The most dumbest thing
@Zaide does is use stupid analytics nobody knows like "medal per capita" and weighted medals. No Zaide, the women's soccer gold doesn't count more than all the other golds.
Except having a larger population inherently means having more suitable athletes to compete. Also means having far greater financial support for the athletes training program, in general - when the country cares about the Olympics (i.e. India does not, China and US do).
When you take into account capital, investments and training facilities (as you yourself stated - Canada is a "winter" country, and only our athletes that can afford it can go train elsewhere, which is not everyone), Canada is performing above expectations in these games while the US and China are not performing above expectations.
I also never said that soccer medals count more on the medal table than any other gold medal, but see below.
Like if you look at the actual analytics the US and China blew the field away
China 38
USA 36
Japan 27
Russia 20
GB 20
The US leads by 9 over Japan in gold medal count. That disparity.
Which is never going to be a surprise, as they both have extremely large populations, spend astronomic amounts of money into their training program, both countries being known for their extensive and sometimes abusive programs. Money that could definitely be put to far better use, but I guess Olympics Pride has a ton of value when it comes to international pride.
He's kind of right though, this is why nobody cares about the final medals table because not all of the medals are equal, you get an obscene amount of medals for all the made-up swimming and cycling and rowing events compared to other sports for example. There's only 1 gold medal for each gender in soccer, 1 gold medal for each distance in the running, I saw on twitter someone say if there was a backwards running race like there's a backstroke in swimming we would think it was ridiculous
The US got a shitload of golds in swimming and track and of course men's basketball
But they all have the same weight
Do you mean to imply that Ledecky's 800m gold was less important than the us men basketball gold? It's all gold.
it's not like they assign one gold for multiple swimming events
The way medals are assigned by discipline is always going to be highly subjective, and highly (but not strictly) based on what the most prominent countries (north america, eastern europe, russia, china, japan, etc.) perform the best at. New disciplines are added sometimes, and others removed. But like, they added rock climbing this year, and they only gave out 2 medals (one for men, one for women), despite having the athletes compete in 3 "sub disciplines" that are as different from one another as backstroke swimming sprint, butterfly swimming and a long distance swim. Or hurdles, a marathon and the 100m. If your country is good at one of the disciplines that has a shit ton of medals handed out - or has one utterly dominant athlete in those disciplines, like Ledecky, De Grasse, etc - yeah, you're (or they're) going to have a shit ton of medals.
In the end, in the eyes of the public, yes, certain medals are 100% worth more than others. Public perception. People in Canada will take far more pride in a hockey gold medal than in a bobsleigh gold medal that one individual won. If a marathon gold medalist were to sell their medal, it would get barely nothing compared to if a 100m gold medalist were to sell theirs.