• BoofStroke@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Medal counts are retarded. The US sent, what, over 500 athletes? Show me a small country who sends an amateur to get on the podium. That means far more.

    • Humanius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Large countries like to boast that their absolute number is bigger, it’s a tale as old as time.

      If you really want to make comparisons (and I’d argue it’s really not that important) you should probably look at medals per capita, or medals per athlete sent. Obviously that gets a bit distorted with countries with small population, but I think it’s a more valuable number.

      By the medals per capita metric the USA is 47th, and China is 75th.
      https://www.medalspercapita.com/

      I can’t find a good list for medals per athlete sent.

      • fluxion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Being able to train that many gold medal athletes is still a worthy boast though. I’d rather countries compete on metrics like this rather than threaten each other with war

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      For people who care about medal count (btw not me) it’s the whole point though to show that you are the biggest with the most people and the most resources. Not that you made the most of what you had or that you have the purest spirit.

      Raw industrial capacity and soldier count have decided wars after all, so showing you can amass the most / biggest can hardly be said to be an empty boast. It’s a threat, really.