaled, but first gold medals ever:
Botswana
Guatemala
I hate ranking by gold medals. Such a huge pet peeve. Here's my preference:
1. Rank by total medals. If you absolutely can't handle that.....
2. A gold is worth 3 points, a silver 2 points, a bronze 1 point - rank by total points
Ranking by gold makes no sense.
1. Rank by total medals. If you absolutely can't handle that.....
2. A gold is worth 3 points, a silver 2 points, a bronze 1 point - rank by total points
Ranking by gold makes no sense.
France did so well in so many events unexpectedly. I still think it's a huge win for them. Team sports especially - where even if you have a good team it's always such a crap shoot to make a gold medal final, and they did so with amazing consistency.
Gold Medal game in Basketball women & men, men's 3v3 basketball, men's football, women's handball, rugby men, men's volleyball. That's an insane result. I know most of those resulted in silvers, but still.
I know it's typical for host nations to do well - but to go from 33 medals to 64 is a huge improvement.
Stylizer1
Teflon Don
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
If you ain't first, you're last.
No really, I do agree with you, though I'd tweak it to something like a 5-3-1 point system. Imho, gold should be weighted much more then silver, and in turn silver should be worth much more then bronze.
Though points by the old meme for how athletes feel getting said medal:
Gold: 5
Silver: -2
Bronze: 4
But who is it that is ranking by gold medals? Or any other way? As far as I know there is no official "ranking" of medal winning by nation. Other than just information provided by the IOC. This country won x gold medals, that country won y total medals, etc... The IOC tabulates the totals but it doesn't actually mean anything. It's not like athlete world rankings that actually qualify you to compete in the games.
Assigning points would be the worst thing I can think of. Now you ARE making it an actual competition and there's just no reason for that. The medal totals mean nothing more than what you make them mean. I guess it's seems easy for me as an American to say I that I couldn't care less if we win more medals than anyone else, but it's the truth. I like to see the US win medals in sports I care about. I don't care a bit about gymnastics so if we never won another gymnastics medal I wouldn't bat an eye. Most of the country would freak out though.
So like I said, medal counts mean what you want them to mean.
Who has these tie-breakers?
I'm not saying that it isn't a ranking. The "ranking" is right there in the first post. I'm saying that it is information only. It has no relevance to anything meaningful. It's not used for anything other than to make people proud of their country (or embarrassed, if you happen to be from Finland right now
).If you, as an athlete, are ranked 10th in the world in say, men's epee, you are automatically qualified for the Olympic competition. If you, as a country, win more medals than any other country, you get nothing other than publicity. It's only as meaninful as you make it.
I know that many Americans count the total medals. That surprises me very much. I've heard all my life that 2nd and 3rd places in the US aren't worth anything. Only 1st places (gold) are worth anything in America. How do you then count all the medals? Ah, I see! You bend the world so that it fits, right? 
We're used to dominate in team sports though. We're the number one country in team sport.
Volleyball (back to back) basketball (back to back finals), handball (winner last time, crashed this time) women handball (world champs), football (back to back WC finals), rugby (always among the best).
Sure women Bball wasn't expected, but so was men handball crashing.
I think the disappointment comes from heavy favourites in fencing and judo crashing or getting just bronze. But OG at home can be galvanizing, especially to non favourites, but heavy favourites are also feeling the pressure.
Silver and bronze in the men's road race were a bit of a surprise (in a good way) though, I think.
They were.
We had good surprises. We also had dominant athletes winning here when they failed to surprisingly in Tokyo (Riner, BMX, etc...).
Steve Prefontaine only finished 4th and he's still a massive legend.I know that many Americans count the total medals. That surprises me very much. I've heard all my life that 2nd and 3rd places in the US aren't worth anything. Only 1st places (gold) are worth anything in America. How do you then count all the medals? Ah, I see! You bend the world so that it fits, right?
He was only 24 when he died, 21 when he won bronze at Munich . Expectations were sky-high for his future. He was already a bit of a legend before he competed in the Olympics, at the time the US wasn't really on the map for distance running. I remember getting this issue of SI in 1970.
The bronze medal didn't make him a legend, in fact in some ways his early death may have enhanced the legend... "what might have been".
He broke all American records. Was the second youngest runner in Olympic history and died young. These are of course special. But what would have happened if he hadn't died and e.g. Would he have taken part in the Olympics 5 times and never won gold? He would have become a legend then? Would Mark Spitz, Michael Phelps or Carl Lewis ever have become great legends if they had never won gold? Do you see where this is going?
Jussi
Registered User
Michelle Kwan took part a couple of times and didn't die, yet was extremely popular with only silver and bronze at the Olympics.
The IOC tie breakers, tie for gold, most silver between them is ranked higher. If silver is also tied, most bronzeWho has these tie-breakers?
I'm not saying that it isn't a ranking. The "ranking" is right there in the first post. I'm saying that it is information only. It has no relevance to anything meaningful. It's not used for anything other than to make people proud of their country (or embarrassed, if you happen to be from Finland right now
If you, as an athlete, are ranked 10th in the world in say, men's epee, you are automatically qualified for the Olympic competition. If you, as a country, win more medals than any other country, you get nothing other than publicity. It's only as meaninful as you make it.
And you get what for this? Other than... bragging rights? Again, it's only as meaningful as you make it.
Jussi
Registered User
Seriously, credit to France for being among the top in football, basketball, volleyball and handball. Biggest European team sports. Now when it comes to hockey...
The World Figure Skating Championships are an event, certainly. Viewership might at times even exceed regular season NHL games.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
Kurt Browning is probably Canada’s greatest male figure skater but he could never put it together at the Olympics.
4x Workd Champion.
The OG is really an opportunity to become a household name for people that don’t actively follow your sport.
