What is the population of the EU put all together?

This is a pretty silly discussion. :2 cents:

Yes, because the larger countries generally have the larger pool from which to draw athletes.

But funding also plays a part in it. A larger populated country like the USA can generate an enormous amount of funding and back tens of thousands of athletes, and then draw the best from that elite pool.

The reason India, with the second larges population on Earth, didn't win that many medals is because India is a poorer country that doesn't pump billions of dollars into athletic programs like the USA does.


Population has a LOT to do with winning medals. Even the Olympic statistics put forth by various medias and the IOC includes population & per capita figures, I've seen it before. A country with 20 million people which wins a lot of medals certainly is something worth noting, Australia definitely has something to be very proud of there. I hope one day Canada can do as well.

Isn't it though? Nothing like disparaging a nations Olympic results to get the tempers flaring. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Exactly, USA won, regardless of why, we won. We plan on doing it next time and the time after that. Now leave our athletes alone and let them bask in the glory.

:321GFY

Oh, and congrats the the other countries athletes that won their respective events.

Go Europe :glugglug

.. and then you get a guy like this coming along. :1orglaugh

Getting the most medals doesn't = winning the Olympics. They don't give you a medal for winning the most medals because THAT isn't a competition.

I don't care who wins the most medals, I just think it's funny that people deny that population isn't a factor that determines how many medals a country wins.

Basic statistics people. Go find a university and study it.

I know this, asshole.
I meant we won our events.
Flame someone else. kthx.

here is a flaw

in most events there is a limit of 2 athletes per event per country.

so you got 2 US guys competing against up to 50 EU guys in each event.

That's why you break it down on a per capita basis.

number of athletes per event per country is not determined by the population

EU doesn't have 25 times the population but has that many more atheletes to compete

Yep, it's true. I would say that economy has a lot to do with it as well. If you have a strong economy and a large population you can afford to train athletes in many different events. Obviously physical attributes come into play i.e. Kenyans can run forever and people from middle Asia and Eastern Europe are able to lift heavy weights etc. I personally think it?s great to see humanity come together to show off their individual traits.

Oh dear. It was a lame and idiotic attempt at trolling to start with. Quoting 'the sun' really does show your level of intelligence though. :)

Look at the populations of the countries those people came from. Some of those countries have to draw their athletes from a population of 4 million people.

population matters because it gives a country more chances to have an athlete with the extraordinary natural ability that is necessary to become an Olympic champion.

Could somebody please phone Dartmouth, and tell these guys that population is NOT a factor in determining how many medals a country wins?

http://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pages/...ary%202004.htm

Thanks.

It was not.
3 pages under 1 hour.

:glugglug

And again, the EU isn't a country.

You guys may as well be saying it took all of Europe to beat the USA in the medal count. Let's add up what all of Asia won. :1orglaugh

:thumbsup this is a great flame thread.

The glory belongs to the individual athletes, not the nations they came from.

In essence, who cares? I don't care if the US got 3 medals...good for the athletes themselves, not the countries.

I agree with this

Too many armchair athletes out there claiming "we won"

Who is we?

very ... stupid

NATIONAL Anthem.

You = MORON.

It's good but it would be better if we snatch the first place. maybe after 4 years again!