Olympic Medal Prediction Model

bettiwettiwoo writes "Slate reports that PricewaterhouseCooper claims to have devised a model predicting the final medal tally for nations competing in the Olympic Games. GDP is of particular importance in bringing home the bacon, closely followed by population size and and past performance. Other factors can also affect the outcome: hosting the games usually gives a medal boost. With the possible exception of China, the titan nations of the games (US, Russia, China and Germany) are predicted to see a successive drop in their total medal tally in the future (and compared to the Sydney Games, the future starts now). So if you were wondering why the Iraqi soccer team seems on its way to the quarter finals, why Greece takes gold in synchronized diving, or why Michael Phelps has to eat Ian Thorpe's bubbles, don't worry: it's only evolution, baby, and it's all perfectly predictable!"

Comments

Olympics

[lachlan76]

The Olympics are about skill, and how many medals a country gets would depend on how skilled the athletes are.

Skill != Evolution

Re:Olympics

[civman2]

Well surely it does. Atheletes are getting better techniques and strategies every games. Otherwise explain how a 4 minute mile was an unacheivable goal 100 years ago and can now be attained by high school students?

Re:Olympics

[DavidpFitz]

The Olympics are about skill, and how many medals a country gets would depend on how skilled the athletes are.

Nothing to do with the amount of money their country has to pump into sports, the facilities they have grown up with, who has the best doping doctors who get past detection. Nothing like that, of course. It's all about the individual's skill. Hmm.

A gold medal may require skill, but it needs a whole lot more besides (unfortunately).

Re:Olympics

[BlueCup]

Well, the way this article is written, it's not so much skill that they're focusing on, though it's not really evolution either... it seems more like sociology, and the "evolution" of civilizations... So, evolution works, but not so much the biological aspects of it. Skill (and, to some extent, yes biological evolution, and sometimes drugs =)) is the deciding factor for a single person gaining a gold medal, but this isn't about what specific people are getting the medals, but what amount a country will get.

Re:Olympics

[Anonymous Coward]

The last sentence of the article reminded me of the music video for Pearl Jam's "Do the Evolution."

Now I have the girl's face from the video in my head, it's kinda scary :-P

Re:Olympics

[ViolentGreen]

That's very true. I don't think it is talking about evolution in the darwinian sense though. I think it's refering to the olympics evolving.

Re:Olympics

[JosKarith]

On the contrary, increasing skill is a part of evolution. Evolution is the constant change - usually for the better - in response to environmental pressures. An increased level of skill in a task frequently performed is an example of such behaviour. Although true evolution works on a much grander scale it is not true to say there is no link.

Re:Olympics

[Keitopsis]

I agree that skill and evolution are not the same, but we are also looking at is the "specialist" problem.

The so-called "first-world" nations can have a specialty programs to develop the skills of their atheletes, not to mention be able to identify potential atheletes through their education systems. Smaller nations cannot devote the manpower or economy to such programs. It is interesting to note that there is a lag function involved using prior achievement to show the effectiveness of the national athletic organizations. So what we are looking at is the skill of individuals being improved through the improvement of all athletic programs.

I think this is an interesting proof that the world quality of life is leveling off.

Re:Olympics

[Lev13than]

In a similar exercise, a pair of business professors have predicteding the final Olympic medal count using socio-economic data rather than athletic performance. Andrew Bernard and Meghan Busse developed their methodology using four factors: population, per capita income, past performance, and a host effect.
They were 96% accurate in their predictions for the 2000 Games, including correctly guessing 97 total and 37 gold medals for the USA. Also discussed is why some countries, such as Australia, surpass expectations while others, particularly Canada and Japan, underperform relative to countries with similar populations/national income.
This year's predicted winners? The USA (93), Russia (83) and China (57). The full paper was published in the Feb 2004 Review of Economics and Statistics - summary here.

Re:Olympics

[lachlan76]

But skills evolve entirely depending on what country you're in?

Re:Olympics

[FooAtWFU]

You're both right, of course. Skills are what it's about, one hundred percent. All that other stuff is just there so the athlete can hone his (or her) skills.

Re:Olympics

[Anonymous Coward]

I think this is an interesting proof that the world quality of life is leveling off.

Well, at least if one looks only at the 2 Olympic delegates out of a population of around 2M.

Re:Olympics

[Kombat]

who has the best doping doctors who get past detection.

Why does everyone insist on viewing doping as a "black-and-white" issue?

The human body is a very complex machine. The chemical reactions that take place in side are very complicated and sensitive. Athletes carefully monitor their nutrition, and supplement their bodies with well-timed servings of synthetic protein, creatine, and other compounds and hormones. Where do you draw the line? Should it be illegal to take protein shakes? What if a competitor eats a huge number of chicken breasts? Or drinks more than the allowable portions of milk?

My point in all this is that there are many things that affect an athlete's ability to perform. You can't just say, "that guy was doping, so he's a cheat. Everyone else passed the doping tests, so they're all honest, supreme athletes." It's not that simple. They're all taking complex coctails of nutrients and supplements. They all take vitamins, energy bars, protein shakes, creatine, testosterone, lactic-acid inhibitors, and who-knows-what else. If one of them accidentally takes just a few too many grams of one of his supplements, he/she could set off the doping alarm, and fail the test. That doesn't mean they deliberately cheated, unless you consider all the other athletes to be "cheating" too, when they follow their artificial diets.

NO ONE competes "naturally" anymore, in the sense that they just eat plain old food, sleep when they feel like it, and then compete. They all have carefully-monitored sleep cycles and diets. They're treated like machines, like high-performance engines. They're groomed to compete, sometimes even to the degree that they're supposed to peak on the day of their competition (that is, if you asked them to re-run their competition the next day, their time wouldn't be anywhere near the time they were able to turn in the day before).

So what's the answer? Ban all supplements? All protein powders? Energy bars? Low-fat foods? Forbid athletes from taking more than 8 hours of sleep a night? Should we try to make sure everyone is on equal footing? Or do we allow them to do everything they can to hone their bodies into high-performance machines that'll break records (and thus, attract ratings, sponsors, and ad revenue)?

Who's to say that a mild steroid is cheating, but a rigorous diet of protein shakes, Myoplex, ephedrine, Xenadrine, selenium, and whatever else is OK?

Re:Olympics

[Anonymous Coward]

In Australias case it is about how much they pump into the Australian Institute of Sports. I would not be surprised if per capita Australia puts more into its sports institutes than any other nation, thus the high medal count.

Re:Olympics

[BigBadDude]

US beating China?

no way, not now that they had to leave all dopers at home.

BTW, did you notice that as soon as WADA got more active and treated to take more doping tests the "top" american athletes started to disappear??

and not to mention that guy Armstrong, who is "home with his family"....

Re:Olympics

[gfxguy]

No, not entirely.

Look at is this way: the best long distance runners are generally from under developed locales in Africa, where, for many people, running is essential just to get places in a timely manner.

A good runner is going to be prime mating candidate, and may very likely choose another good runner. Over just a few generations, this can have an amazing effect.

Of course that doesn't happen everywhere - but I think athletes are more likely to marry athletes in just about any country. After all, they spend all day training with other athletes.

So it may not be specific countries, but athletes in cold weather climates tend to participate in cold weather sports. People in warm climates tend to participate in warm weather sports. Now repeat the process of athletes who tend to look for good physical specimens as mates, and you do see an evolution.

Well, you might call it voluntary genetic engineering. Here in Georgia, USA, some idiots call it "biological changes over time" because they refuse to use the word "evolution." Whatever it is, it's real and it happens.

Re:Olympics

[MindStalker]

Well I think the athletes futures are important too. Even mild steroids taken frequently can have major impacts upon ones health. But the athletes would be pushed very hard into taking them if they were legal. Not that high doeses of Xenadrine is very safe either, but obvious there are limits. So while I agree the black and white of "cheating" isn't as clear, there has to be limits set, if simply to avoid destroying these athletes in the name of competition.

Re:Olympics

[Planesdragon]

The Olympics are about skill

No, they're not. If they were, tactical assault, "ultimate fighting", and compettive woodworking would be olympic sports.

The Olympics are, and always have beeen, about "performance." And not in general, but performance in a specific test.

Re:Olympics

[The_Real_Nire]

No, the Olympics are about athletics, which have NOTHING to do with Slashdot.

These are the bastards that picked on us in high school!!

Anyhow, this dude has way too much time on his hands if he thinks making a Medal Predicting Model was a good idea, and actually did it.

Re:Olympics

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the Olympics are about athletics, which have NOTHING to do with Slashdot.

These are the bastards that picked on us in high school!!

Anyhow, this dude has way too much time on his hands if he thinks making a Medal Predicting Model was a good idea, and actually did it.

ew. Somebody is bitter.

Re:Olympics

[Trolling4Dollars]

Um. Wasn't the computer you are typing on created in a lab by a human? So, if that's the case, then your computer is a "work of the flesh" as you put it, right? So, I would guess that makes you a sinner? I've run into some pretty weird religious nuts in my day, but you take the cake.

Re:Olympics

[Anonymous Coward]

> The Olympics are about skill, and how many medals a country gets would depend on how
> skilled the athletes are.

A modern athlete's skill is created for the most part by training (and to a much lesser degree by talent). Quality and amount of training is largely determined by the amount of money available. Both through quality of material and science, as well as available time (in some countries/for some sports even 'professional' athletes have to keep a daytime job to be able to support their daily expenses).

Re:Olympics

[Anonymous Coward]

geez dude, way to take the bait

Re:Olympics

[js3]

they predict canada will get only 2 medals in athens. We already have one so looks like it will be slim pickings from now on lol

There is a simple reason why Canada does not perform well in the games. Absolute lack of support from the general population/government/business for the athletes. The collective conciousness in Canada seems to want to dump every bit on money into the blackhole called health care. Everything else doesn't matter, even the military is abandoned.

In autralia they think differently, they spend billions on the athletic programs and military and less on themselves.

Any country that wants to do well in the olympics will with enough money invested. Those that don't seem to do well tend not to be interested in the medal count anyways.

Re:Olympics

[TheFlyingGoat]

I'm bored with everyone saying that Armstrong is doping. He's by far the most scrutinized individual in the world as far as testing goes, and he's never tested positive. You think that he'd be afraid of the Olympic testing which is approximately the same as the Tour testing? Of course not. If he can pass one, he can pass the other. The guy has been away from his children for months while training for the Tour... I'd want to go home too.

As for the other "top" athletes, I'm not sure which ones you're referring to. The NBA players that didn't go aren't doping, since the NBA has almost as strict testing as the Olympics. They've either got legitimate excuses (Garnett and Kidd: marriage and injury, respectively) or they're dumbasses (Shaq, for example).

As for the US beating China, it'll be tough, but it is possible. I think their medal counts will be very close, but the US won't have nearly as many golds.

Sidenote: US Mens Basketball would be set if they had invited Michael Redd (who wanted to go) instead of one of the rookies. Then they'd have the best pure shooter in the game and the 2nd best big man as the core of the team. Inside-outside is the way to win international basketball.

Re:Olympics

[Anonymous Coward]

would u do me a favour and grab on to my fleshlight?

Re:Olympics

[The_Real_Nire]

At least I'm not a coward :P

Re:Olympics

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow your halarious, China is much more known for doping that the US ever has been. Plus China practically breeds there olympic athletes from an early age.

Also armstrong has already done 3 olympics and was last with his family april before the tour.

Re:Olympics

[Anonymous Coward]

You're confusing supplements with performance enhancing "drugs" or other controlled substances. Virtually everything that you can buy from a (legitimate) heath food shop, gym or online are "supplements" which are exactly that, they supplement real food and are basically nothing more than powdered/liquid food in a filtered/concentrated form. Either that or they are mild stimulants, such as caffeine or ephedra. There are strict guidelines about the permitted levels of stimulants in competition for most high level sports these days. However, nowhere will you ever see anything pertaining to levels of basic macronutriencs or essential vitamins and minerals.

Supplements don't do anything more than eating similar macronutrient proportions of real food would do, they are simply more convenient for atheletes on very controlled diets, particularly when it comes to consuming large amounts of protein without the saturated fats.

Virtually all quality protein powder's are extracted from whey (milk), and in some cases soy, they are not synthetic. Things like Creatine, L-Glutamine, Omega3 EFA etc are all present in regular foods such as red meat, wheat and flaxseeds respectively. Consuming them in concentrated form is a matter of convenience, and in no way constitutes "cheating". It's no different from juicing an orange or drinking reduced fat milk, you are removing undesired elements from an otherwise natural food source.

Using food supplement products, observing a controlled diet and using precisely monitored training techniques doesn't mean an athlete isn't competing "naturally", nore are they using performance enhancing substances. They are maximising their performance, but it is not being artificially enhanced by a controlled substance.

If any of these supplement products on the market actually exhibited true drug like effects, which are almost always accompanied with drug like side effects, they would be pulled off the shelves by the FDA and be required to be sold by prescription only, as has happened in the past with such products as Triax. Such results would also attact the attention of the respective sporting bodies and the substance would become listed as a banned substance as a result.

The true performance enhancing drugs, such as anabolic steroids, are those that are not generally present in regular food products, and produce an elevated anabolic (muscle buidling) or altered metabolic state that boosts the subjects performance and development. This can be due to increased levels of insulin, testosterone, human growth hormone or altered levels of IGF-I and MGF in an atheletes muscle tissue, or any number of other "benefits".

The point is that the performance enhancing "drugs" result in significant chemical and behavoural changes uninitiated by the body, and usually similarly significant side effects if taken for long enough or in large enough doses. More importantly they are generally controlled substances that must be sold through specific channels and not something that you will find on the shelves at your local supermarket. Where as supplements are mostly macronutrients, vitamins and minerals extracted from natural food in a more convenient form.

A previous poster indicated that the greater the "wealth", the more advanced the potential for doping is likely to be, which is exactly right. For example, a compound such as Mechano Growth Factor (MGF) is extremely difficult and expensive to manufacture, in fact very few people in the world know how to do it.

However the substance itself is the holy grail of performance enhancing drugs as it is the body's trigger to muscle tissue growth, is currently virtually impossible to detect because it's naturally occuring in the body, and localised to muscle tissue not the circulatory system. A country unscrupulous enough to invest the necessary research and development into the production of such a compound would have a competitive "doping" advantage over other countries using currently available substances and masking agents.

Re:Olympics

[Ba3r]

But we don't live in such an untainted biological world. Runners in Kenya are an exception to the norm; the norm being that rich countries can provide for athletes to do only one thing: train. Big countries have alot more people to choose from, making their chances of finding the best athletes higher. This is probably why these models are fairly accurate; they combine the size of population to choose from, and the ability of the society to provide for a non-profit pure athlete class.

Re:Olympics

[proj_2501]

not all athletes are or were jocks.
not all geeks were picked on in high school.
not all geeks have to resort to ridiculous generalizations to make a post on slashdot.

grow up.

Re:Olympics

[gnuman99]

The Olympics are about skill, and how many medals a country gets would depend on how skilled the athletes are.

The Olympics are about dope & roids, and how many medals a country gets would depend on how much dope the athetes are^H^H^H use.

Re:Olympics

[Fred_A]

Since most of them don't bring in any medals when they're past 35 and they don't have much market value for sponsors, nobody cares about their health.

Re:Olympics

[ivan256]

using socio-economic data rather than athletic performance ... methodology using [...] past performance

Don't you see a flaw there?

You can cook up socio-ecomonic statistics to prove anything you want about how evil, or oppressed, or unfair anything you'd like is.

When they pull this shit with religion it's called "numerology", but when they do it with somebody's favorite political issue it's called statistics. Let's use your example as an example:

They were 96% accurate in their predictions for the 2000 Games, including correctly guessing 97 total and 37 gold medals for the USA.

What's the statistical value of a data set with a sample size of 1? Whenever anybody says they can predict the future statistically, call bullshit.

Re:Olympics

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, they predict 13 medals for Canada, 2 gold.

I'm not sure the reason is as simple as a lack of government funding, although a lack of funding is certainly a factor.

Sheer population is another. Elite atheletes are freaks of nature (ie. on the extreme right side of the Bell curve). With a population 10 times that of Canada, the U.S. has 10 times as many freaks to choose from, so to speak.

Focus is probably a third reason. A kid in Canada is far more likely to spend their winter playing hockey not basketball. Not surprisingly, Canada is a medal contender in hockey, doesn't qualify in basketball.

Re:Olympics

[timeOday]

In a similar exercise, a pair of business professors have predicteding the final Olympic medal count using socio-economic data rather than athletic performance.

Some people think national pride doesn't belong at the Olympics, and decry such things as counting medals by nationality.

These studies are the strongest possible argument in favor of nationalism at the games. This is why all the folks back home feel some pride in the achievements of an athlete they never met - because there apparently is a strong collective aspect to it.

Re:Olympics

[The_Real_Nire]

not all posts on slashdot are serious

it was SUPPOSED to be funny

lighten up.

Re:Olympics

[antic]

You're wrong on Shaq ("dumbass"). Shaq turned down the opportunity because he'd already won a gold. Yes, it's a convenient excuse, but it's hard to argue with someone wanting to let another person experience the games.

And you're probably right on the US needing some pure shooters. Right now they're barely leading Greece with a quarter to play. (I'm from AUS, and we got drilled by Greece.)

Just in case you didn't know, you can get this little app from Fiba.com called Fiba Buzzer if you're a Windows user. Runs in your system tray and alerts you whenever a quarter starts or finishes in Olympic basketball. You can expand the display slightly to update frequently checking for scores, rebounds, etc. It's nothing incredible, but beats hitting refresh on the Olympics site.

Re:Olympics

[ZimZamBillaBam]

Sounds like this dude has 'roid rage.

Re:Olympics

[gfxguy]

I don't disagree, but there are tendancies at work here... athletes tend to marry athletes. Athletes in warm weather climates tend to do more water related sports (water skiing, swimming) and athletes in colder climates tend to do more cold weather related sports (ice hockey, skiing, etc.)

So the model is right when you consider places like the U.S. have both cold weather climates and hot weather climates, while Canada is generally cold weather (not that it doesn't get hot at times, but it's generally a colder weather climate).

As time goes on it does become more irrelevent, but it still happens to a degree.

Re:Olympics

[TPFH]

So, are you saing it takes a village to get a gold medal?

(Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

Vital step missing

[gowen]

The variable they seem to have omitted is Propensity of country's sporting bodies to turn blind eye to positive drugs tests."

Thats the primary explaination for the success of the Eastern Europeans in the 60s and 70s, and US Athletics since then.

Re:Vital step missing

[Anonymous Coward]

The major doping moving from eastern europe to the US since the late 70's? God, come on. Who's star atheletes are in trouble right now? And I think we all remember how those doped up kids from the US beat the Russian hockey team.

Doping by atheletes is a world wide problem and it takes place in every country. The US is in no way more guilty of it than any other western European country, that's for sure.

And this gets +5 Insightful. Just shows how you post anything anti-US on slashdot gets you +5.

Re:Vital step missing

[LostCluster]

Additionally, there's also the local government's willingess to fund the teams. Here in the USA, the USOC doesn't get direct government funding, but they get a special law that makes the Olympic rings trademark stronger than the usual trademark.

Re:Vital step missing

[gowen]

Who's star atheletes are in trouble right now?

Well, last I checked, it was Tim Montgomery (THG, via BALCO), Marion Jones (ditto), Torri Edwards (Nikeathon), Kevin Toth, John McEwen, Melissa Price, Regina Edwards, Kelli White. Throw in a previous positive tests from Carl Lewis, that was swept under the carpet. Need I go on? I could.

Fortunately, with USADA, this looks like it might change.

See this or this for examples.

PS : Hockey is not governed by US Athletics, which is, unsurprisingly, concened with Athletics.

Re:Vital step missing

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you know that that variable actually has an influence in the model unless you've statistically tested it for significance, controlling for other variables? Isn't what you're saying just blind conjecture, and worse yet, politically motivated? Is that how science should be done? Or perhaps you have links to published reports, now that I'd be interested in seeing. Not you're ignorant rants though.

Re:Vital step missing

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're actually claiming that no other athletes in the world are doping, that it's only done in the US?

Holy crap, so what's next, an explanation of how it's Bush's fault? Or wait, Cheney's. No, Rumsfeld's. Powell's? Uh.. no wait, it's *always* Kissinger's fault!

Re:Vital step missing

[gowen]

So you're actually claiming that no other athletes in the world are doping, that it's only done in the US?

Err, no. I'm not saying anything like that. For example, Dwain Chambers, a British athlete, was also recently banned for using THG. So stop setting up idiotic strawmen.

But, if you followed the sport, you'd know that US Athletics has an absolutely shocking track record when dealing with doping.

Re:Vital step missing

[Anonymous Coward]

The US is in no way more guilty of it than any other western European country, that's for sure.

But they are, sorry. To say that the US and especially the US Track and Field association has a bad track record when it comes to doping would really be an understatement. Just look at what they did during the Olympic Games in Sydney. There were american athletes that were doped, the US Olympic Comitee knew they were doped and ..................

nothing happened, they covered it up.

You don't believe me, try a google search, I'm sure you will be able to find an incredible amount of articles on the subject.

There are further stories to be told, like US Athletes constantly dodging required doping tests with no consequences whatsoever.

And of course there is the Balco case.
I'm sure google will be your friend in finding information about this too.

Last but not least, this does in no way mean that doping isn't a global phenomenon and that there isn't widespread doping in other nations too, but the US has a particular bad reputation when it comes to fighting doping and this reputation is well deserved.

Re:Vital step missing

[PsiPsiStar]

Well, part of that would be covered under 'past number of medals gained' as well as the wealth of the particular nation, considering that desire is not enough. A champion has to be able to avoid detection, which means good technology.

These things are far easier to quantify than 'desire.'

Re:Vital step missing

[strictfoo]

And the same thing could be done for almost any country.
Many of those are accusations, and while some are probably true, we can do the same thing for almost any country. Let's start a list, shall we?

England
England again (the world champ 100m sprinter... no!)
Germany
Ireland
Russia
Turkey!

How multicultural! Those took me about 5 minutes to find.

Have a good day

Re:Vital step missing

[Anonymous Coward]

For someone who is 'not saying anything like that', you certainly are focusing on the US. One British athlete? That's it? Again, it seems you're content with giving the impression that "US : rule :: World : exception" when it comes to doping...

Perhaps you'd be better off dealing with your animosity and lack of objectivity before continuing this - wouldn't want anyone to get the idea that you're a bigot, now, would we?

Re:Vital step missing

[Anonymous Coward]

Eh, just let it go. He's not interested in being objective. He's having much more fun calling down the shit on the US dopers only. Best not to even mention that other countries also have dopers, you might upset him.

Re:Vital step missing

[Anonymous Coward]

Just shows how you post anything anti-US on slashdot gets you +5.

Likewise for Pro-US posts, apparently.

News flash: there are a lot of zealots out there, and they tend to seek out power (like becoming website moderators). Shocking, eh?

Re:Vital step missing

[gowen]

He's having much more fun calling down the shit on the US dopers only

No. I'm calling down shit on the US dope testers, who, prior to the establishment of USADA, ended up responsible for athletic performance (and the enormous income it generated) and dope testing.

Unsurprisingly, this led to a massive conflict of interest, and the US dope testing becoming something of a laughing stock. Don't believe me? Then don't take my word for it. Here's what Dick Pound of the World Anti-Doping Authority has to say :

"I think the leadership within USA Track & Field has been largely responsible for this problem getting as bad as it has, and they're going to have to look very carefully at their own house. I think that they have demonstrated over the past few years there is a very serious problem, and it is a sleazy thing."

"I think that a lot of the difficulty has been simply a lack of no tolerance for cheating. Until that message goes out and is backed up by some sanctions, it's kind of an invitation to flirt out there at the edges."

Re:Vital step missing

[Anonymous Coward]

the problem is that the US dopers were all TOP RANKED and had received a large number of medals.

of course, the same problem exists in every country.
but nowhere else half of the track and field team were tested positive during a period of two years

Re:Vital step missing

[Anonymous Coward]

no dude,

the problem is that US media made fun of east european contries and accused them all to be cheaters in the past.

Re:Vital step missing

[Anonymous Coward]

Fine. US dopers, US testers, whatever. Keyword is 'only'.

Re:Vital step missing

[Necromancyr]

So, let's say USA sends 500 athletes. And 100 get doping allegations.

Korea sends 50, and ten of their athletes getsdoping charges against them.

Oh wow, america has so many more. Not really, same number of athletes 'cheating' in the olympic teams sent. No real difference. Both have 1 in 5 people they send using illegal doping agents.

Then again, you can test positive for 'doping' simply by training at high altitudes...so it's not all that accurate for all things.

Re:Vital step missing

[Pentagram]

England doesn't compete in the Olympics.

Woah

[Xpilot]

What's with all the links to half-naked men? Dammit, Slashdot has gone all metrosexual these days.

Re:Woah

[Class Act Dynamo]

I know. And did you notice that the two almost naked Greeks were hugging tightly in anticipation of winning the gold. It's almost like the ancient olympics, but they were not oiled up.

Relevence ???

[Anonymous Coward]

How about we forgot about this silly talley and watch the outcome as it unfolds...

Re:Relevence ???

[strider44]

Exactly. It's a sporting event, and if we had some way of telling exactly what happened then it wouldn't be fun.

None-the-less, I don't think Greece winning the syncronised diving should be counted as predictable. It's along the same lines as Stephen Bradbery's ice skating 1,2,3,4 crashing out and him coming from fifth place to win gold. In this particular example the teams coming first and second stuffed up their dives big time, with China getting absolutely nothing and America (though on the news broadcast it said Russia so I could be wrong about that) had one of their divers hit the board with his foot on the way down.

Anyway, unpredictability is what makes sport fun.

Re:Relevence ???

[zero-one]

How about we forget this silly sporting event and use the tally?

Re:Relevence ???

[sharkdba]

In this particular example the teams coming first and second stuffed up their dives big time, with China getting absolutely nothing and America (though on the news broadcast it said Russia so I could be wrong about that) had one of their divers hit the board with his foot on the way down.

It was Russian diver who hit the board (I was watching the event). So I agree with you: Greece won more by luck, although their performance was quite solid.

This is actually a common thing during Olympics. Participating athletes are usually of very high level, and competitions are often very very close. It often boils down to who makes the least mistakes. In the example you mentioned both China and Russia were clearly leading the event until they both made mistakes. This allowed Greece, US, and a few other countries to move up. You might question the fairness of this, but it actually adds a lot of drama (one mistake and you're out, lot of pressure on your performance), and makes watching the Olympics more interesting (since it's less predictable, anyone can win).

Similar thing happened during men's gymnastics. Romania was clearly leading the event, until one guy fell of the bars.

Re:Relevence ???

[timeOday]

This is actually a common thing during Olympics. Participating athletes are usually of very high level, and competitions are often very very close. It often boils down to who makes the least mistakes.

This is why the X-Games are/were in some ways more fun. Most of the sports are fads. Granted, that trivializes it on one hand, but it also means every year there are new tricks, and a real chance for breakthroughs. You might even argue it favors more generalist athletes, who can pick up a new sport more quickly.

The Olympics on the other hand is about pristine perfection. Everybody competing has already done it 10,000 times or more, the question is whether or not they nail it in one try.

Re:Relevence ???

[Xaria]

And to clarify (also watching the event) the US divers had the most perfect synchronisation in the event. They both pulled out of their (beautiful) dives late, and in perfect unison entered the water with their legs about 30 degrees from vertical. Oops!

Thanks to them, Australia won a bronze medal. We usually suck at the diving, so it's much appreciated :)

Re:Relevence ???

[strider44]

yep, that's why America was ringing in my mind. I was still thinking America stuffed up in a gold-medal winning position, but it just wasn't as bad as the russians or chinese.

Mandelbrot

[m00nun1t]

I'm sure Mandelbrot will claim to predict this sooner or later.

Predictability...

[dmayle]

and it's all perfectly predictable!

While that's one thing Vegas will no longer be taking bets for...

Re:Predictability...

[Neko-girl]

Probably because it's a losing proposition.

Re:Predictability...

[mister_tim]

Actually, funny you should mention that. There have been studies (I can't find a reference just at the moment though) that show that bookmakers and betting agencies are better at predicting things, such as the outcome of an election, than most other forms of prediction (e.g. those taking into account past performance, statistical analysis, etc). I guess that people, taken as a population, really are very careful about what they do with their money.

But..

[rf0]

..it still doesn't tell us who to bet on in the Womens beach volleyball. Damn now I'm going to have to watch every match to find out

Rus

Re:But..

[meringuoid]

Stuff beach volleyball. I'm following the Japanese womens' gymnastics team...

Re:But..

[Reapy]

I'd put your money on Walsh and May. Do they ever lose? :)

Re:But..

[strider44]

as an Australian I'll have to point out the two pottharst/Lochowitz (spelling probably wrong) and cook/sanderson teams. Pottharst and Cook being the winners of the Sydney olympics :) And since I'm pretty sure Walsh and May were around 4 years ago, yes they do lose.

Re:But..

[strider44]

And in current news, a rampant pedaphile was caught today after posting about his disgusting compulsion on a popular news web-site...

Re:But..

[Anonymous Coward]

While Walsh and May were around 4 years ago, Walsh was playing indoor volleyball, not beach. So they didn't lose then (as a team, anyway).

Re:But..

[ifwm]

Misty May and Kerri Walsh. They're by far the best (despite a lingering abdominal injury) and should win the Gold. As you know, however, anything can happen in athletic competition.

Oh, and they're fun girls too (I played in the sam tournament with them last year on the AVP)

Re:But..

[ifwm]

Walsh and May didn't play together 4 years ago, in fact Kerri Walsh was on the indoor team in Sydney, and if I remember correctly, Misty May played with Holly McPeak.

The Australians have NO chance, and I'll back that up with money.

Re:But..

[Anonymous Coward]

"Oh, and they're fun girls too (I played in the sam tournament with them last year on the AVP)"

I misread that as....

I played in the spam tournement with them last year on the AVP (Alien Versus Predator).

Proof positive I have been paying waaaay too much attention to /. and television ads during commercials (on other channels) for terrible movies during the olympics.

Re:But..

[Fishstick]

heh - but actually women's gymnastics is no longer the exclusive province of the 12-14 set.

Female gymnasts: older--and healthier?

In a recent rule change, the Federation Internationale de Gymnastique (FIG), the group that governs international gymnastics competitions, responded to the persisting concerns in this area. As of January 1, 1997, FIG raised the age eligibility by 1 year, so that female gymnasts now must turn 16 the year they compete at the senior international level. The change affects senior American women, who must now turn 15, rather than 14, the year of their national competition. FIG also raised the age limit for junior international competitors from 12 to 13.

The age of female gymnasts has been an issue in the sport for 25 years. Jackie Fie, who helped found the American women's gymnastics program in the 1960s and is president of FIG's women's technical committee, recalls that the age threshold was 14 in the 1970s and changed to 15 in the 1980s. The present limit, she says, has been discussed since 1988 and was actually approved by FIG in 1994. Fie, who lives in Jefferson, Iowa, says the change was prompted by many concerns, including the musculoskeletal development of young competitors, lengthening gymnastic careers, preventing burnout, and countering negative publicity that the sport has received.

16 seems to be the societal threshold between 'pedophelia' and 'jailbait'. Still wrong, but...

They neglect the important question

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does Puerto Rico have its own Olympic team?

It's part of the United States, so why? Because it's not a state? No. Washington, DC isn't a state and you don't see it with its own team. This just doesn't make any sense.

Re:They neglect the important question

[Skier4Life]

After reading your comment I did a quick search in Google News and found this article.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/94 21036.htm?1c
The ironic thing about the article is it recommends DC field a basketball team.

Also, if you want more information on Puerto Rico you can go to this link.
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Puerto_Rico

Re:They neglect the important question

[I confirm I'm not a]

Why does Puerto Rico have its own Olympic team?

Maybe because it's self-governing? Sport seems odd like that: for most events (not the Olympics, but most -all? - others) the UK does not compete: England, Scotland and Wales do instead (and Northern Irish athletes compete with Ireland).

Sport's wierd like that. My advice is to pick just one sport (I picked Women's Beach Volleyball) and stick with it, ignoring all the other nonsense sports fans are supposed to participate in (except maybe drinking beer. Beer's OK.)

Re:They neglect the important question

[adolfojp]

Perhaps I can answer your question.

Puerto Rico is not part of the USA, it belongs to the USA. It was given to the USA by Spain in 1898 afted its defeat in the Spanish American War.

Although its constitution names it a Comonwealth, it is actually a colony, a territory with some form of limited local government. Puerto Ricans are US citizens, and use the Dolar as a currency. We must abide by the American governmet, yet we cannot vote for the President or have representation in the Senate or in the Congress.

So there you have it, Puerto Rico is not part of the USA, it is an american territory.

On a related issue. About the future status of the island. 47% of the voters want statehood, 47% want to preserve the status quo and the remaining 6% want its independence. As you can infer from these numbers, the matters of status are actively debated on a daily basis, yet, no change seems posible in the near future.


Cheers,

Adolfo

Re:They neglect the important question

[DavidpFitz]

Sport seems odd like that: for most events (not the Olympics, but most -all? - others) the UK does not compete: England, Scotland and Wales do instead (and Northern Irish athletes compete with Ireland).

Not quite true... atheletes from Northern Ireland actually have the choice whether to compete for the great Britain or Ireland. The team is specifically not the UK, as this would include Northern Ireland.

Also, the UK rarely competes as a single team - but often as Great Britain (the UK, sans NI) in Rugby League, for example.

Re:They neglect the important question

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does Puerto Rico have its own Olympic team?

I see you are a basketball fan. /grin

Re:They neglect the important question

[pjt33]

Another example is Korea - there's one Korean team at the Olympics representing both North and South Korea.

Re:They neglect the important question

[robin_j]

Northern Irish athletes compete with Ireland

The only international sport I know of in which NI competes as part of an Irish team is rugby union. Do you know of any others?

People born in NI can claim Irish citizenship and as a result may play for (Republic of) Ireland so that may be where your confusion lies.

Re:They neglect the important question

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a reason for that. North Korea isn't a recognized country by most of the world. Yes, they know it exists, but it's treated as a real country with its own embassy, etc. Washington, DC has a Korean Embassy, but it belongs to the South Koreans.

Re:They neglect the important question

[Anonymous Coward]

Puerto Ricans are US citizens, and use the Dolar as a currency

Well, if should be easy to spot these counterfeit bills, I imagine.

Re:They neglect the important question

[DrCash]

So perhaps if the NBA offered San Juan an expansion team next year,... we would sway their vote towards statehood,... ;-)

I wonder what a Puerto Rican NBA team would be called?

Re:They neglect the important question

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does Puerto Rico have its own Olympic team?

To kick the Dream Team's ass!

*ducks*

Re:They neglect the important question

[matlhDam]

Cricket's another sport where the Ireland team is a composite North/Republic team. Of course, cricket isn't exactly big in Ireland...

Re:They neglect the important question

[2short]

The Korean team represents South Korea. North Korea is not allowed to compete.

Re:They neglect the important question

[sunking2]

This is totally not true. Currently N.K. has 3 medals. North Korea is not some phantom nation, virtually everyone recognizes them as a nation. Other than S. Africa and apartheid a while ago I can't think of another nation not allowed to participate.

The last few days have been pretty ironic. On Friday you have the two Koreas marching through the opening ceremonies hand in hand. Less than a week later you have S Korea throwing hissy fits over the US talking about pulling out the majority of troops from the DMZ.

Maybe they aren't so chummy after all?

Re:They neglect the important question

[sharkdba]

On similar note: why does Taiwan not have its own Olympic team? Pressure from China too much?

Re:They neglect the important question

[pyat]

with regard to soccer, Northern Ireland has its own national team, quite distinct from the Republic of Ireland team.

In rugby there is an all-ireland international team

Re:They neglect the important question

[PantsWearer]

I'd just like to point out that Puerto Rico is not alone in this distinction. There are a number of US territories throughout the world, among them American Samoa, Guam and the Northern Marianas Islands. The US doesn't really come close to the territories that the Brits still have lying around, but it takes a long time to deconstruct an empire upon which the sun never sets.

Also, I'd like to not that this isn't limited to offshore lands either. The District of Columbia (the DC in "Washington, DC" for those watching at home) is actually under approximately the same non-representational government. There is a single representative in Congress, who is not allowed to vote except on committee and more or less doesn't get much say. Heck, DC license plates actually say "Taxation without Representation" on them.

Re:They neglect the important question

[Galvatron]

That is no doubt the formal reason, but I'd offer another reason: to blunt Chinese attempts to keep Taiwan out. China tries to argue that Taiwan should not be allowed to compete because it is a "rogue province." The US counters that if Puerto Rico gets its own team, Taiwan can have one too.

Re:They neglect the important question

[mvdwege]

How about Football?

Last I checked, Northern Ireland is an independent member of UEFA, seperate from England and the Republic of Ireland.

Mart

Re:They neglect the important question

[Anonymous Coward]

Hope you're not envying something to the Cubans...

No Good?

[Anonymous Coward]

so *being good* has nothing to do with it?

ah.. so much like politics...

Re:No Good?

[caitsith01]

Correct. Being 'good' is just an amalgam of money, population from which to select specimens, logistics, mentality of competitors etc. etc.

Unless you would care to assert that there is a genetic (i.e. racial) reason for 'goodness', in which case you are a braver person than I.

hosting the games usually gives a medal boost

[Anonymous Coward]

> Other factors can also affect the outcome: hosting the games usually gives a
> medal boost.

Huh - that would explain why Greece is doing so well at the diving events at the UKs expense.

Lies...

[NETHED]

There are lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.

This might sound good and all, but comon, this just reinforces common sense.

Ok, if country A has lots of money, then they can train thier athletes.
If country A has had good athletes before, it stands that they will have good athelets in the future.

The question I ask, did this predict Thorpeo's upset of the American swimmer? I think not

Re:Lies...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thorpedo's victory was an upset?

WTF?

Thorpey held the WR, had 9 of the fastest times ever, had not been nbeaten in the distance for 4 years.... add to that Phelps had never gone close to any of Thorpe's times.

Phelps lowered his PB and got third - which, when you look at his performances over the distance is in fact a bloody good result personally for him.

The fact is, it would have been a pretty major upset for Thorpe to lose to Phelps. It was always goignt o be a race between Hoogie and Thorpe, NOT Thorpe and Phelps - it was only moron commentators who were talkign up the clash that begged to differ.

Past performances always said Thorpe verses Hoogie and guess what - that's exactly how it turned out.

Admittedly, the race did live up to hype as an event. It was a damn good one.

Re:Lies...

[mike_mgo]

I haven't followed swimming that closely, but was Phelps really the favorite in that race. I thought van den Hoogenband from the Netherlands (won gold in Sydney) and Thorpe from Australia (world record holder) were both favored over him in that race.

Obviously these statistical models aren't trying to pick winners of individual events, but for this race I think the result was pretty much what people expected, despite what Sports Illustrated or Time Magazine might have put on their covers while trying to sell magazines.

Re:Lies...

[Shard013]

Americans just don't like losing, so they make a big fuss if they do. America may have been supprised their star swimmer lost, but everyone else would have been shocked if this particular underdog won. He was clearly outmatched by thorpe and the other guy with a really hard name to pronounce.

Re:Lies...

[jebell]

The question I ask, did this predict Thorpeo's upset of the American swimmer? I think not

Upset? Anyone who follows swimming knows Phelps didn't have a chance in the 200 free.

Re:Lies...

[TobyWong]

You make it sound like aussie was a longshot to win, he cleaned up last olympics so I don't see how anyone could possibly be suprised he would be successful again.

Re:Lies...

[Anonymous Coward]

Statistics isn't about predicting an individual race, no one can do that. It's (partly) about analyzing which dependent variables can accurately predict a response variable, in this case, medal count. While it may be 'common sense', it might be interesting to see for each 100Mil$ GDP, how many more medals on average does a country receive? Questions like that can be answered by the statistical model, not your silly betting questions. And that wasn't even an upset, since the odds-on favorite won the race.

Re:Lies...

[Anonymous Coward]

It didn't need a formula to predict Thorpes upset of the American swimmers - he is the greatest short distance swimmer of our time - simple.

Re:Lies...

[Anonymous Coward]

This might sound good and all, but comon, this just reinforces common sense.

It is not simply reinforcing common sense, it is accurately quantifying the contribution of those factors. That is a awesome feat.

Re:Lies...

[Reapy]

Make that american commentators don't like the us losing. I was cheering on puerto rico in that basketball game. It was so awesome watching how upset the commentators were getting about it. I made the mistake of thinking it was an elimination game, thinking they were going to be done at the olympics and totally f up their tv schedule. Too bad that wouldn't have happened, it would have been hilarious.

So no, not all americans mind losing :)

Re:Lies...

[strider44]

I remember on the Dream they showed the American commentry on the 4x100 relay for the Sydney Olympics. It was understandable but hilerious in reflection. They literally said when losing on the last turn "the american team should take it from here". They also kept talking about "the streak".

So no, not all Australians mind winning :) (but we f****** hate losing!)

Re:Lies...

[strider44]

in our news coverage they didn't even mention phelps, though that's not surprising since the anchors were having fun saying Van Dam Hoogenband ten times in five seconds each time the news report came up.

Re:Lies...

[igny]

Thorpe verses Hoogie

How poetic...

Re:Lies...

[LostCluster]

If an upset was widely predicted, it's not an upset anymore...

Re:Lies...

[Pros_n_Cons]

American, and Austrailian olympians have to do it with their own funding, unlike China where they pull kids out of school at 5 years old and begin training them for one thing and giving them a million dollars if they win. I forgot which, but a few of their gold medalists are given business. The largest sport shop chain in china is owned by an gold medalist.

Re:Lies...

[One_6453]

Please tell this to the Kenyans...........

Re:Lies...

[Shard013]

Sorry for generalising. Its easy for a few people to ruin a lot of others reputations. *cough*bush*cough*

My prediction

[foidulus]

The entire population of Luxembourg gets a gold medal in 100 years(namely because they will be the only people left on the planet)

Re:My prediction

[Sique]

But... Luxembourg has won already two gold medals at the Olympics: One in 1900, and one in 1952, accompagnied by a silver medal in 1920, and two other silver medals in 1992.

Re:My prediction

[foidulus]

D'oh, the joke was that they each get a gold medal, because they are the only ones participating in it. Damn preview button.

Host Country

[worst_name_ever]

Other factors can also affect the outcome: hosting the games usually gives a medal boost.

I imagine that's due at least in part to the fact that the host country traditionally makes an attempt to field a team in every event, or at least as many as possible.

1. Compete in more events
2. ???
3. Medal profit!

Evolution - or just better training

[grunt107]

For the newer countries entering the competitions, they get better with better facilities and coaching. The US gymnastics got better with the addition of Bella K. The Chinese basketball gets US coaching. International Basketball players get NBA experience and are learning how to trounce the US 'Dream?' team.

Evolution can only be used in this context to explain the improvement of training principles.

Biological evolution would just predict athletes would just get more 'athletier'.

Re:Evolution - or just better training

[Anonymous Coward]

Biological evolution would just predict athletes would just get more 'athletier'.

Perhaps even more 'athletic' as well.

Re:Evolution - or just better training

[Life2Short]

"learning how to trounce the US 'Dream Team,'" Not exactly hi-tech, that. My 7th grade basketball coach taught us about the zone defense way back in 1976. Man was that guy ahead of his time. Snicker. Here's another sure-fire strategy that will work against current American NBA stars: force them to shoot free-throws. And the networks wonder why NBA television ratings are sagging...

Re:Evolution - or just better training

[IncarnadineConor]

It isn't that NBA players can't shoot, it's that the NBA players they selected can't shoot. Had their first choices for players not declined the US team would still be dominate, however when pretty much all the first string players turned them down, they went with big names rather then trying to put togther a solid team. They don't have a single player out there with a solid outside shot, but that doesn't mean that such a player was unavilable to them for selection. They just wanted to sell jerseys.

Re:Evolution - or just better training

[grunt107]

Here's another sure-fire strategy that will work against current American NBA stars: force them to shoot free-throws

Flamebait strategy: White, money-grubbing, midwestern groupies (worked on Kobe)

Re:Evolution - or just better training

[Anonymous Coward]

correction:

they selected a team that would pass the doping test.

Re:Evolution - or just better training

[IncarnadineConor]

Doping, sure, but they better hope Odom doesn't get selected for a drug test.

Re:Evolution - or just better training

[Kiryat Malachi]

Some columnist or another pointed out we would have done better in the Olympics had we just sent the Detroit Pistons to play. Being from Detroit, I'm all for that - can you imagine a giant gold medal statue right next to the fist? It'd be great.

But seriously, take any of the international olympic teams, put them in the NBA, and they would NOT be successful. The US Olympic team is a joke - sure, Tim Duncan is great, Iverson too, but where's Shaq? Kobe? Kevin Garnett? We have a team full of post players. The current US team is second-choice athletes; the foreign teams are first-choice. The problem isn't that the NBA players aren't any good, the problem is that the team we wanted to choose for the Olympics said no, and we were left with our second choices.

Here's a question for you - if zone D would dominate the NBA, why aren't NBA teams using it constantly? The answer: because it wouldn't. It just happens that the US put together a team uniquely ill-suited to compete in the Olympics. Had we added a couple decent shooters to the team (we tried, by the way - they said no) Puerto Rico would be holding its collective backside.

Re:Evolution - or just better training

[Khomar]

A perfect example of "learning how to trounce the US 'Dream Team'" was displayed by the Detroit Pistons. Rather than focusing on the big stars, they developed a team that actually played as a team. Other countries have realized that this combined with the zone defense you spoke about and just executing good plain fundamentals will give all those over-hyped NBA stars a run for their money. We don't need a collection of stars on our olympic team. We need a team that can play together.

I stopped actively watching the NBA several years ago because it had ceased to be a team sport. It seemed that every game came down to this: 1) point guard brings down the ball, 2) pass the ball to the star player, 3) star player plays one-on-one against other star player and shoots fade away or dunks (after a modest, uncalled travel). This is not basketball. This is marketing and hype. The only basketball worth watching in the US anymore is the March Madness, and even here the stardom is starting to interfere with good play.

Personally, I was glad to see our olympic team lose. Now maybe they can forget their egos and start playing team ball.

Re:Evolution - or just better training

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, NBA teams don't use zone defense generally because it's against the rules. Only man-to-man is allowed.

Specifically if a defender moves toward one opponent, then switches course before they reach there (as you would do in a zone defense if he left your zone) the referee calls illegal defense.

Obviously it doesn't get called 100% of the time but if a team tried zone as a main strategy the officials would start to take notice.

Re:Evolution - or just better training

[ifwm]

You're wrong, zone defense is allowed, with some variations. The problem is that the teams they compete against are very good at the zone and have been playing together for years, generally.

A few decent shooters on the US team would change everything.

Re:Evolution - or just better training

[chanceH]

you can play a zone, as long as one of your zones isn't in the lane. I.e. where the offense wants to go. So its still pretty impractical.

its better than 'illegal defense' calls they just got rid of, but still stupid, and US team is reaping rewards of that crap now.

Thorpedos Win

[Anonymous Coward]

I am surprised at the comment about Ian Thorpe beating Phelps. It might just that being an aussie he is all you hear about but the thorpedo, the "superfish" or simple thorpie was always expected to win that race (at least according to Australian Media).

I am somewhat surprised that Australia didn't get mentioned in the top 4 predictions, considering the number of athletes we have in Athens.

Finally (To All Australian Slashdotters),

Aussie, Aussie, Aussie.....

Re:Thorpedos Win

[donscarletti]

Oi Oi Oi

Re:Thorpedos Win

[DavidpFitz]

It might just that being an aussie he is all you hear about but the thorpedo, the "superfish" or simple thorpie was always expected to win that race (at least according to Australian Media).

And in the UK - what track record does this young American have? Thorpe proved he can do it at Olympic level at Sydney and has the advantage of having built-in flippers!

Re:Thorpedos Win

[Anonymous Coward]

He was the youngest male swimmer to ever set a WR when he broke the 200 fly record before his 16th birthday. He also has the WR in both IMs and has won 3 golds and 2 other medals in this games and still has 3 events to go. Ian is past his prime. And Michael was in the 2000 games when he was only 15. Michael also has won more than a few world championships in the last four years. Just because you don't know anything about swimming doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

-- Signed an actual swimmer --

Iraqi Soccer

[BlueTooth]

I assumed that the reason Iraq was doing well had to do with the fact that they don't face torture if the return home in defeat. Policy like that has tended to drive the big stars away over the past years.

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[strictfoo]

Woah woah woah... slow down cowboy! This is slashdot. That comment might be ever so slightly construed as a round-about way to condone US foreign policy. We can't have that here, now can we?

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[BlueTooth]

might slightly be construed that way...but just so we all know where we stand i'll point out that there is a big difference between "evil dictator bad" and "us foreign policy good".

how much is a room in your sig going for?

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[Daniel Dvorkin]

Woah woah woah... slow down cowboy! This is slashdot. That comment might be ever so slightly construed as a round-about way to condone US foreign policy. We can't have that here, now can we?

You know, every time someone says something like that, he weakens his own case ... I'm really sick of all the Bushies trying to act like they're persecuted for their views. They're not, on /. or anywhere else. But it's a remarkably effective bit of propaganda, isn't it?

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[Anonymous Coward]

It seemed to me that the biggest reason Iraq beat Portugal wasn't the "we will not be tortured" stuff. The biggest reason was, to put it quite frankly, that Portugal played awfully bad.

But alas, we are talking about the post-war Iraq and everyone is looking for a feel-good story.

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[Anonymous Coward]

ok, this might sound like a feel-good-story, but it is not. simply because each members of the iraqi team probably had a civilian friend/relative that was killed by american "friendly fire" in the past year.

now that we got past that, let me just say that iraq played GREAT football, Portugal played well as well but they never had a chance against a superior team.

BTW, iraq just won their group and are set for quarter finals.

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[mzwaterski]

Just to be fair, they probably each had a civilian friend/relative that was killed by their government before the war as well.

On an unrelated note:
Why don't we just be happy for a country that has gone through some VERY rough times? I for one am excited to see that they have something good to cheer about. I can't help but cheer that team on!

-Mike

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[strider44]

Plus everyone was going for them as well, and this has a huge impact! I remember seeing something similar with Camaroon vs Spain grand final at Sydney. Spain were favourites (at least in the eyes of the crowd; I didn't check actual betting), and Spain kind-a liked to jump (or should I say dive?) at the opportunity to milk a penalty. This meant that there were about a hundred thousand people in the crowd cheering violently for Camaroon - it was inevitable that they would win.

In the end in the Iraqi match the psychological match was won before the game started.

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[BigBadDude]

"gone"?
why do you past?

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[mzwaterski]

I said gone, because in the past, they have gone through some rough times (i.e. a war being fought on top of them). This in no way means that they are not currently going through rough times and/or will not go through rough times in the future.

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[Impotent_Emperor]

It's rigged, I tells ya!

Isn't it obvious? The U.S. makes sure Iraq wins a gold medal in soccer. The Iraqi people will be so happy that all fighting will stop and peace will endure for 20 years.

Don't underestimate how serious some of these countries are with soccer. Some would assassinate players on competing teams to ensure victory!

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[Minna Kirai]

I assumed that the reason Iraq was doing well

But they're not doing well. That's a myth. In truth, the other teams are doing poorly. Football is the world's most popular sport, but none of the good players have been sent to the Olympics. They've got more important tournaments to worry about.

Some newspapers used lines like " a shocking win against the formidable Portugal squad", but that's simply a lie. The Portugese team was weak; everyone knew it.

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[rho]

No, not persecuted. They're called, in equal proportions, baby-killers, gay-bashers, eager-polluters, chickenhawks, war-mongers, racists, and Swiftian-like in their anti-poor attitudes.

Persecution? No, not persecuted. They're not put in cages, like gorillas, or denied ballot access. Baseless name-calling, borderline libel and slander, and various other ad hominem attacks abound, though. I'm not all that offended if some people classify that as "persecution", however--we are quite spoiled in America these days, due no doubt to the extreme unfairness inherent to our religio-capitalistic oppressive culture. When the biggest threats to your free speech involve the possible inability to access goatse.cx from the public library, it's possible that some people might exaggerate the nuances.

So, tell me. Do you think that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are being persecuted? After all, they've gotten close to zero media time on their well-documented charges, and have instead been accused of being Republican apparachniks by everybody from Dan Rather on down. Contrast this to the Bush-AWOL story that had legs for two weeks, which was based on the careful accretion of no facts at all. A serious charge has been made against Kerry--where are the defenders of the truth? They're poking into the Internet postings of the authors of a book and ignoring the charge altogether.

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[Daniel Dvorkin]

If you honestly think that the "Swift Boat Veterans For Truth" (none of whom actually served with Kerry; everyone still living who actually did serve with him supports his story) are being ignored, and that the AWOL Bush story had legs (or that it was based on "the careful accretion of no facts at all," when in fact it is quite clear to anyone who examines the facts of the case that the President of the United States is a deserter) after the way it was buried during the 2000 campaign, in contrast to the spurious "Clinton is a draft dodger" line that we heard ad nauseam for eight years ... in short, if you think the mass media has been anything but sycophantic toward the Republicans ... you're living in a world so different from reality that I'm not sure that there's any point to this discussion.

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[Minna Kirai]

(none of whom actually served with Kerry; everyone still living who actually did serve with him supports his story)

Wrong. One (1) of them did serve with Kerry, and doesn't support him. The guy is a staunch Republican, of course.
Steve Gardner.

Re:Iraqi Soccer

[mark2003]

Of course no-one in the Republican party or amongst their supporters accuses anyone that is slightly more left wing than them of being limp wristed liberals, baby killers, girly men, cowards, traitors or communists do they... or tries every piece of slander and inuendo that they can find to impeach a president?

Republicans spend their time attacking the personal lives of anyone that stands against them, generally rather than attack their policies, and then cry foul when anyone does the same. Sen (R) Kettle meet Sen (R) Black...

Why bother having the olympics?

[acomj]

They say in any given event anything can happen. Thats why they play the games.

Models may be able to approximate overall medal performance but its a little disingenuous because its up to each of the athletes to perform in his/her event.

If the models worked too well gambling on sports would stop.

Re:Why bother having the olympics?

[Anonymous Coward]

The models predict trends not individual results.

Re:Why bother having the olympics?

[mike_mgo]

Why would improved models have anything to do with sports betting?

Points spreads and handicapping are already models used (ok, not models really, just a way for bookies to balance the money). Bets are placed all the time on sports where the winner is all but assured. Unless these new models can actually predict the final score or how much faster the winner will be than second place, then there is no reason sports betting shouldn't be able to continue.

Poverty?

[kaleco]

"If you're on the poverty line, you don't have a lot of time to invest in sports," said John Hawksworth, head of macroeconomics at PwC.

This isn't always true. Many athletes come form impoverished backgrounds. This is especially true of football (soccer) in the UK. In Brazillian townships, excelling in sport is seen as a route to a better lifestyle. A fiendish motivator, that.

Re:Poverty?

[plinkyplonkypk]

Way to stop reading midway through a paragraph, buddy !

The point is backed up in the next line !

The whole quote:
If you're on the poverty line, you don't have a lot of time to invest in sports," said John Hawksworth, head of macroeconomics at PwC. Poor countries like Brazil can excel in soccer, the one truly global sport. But in nations where the horse is still the primary mode of transportation, not many people have the time or leisure to compete in dressage.

Re:Poverty?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's about poor countries, not poor athletes.

A poor athlete in a rich country would have many opportunities to use athletics as a route to riches.

A poor athlete in a poor country would not have as many of those opportunities. How many Elbonians are forking over hundreds of dollars for Superbowl tickets?

The current table

[mi]

Here is a more or less up to date table of the medals so far.

Ukraine is not doing too badly, thank you very much. Not for the third poorest country in Europe anyway.

Eating Bubbles?

[Anonymous Coward]

The US might have wanted Michael Phelps to win the 200m freestyle, but Thorpie was always the safest bet (Thorp's PB was better than Phelps). I think it would have been an upset had Phelps won, rather than the other way around as the poster implies...

The reason Phelps has to eat Thorpe's bubbles

[hayden]

It's all a cunning plan by Australia to breed the perfect swimmer. It's working well too. Nobody seems to have noticed the size 27 feet. We're going to try to get away with hands the size of hub caps at the next olympics.

Re:The reason Phelps has to eat Thorpe's bubbles

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean size 17 feet don't you?

Re:The reason Phelps has to eat Thorpe's bubbles

[Anonymous Coward]

Its either a joke or an exageration, Australians a known for both

Re:The reason Phelps has to eat Thorpe's bubbles

[Otter]

Nobody seems to have noticed the size 27 feet.

Nobody there seems to have noticed the Japanese guy kicking illegally off the wall yesterday, even though I spotted it instantly at home. Given how bad the officiating has been (softball and gymnastics have both been absolutely terrible), someone could probably show up with fins on. I don't get why the officiating at super-high-profile events (Olympics, World Cup) continues to be so consistently lousy.

That said, while I normally root for swimmers in inverse proportion to the silliness of their suits, Thorpe is just freaking amazing. His free is like watching a fish swim.

Re:The reason Phelps has to eat Thorpe's bubbles

[ambrosine10]

"Kicking illegally off the wall"? I think all swimmers kick off the wall ;)

If you mean his kicking style, I don't think it was illegal. The Americans sound like sore losers to me.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A648 6-2004Aug16.html

Re:The reason Phelps has to eat Thorpe's bubbles

[DeionXxX]

Technically the kick he did was illegal. It was a dolphin type kick that's not allowed in the breast stroke event. Only the "breast-stroke-type" kick (sort of like a frog kick) is allowed in the event. When I was watching it I noticed it, and then the commentators immediately started talking about it, even before the race was over. The kick gave him that extra half-second lead (since he was losing at the end of the first leg and thats when he did his kick to inch ahead of the American).

It was unfair and probably would've been called correctly if the judges had underwater cameras like the TV viewing audience.

-- D3X

Re:The reason Phelps has to eat Thorpe's bubbles

[Anonymous Coward]

What a load of crap. The judges couldn't see what was happening underwater?? What do you think they're doing there?

You say the only reason Phelps lost the lead was because Thorpe cheated, but Phelps came THIRD. Did van den Hoogenband cheated too?

Get a clue before calling one of the greatest athletes in history a cheat.

Re:The reason Phelps has to eat Thorpe's bubbles

[Anonymous Coward]

"If I had swam illegally, I could be cautioned or sanctioned, but it never happened to me so far," he said. "After the race, I was not cautioned and was not sanctioned, and that shows how my technique is not under consideration of sanction or caution."

I'm glad the Japanese use faulty logic just like us Americans.

Re:The reason Phelps has to eat Thorpe's bubbles

[ambrosine10]

What a load of crap. How did he then win the 200 event? The judges were surely watching closely. And another swimmer did get called for that violation. And the American got a bronze, not even a silver. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5716924/

But when you take into account....

[Dj]

When you take into account the size and prosperity of the nations competing, and measure it against their actual performance...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sydney/story/0,7369,37 66 44,00.html

The winner is Cuba....

Re:But when you take into account....

[Anonymous Coward]

thats another reason why that catsro dude is evil!

oblig simpsons quote

[REBloomfield]

"You're forgetting what the Olympics are all about: giving out medals of beautiful gold, so-so silver and shameful bronze."

Re:oblig simpsons quote

[Anonymous Coward]

It is still an improvement on the original Greek Olympics, they only recorded who won....

In other news

[aussie_a]

no-one gives a shit.

always root against...

[zeus_tfc]

Sorry, that made me think of a Top Secret! line:

Hillary Flammond: Who do you favor in the Virginia Slims tournament?
Blindman: In women's tennis, I always root against the heterosexual.

Australia was winning

[pommiekiwifruit]

Australia was leading the medal tally at one point (13 medals) but then China overtook it.

And the UK just gets a silver for synchronised diving - with the least identical pair since Schwarzenegger and DeVito in Twins!

Re:Australia was winning

[Anonymous Coward]

We don't feel so bad, China has over 50 times our population.

Re:Australia was winning

[imroy]

I happened to be watching the mens synchro diving the other night and saw the UK pair. The shorter of the two really only came up to the shoulder of the other! I wonder how that effects the dives. Not only would the difference in body length affect the time that they hit the water, but possibly also change their spin characteristics.

Re:Australia was winning

[Anonymous Coward]

I hardly saw any post that's more misleading! China was leading the medal and gold counts from the start, and Australia was top for only like 1 hour in the last 5 days, and China regained lead after that 15-minute of fame for Australia. But in your post you made it sound like Australia led for 3 days and was really winning before China took over.

developing countries?

[coolcold]

what about people living in developing countries? fitness (which is related partially to number of gold medals) of a country's population changed with the living conditions eg try to find a good runner in country that still do hunting. a "good" living conditions would make people more lazier thus making it hard to find good player especially evoluation takes place. just a thought

Australians are the best right now

[essreenim]

..if thats the case.
They're GDP is not much different to US. But they have far less people - only about 30million compared to over 250 in the US. They are particularly good a churning out great swimmers.

I think part of the reason is, they invest allot in sports psychology, and given that 90% of Aussies live on or very near the sea, water is in their blood. They just like to swim!!!

Re:Australians are the best right now

[lachlan76]

Yes, I love my country.

I like swimming.

Aussie swimmers kick ass!

Re:Australians are the best right now

[pommiekiwifruit]

Nothing like sharks, blue-ringed octopus, crocodiles and jellyfish to give aussies incentives to swim faster :-)

Re:Australians are the best right now

[freqres]

think part of the reason is, they invest allot in sports psychology, and given that 90% of Aussies live on or very near the sea, water is in their blood. They just like to swim!!!

I think the sharks make good training partners as well. For the swimmers that don't make the cut, not only is the water in their blood, their blood is in the water. Australia is starting to sound a lot like Soviet Russia.

Re:Australians are the best right now

[kimba]

The real figures sound even better - there are 20 million Aussies, and just shy of 300 million Americans.

Re:Australians are the best right now

[simong_oz]

[Australia] only about 30million compared

actually just under 19million in the 2001 census

invest allot in sports psychology

Just in sports in general - facilities, training, coaching. And in identifying and nurturing young athletes. many countries are great at grass-roots level and professional level, but the in between steps are not so good - promoting and encouraging promising youngsters to become professional athletes.

The weather helps too - more incentive to be outdoors. and there's also the fact that sportsmen(women) are held in high regard in society, so being seen as a professional athlete/sportman(woman) is considered a career, not a hobby.

Re:Australians are the best right now

[vip223]

Or "Freddy the Crab" in the case of Australian swimmer Liesel Jones

Re:Australians are the best right now

[Anonymous Coward]

Er, Australia has a GDP of $570.3 billion and the US has a GDP of $10.98 trillion. Apparently they don't teach spelling or economics wherever you live.

Re:Australians are the best right now

[pommiekiwifruit]

The weather helps too - more incentive to be outdoors.

And the shockingly bad television, or am I thinking of NZ there...

Re:Australians are the best right now

[Spyritus]

Well that explains the difference between Australia and Kenya at track and field.

The only things Australian's have to outrun are snakes, Kenyan's have lions.

Re:Australians are the best right now

[Pentagram]

given that 90% of Aussies live on or very near the sea, water is in their blood

I think water is in everyone's blood.

Re:Australians are the best right now

[Anonymous Coward]

about 20 million people - and yes australian GDP is incredible given the population but its trillions behind the US' GDP.

Re:Australians are the best right now

[Anonymous Coward]

Australia has 20 million people, and only a fraction of the US GDP. We're just good at what we do :P

Re:Australians are the best right now

[OzRoy]

I am serious when I say this, but I actually did see a swimming coach who put a crocodile into the pool to encourage his students to swim faster.

Apparently it worked too.

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/9810/09/fringe/ au stralia.crocs/

Re:Australians are the best right now

[Anonymous Coward]

America won THREE times as many gold medals as Australia in the Sydney Olympics, Australias's own backyard!
Australia has NEVER beaten America in ANY Olympics ever in the # of medals or # of Golds won,in history. Ever.
Where do you come up with your "Australians are best" nonsense from?

Re:Australians are the best right now

[essreenim]

/ pop

Economics? Isnt that a novel written by Lucifer?

Athletes train in other countries.

[NewtonTwo]

Does this account for the numerous athletes that live and train in countries other than the ones they compete for?

Example from yesterday. Markus Rogan, silver medalist in the mens 100m backstroke trains and competes with Stanford in the USA, however, in this model it appears that medal is credited towards Austria.

Re:Athletes train in other countries.

[freqres]

I also saw a couple of girls competing for Russia in synchronized diving that lived and trained in Texas. Not to mention all the world basketball players that live in the US and play in the NBA. Same thing could be said for hockey players in the winter Olympics, though their are still a few NHL teams left in Canada.

Re:Athletes train in other countries.

[BigBadDude]

this is just stupid.

this happens everywhere. why dont you mention the US football (real football) team training in EU?

its just the way it works, just like the fact most top rated US tennis palyers are not americans

Re:Athletes train in other countries.

[NewtonTwo]

How does not mentioning the US soccer (AKA real football) training in the EU make this argument "stupid"? Nice straw man though.

No one was denying this happens both ways. The original post was debating the validity of the model trying to tie socio-economic factors to Olympic medals.

Consider this. According to what I could find, prior to Athens, Zimbabwe had won a single gold medal (1980). Does Kristy Coventrys, who trains and competes in a country other than Zimbabwe, I won't mention any specific country, winning a silver in the womens 100m back indicate that Zimbabwe's economic growth has since basically doubled?

If you ask me, unless this model accounts for that, its results are bogus.

Possible Hypothesis Test

[tabdelgawad]

Mods, bear with me if this seems OT. A history buff friend of mine tells me that there are two main theories of historical development. One is the 'great man theory', where the course of history is determined by great (as in influential, not necessarily nice) individuals. The other is a view that history is inexorably driven by economic and social conditions that lead to inevitable outcomes (think Asimov's 'psychohistory'). Clearly, we're no where close to being able to test these theories empirically.

It strikes me that creating this model for olympic medal winners could provide an excellent 'lab expermient' to test this outstanding question in the philosophy of history. In many ways, international sports resemble international relations (rivalry, preparation, 'war', great (wo)men, winners, losers, etc.). If models can predict medal outcomes with acceptable accuracy, it could provide evidence against the 'great man theory' of history, and imply that a version of 'psychohistory' might be possible in the future!

Re:Possible Hypothesis Test

[Scot Seese]

Required reading:

Diamond, Jared: "Guns, Germs & Steel"

Jealousy that Australians are kings of the pool !!

[essreenim]

it's only evolution, baby, and it's all perfectly predictable!"
...sounds like it!

here's another paper

[flynt]

I don't believe this is the same group, here is another model for prediction of medal counts.

http://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pages/faculty/andr ew .bernard/olympicmedals.htm

This page contains more information than the news piece in the Slashdot writeup, you can actually see the Math/Stats they used to construct the model. Last year, this group predicted the US's medal count and gold medal count exactly on.

Re:here's another paper

[mgs1000]

Last year, this group predicted the US's medal count and gold medal count exactly on.

Zero?

We're talking about last year's Olympics, right?

Also, Proximity to the medium you race in!!!

[essreenim]

Yes, true but its also about inclination towards certain sports. For example, the vast majority of Aussies live near the sea and so are inclined towards water sports, particularly swimmimg. Thats why they own every one (per population) in the pool!!

Re:Also, Proximity to the medium you race in!!!

[lachlan76]

Cricket/AFL/Rugby are more popular in Australia than watersports.

Re:Also, Proximity to the medium you race in!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Pfah, when measured by population it's the Dutch that own everyone in the pool, including all the Aussies and their merry fish.

Not that this refutes your argument in any way, swimming is seen as a kind of necesairy survival skill in a sea-border country where more then half of the people live below sea level :)

go Iraq!

[jeffy124]

That's pretty cool for their soccer team, considering they couldnt play any pre-Olympic exhibition matches and that the first goal they scored during these Olympics was in the wrong net. (They still won that game 4-2 over Portugal).

Re:go Iraq!

[Anonymous Coward]

yet another reason why you should vote Bush

oh, wait....

The model reprinted in a terse form.

[tod_miller]

Wealthy countries with a larger pool of potential athletes, who have been consistently successful in recent history, and have a government who sponsors athletics, will win more medals.

For my next trick, I shall predict what date Christmas will be on - using only the last 400 years of the Gregorian Calendar, minus the bits where they fsked up.

And no smart asses talking about Orthodox Christmas.

In other news, PWC open the worlds largest betting office...

More interesting stats.

[pubjames]

I think the statistic of medals by country is boring - of course bigger countries are likely to get more medals.

I think medals per capita of population is a much more interesting statistic, and show how well certain countries (like Australia) do.

Since nobody else has pointed it out, the results so far seem to suggest that China is actually going to do much better than this prediction suggests.

Re:More interesting stats.

[Ed Thomson]

buy what about the team sports? They favour the bigger nations artifically increacing their medals per capitia ratio

The end of the world is comming :o)

[pdamoc]

Abomination: netcraft about the official Olympic site
And since we are at it... let's /. the site to see how well does that combination holds. (maybe we can make the news.... again) :o)
www.athens2004.com

Re:The end of the world is comming :o)

[Anonymous Coward]

Abomination: netcraft about the official Olympic site

Netcraft comfirms it. The Olympics are dying.

Yada yada...

Medal metric

[caitsith01]

Is it true that in the US you are being shown a medal tally that is the sum total of all medals? In Australia we see nations ranked by Gold, then Silver, then Bronze.

Re:Medal metric

[imroy]

I don't know, but that's what I've heard also. I now see on www.athens2004.com that even by this metric, the USA is now equal second with us (Australia) behind China. We have twice as many gold medals though.

I still prefer Roy and H.G's tallies anyway :)

How many per person?

[houghi]

What would be realy interesting is to compare how many medals are won per athlete (or team) that participates. Or per person they send to the games, including docters, coaches, trainers and what not.

Also nice would be to compare this with the number of sports they participate in. Crossreference this also with e.g. the amount of people who live in a certain country.

e.g.: The Netherlands will get 21 medals. The US will get 70 medals. Does this mean the US sends more people or that the Dutch are better at sports, if you calculate it per captiva?

Nice table

[Anonymous Coward]

Why don't you try ranking it by Gold, like the official site?

Too true - poverty is one great motivator

[Anonymous Coward]

It also seems to me that poverty is one hell of a motivator to succeed in something like sports.

How many little rich kids wind up succeeding at the highest levels of sport? Outside of baseball's ability to run in families (Griffey, Bonds, Boone, and a bunch more), about the only atheletes that have had long-term success that I can think of and came from monied families are Kobe Bryant and Mike Piazza.

While those that came from dirt-poor backgrounds seem to abound - Lance Armstrong comes to mind immediately, basketball players from the poor inner cities, baseball players from poor Central/South American or Carribean lands, just about all of boxing.

I guess when Daddy can buy you a Bimmer for your 15th birthday so you can learn to drive it gives little reason to practice those jumpers.

Of course there are execeptions, especially in sports like gymnastics that are skewed to those who can pay for the best individualized coaching and training, but these seem to be the exceptions that prove the rule.

Re:Olympics Outsourcing

[Anonymous Coward]

> Smaller nations cannot devote the manpower or economy to such programs.

Correct. That's why they outsource to the USA. You'd be surprised how many Olympians are US citizens/permanent residents. Swimming and Track & Field come to mind. The local TV had a story about a local girl swimming for some foreign country, and in years past they've had stories about the US-raised athletes competing for Trinidad & Tobago in the 100m. It's a joke.

Re:What a steaming pile of crap this "study" is

[Anonymous Coward]

The model is used to quantify which of these effects is most powerful. You can't do that by blind conjecture. Perhaps the study found that some of these variables weren't even as important as once thought. You never know unless you do the research.

Actually

[caitsith01]

Actually, I will lay claim to having predicted this, right here.

...and they called me crazy! Well, who's a high paid consultant at PwC now? Hahahahahahaaa!

Ah... moderators on crack again

[edinho]

How did that get an INSIGHTFUL rating is beyond me. Nothing to back it up, purely out of the a$$ conjecture. FLAMEBAIT is probably more appropriate.

Cheers,
e.

Re:Ah... moderators on crack again

[theCoder]

Actually, I heard something like what the original poster said on NPR the other day. And a quick Google News search reveals more sources:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A164 35-2004Jul26.html
http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story.jsp?sectio nid=1258&storyid=1787674

So, yes, invading Iraq and overthrowing Saddam, even if done for the wrong reasons, did actually have some good consequences.

Admit it, Australians own the pool per population!

[essreenim]

Yeah, but baseball, basketball, American football are more polular in the US to a much bigger degree!! swimming is not a huge sport in ANY country..

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[pubjames]

Maybe his win has to do with the fact that the vast majority of aussies live near the ocean.

You North Americans are such bad losers. There are any number of posts here claiming that "other countries" are doing well because they are trained by North American coaches, or because train in the USA.

Now you claim that perhaps the didn't win the swimming because Aussies live near the ocean. Jeeze...

Can't you just accept that sometimes althletes from other countries might be better than the USA ones?

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[Anonymous Coward]

In the 70's Australia went to an Olympics and got like 5 medals. Embarassed the government pump millions and millions into a group called the Australian Institute of Sports and since then every olympics we win more and more medals - per capita Australia puts more into sports than any other nation on the planet - based on their population they win an amazing number of medals and it is all about investing in their athletes and encouraging sports.

About Quality, not Quantity

[Anonymous Coward]

I understand that American media makes a big deal about the total number of medals, because the US has earned a lot of medals, but not many golds. Whereas last I checked Australia and China were dominating in terms of GOLD medals. I think this needs to be more clear.

Re:About Quality, not Quantity

[Anonymous Coward]

Totally agreed. While eventually US would win both in medal and gold counts, it's the gold medals that really count. For example, as of now China has 16 medals but 10 of them are gold (63%), while US has 13 medals while only 3 of them are gold (23%). Clearly the medal counts do not relect the true dominance of a country's performance.

Another reason for using gold counts is that some sports allow only one athlete per country. So the country that send out more athletes could have a better chance in winning more medals, but that doesn't reflect the true excellence of a country in sports because some smaller country with a smaller delegate might win gold in those single-athlete events!

Re:About Quality, not Quantity

[Danny Rathjens]

Right now the USA is 4th by golds and 3rd by total medals. I don't see such a huge discrepency. 8^)

Re:About Quality, not Quantity

[ifwm]

Something else to consider is the timing of the events. So far the events that have been completed are not traditionally won by Americans. As the games progress, the medal total will probably change quite a bit.

And no, China will not be the overall winner. they simply are not competitive in many of the upcoming events (track & field for example)

Re:About Quality, not Quantity

[Anonymous Coward]

America is going to end up winning more Golds than anyone else...as usual.
The chinese always start off with more golds because their best events (stuff like fencing and women's weightlifting that Americans don't really care that much about)are scheduled first.
I don't see China wining any golds in track and field where America is traditionally strong.
China has basically shot its load at the start of the competition, while America has still got plenty of fire power.
Same thing happened in the last Olympics and in the Olympics before that.
America always finishes strong
Nothing new here, dude.

Re:About Quality, not Quantity

[another misanthrope]

aahhh the beauty of the internet... stupid claims can come back and bite you in the ass.

still feel aussies and china are dominating in terms of GOLD??

http://sports.yahoo.com/oly/medals

Gold Silver Bronze
Total

United States 14 11 10 35

China 14 9 6 29

Russia 3 8 10 21

Australia 7 5 7 19

hope it doesn't upset you too much.

Re:About Quality, not Quantity

[another misanthrope]

hey in case you stopped looking here's how the aussies and china are DOMINATING in terms of gold these days:


United States 29 35 27 91
Russia 17 23 31 71
China 28 17 13 58
Germany 14 15 18 47
Australia 17 13 16 46

Sorry little man, it must be the gangster rap?

Re:About Quality, not Quantity

[another misanthrope]

Hey in case you missed it here are the medal totals - it's a shame really that the US dominated again, maybe next year your country can do better?



United States 35 39 29 103
Russia 27 27 38 92
China 32 17 14 63
Australia 17 16 16 49
Germany 14 16 18 48
Japan 16 9 12 37
france 11 9 13 33
Italy 10 11 11 32
South Korea 9 12 9 30

wow! outstanding analysis skills!

[Anonymous Coward]

so.... the chances of winining a medal are proportional to:

a. how many people you enter, and
b. how much money you spend on training.

wow!

Maybe PWC can come and consult for me. i need to train my grandmother to suck eggs, and my old dog is in need of learning a few new tricks.

what the Fox article doesnt say

[WormholeFiend]

is that the guy in a blue tutu jumped in the pool BEFORE the medal-favourites flopped...

I bolded the interesting paragraphs.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/olympics/national/2004/0 8/ 17/Sports/athens-security040817.html?print

Olympic organizers boost security after Canadian fan leaps into pool
Last Updated Tue, 17 Aug 2004 09:16:11 EDT
CBC SPORTS ONLINE - Olympics organizers have increased security at all sports venues after an unidentified Canadian spectator plunged into a swimming pool during a diving competition.

The man, bare-chested and sporting a blue tutu, scampered onto the pool deck and climbed to an adjoining diving board during the men's synchronized three-metre springboard event on Monday.

He jumped into the pool after about a minute atop his perch and was immediately apprehended by security officials at the Olympic Aquatic Centre.

The man, who was not identified by police, was arrested and questioned by a prosecutor.

Although the spectator appeared to have harmless intentions, Olympic officials took the breach seriously.

Organizers have spent an unprecedented amount on Olympic security and the incident exposed a hole in the supposed impenetrable safety ring at venues.

"We are going to put security guys around the field of play," Marton Simitsek, an Athens 2004 executive, told the Associated Press on Tuesday.

Olympic organizers said the man was trying to send a love message to his wife by getting on TV.

However, the message painted on his chest appeared to be the website address for an online gaming website.

The fan disruption turned the competition on its head.

The top-ranked Chinese duo Kenan Wang and Bo Peng appeared headed toward certain victory before the intrusion. However, after the incident, one of the Chinese divers landed on his back on his final dive and the team received zeros across the board.

Russian Dmitry Sautin then knocked himself on the board and American brothers Justin and Tony Dumais worked themselves out of a medal position with a missed landing.

Unheralded Greeks Nikolaos Siranidis and Thomas Bimis won the gold. It was the host country's first gold of the Games.

with files from The Associated Press

Re:what the Fox article doesnt say

[sharkdba]

...that the guy in a blue tutu jumped in the pool BEFORE the medal-favourites flopped...

So just out of curiosity, are you implying anything? Like the tutu guy influenced the results somehow?

Re:what the Fox article doesnt say

[WormholeFiend]

me? no... but the article i copypasted does.

it certainly contrasts with the linked Fox article, in which the tutu event is a mere footnote, or afterthought that could not possibly have affected the subsequent performances.

Re:what the Fox article doesnt say

[canoe_head]

Two words... Blame Canada

Re:Prediction: some sports are stupid

[GodsMadClown]

Take a look at the picture... That screams something a little more than *metro*sexual.

Re:Prediction: some sports are stupid

[gelfling]

I was trying to be kind. And I am so glad that they decided not to have an exhbition sport this time round. We are officially at the bottom of the barrel.

Re:Admit it, Australians own the pool per populati

[Apiakun]

The people of Atlantis beg to differ!

The UK is a good example

[Peter Cooper]

Nothing to do with the amount of money their country has to pump into sports, the facilities they have grown up with, who has the best doping doctors who get past detection.

Your sarcasm is well placed. The UK is a good example of a nation with a reasonable population (over 60 million - ranking 21st in total), a high GNP (4th highest in the world), but which severely lacks in Olympic performance and medal tally. Why? We just don't have the faculties.

And, rather uncoincidentally, the news over the past couple of days has been talking about how we need to nurture and recognise sporting talent in schools a lot better... :-)

All this said, I can't see why being great at the Olympics is so amazing in itself. Sure, it's a nice ego boost to a country, but England would get more out of winning the World Cup than scooping a bunch of golds at an event almost no Brit watches.

Re:The UK is a good example

[atomico]

I know a country which, in addition to never coming close to winning the World Cup, treats mediocre athletes competing in obscure sports far better than its best scientists and researchers.

The result: our brightest minds have to go abroad to make a living, while second-rate athletes who would never have a chance in their home countries come here, sign a couple of papers and get a nice grant. Many of them don't even bother to learn the language.

That country is called Spain.

Re:The UK is a good example

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, so Spain is that nation I heard about where atheletes get paid a lot of money.

Quit fucking whining. People care about athletes. People don't care about egotistical nerds.

Re:The UK is a good example

[Etherael]

I thought you were about to say "Australia"

Equally true. ;)

If ...

[akintayo]

Tennis (both types), volleyball (especially beach) belong at the Olympics then so does badminton. As much strategy is required for badminton as is for those sports.

Synchronized diving is silly, but I fail to see how it is more so than 'normal' diving.

Re:If ...

[ywl]

What do you mean? Badminton *is* an event at the Olympics...

There are five medals for badminton: Man Single, Woman Single, Men Double, Woman Double and Mixed Double, one more than tennis and three more than volleyball.

Re:If ...

[akintayo]

My parent seemed to imply that Badminton did not belong, I believe if Badminton is removed so should Tennis and Volleyball. Also Tennis has 8 medals, four for Table and four for Lawn. And volleyball has four, two for normal volleyball and two for beach volleyball.

Re:If ...

[sharkdba]

Ah, the discussion which sports should belong to Olympics.... It can be long and tedious. Personally I think if Taekwondo is an olympic event (Koreans added it in Soul, right? since this was their national sport), so should kick boxing (which is much more widely distributed). And if judo, why not karate as well?

And this site PokerInAthens.com claims that poker should be included as well (which if happened would open way to adding many other games such as bridge and chess).

Correct name of the company...

[lemon031]

is PricewaterhouseCoopers, not PricewaterhouseCooper (as the blurb states).

Re:Correct name of the company...

[geomon]

Troll?

The guy is correct. The name was incorrectly cited in the article header. The context of the correction was not meant to be a slam, just good EDITORIAL review.

Re:Correct name of the company...

[lemon031]

Whoever modded me troll here is a fool. Like the other guy graciously pointed out, I was simply trying to correct a mistake.

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[legojenn]

Can't you just accept that sometimes althletes from other countries might be better than the USA ones?

What? You mean there is more than one USA? Where?

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[BigBadDude]

and dont forget the Netherlands, where you have to swim to work everyday.

Ian versus Michael

[theolein]

I know a lot of Americans are disappointed that Team USA(TM) is not doing its usual thing of clearing up most of the medals at the olympic games, as has happened in most of the olympics in past decades, but I fail to see the reason why. The Americans are doing very well nonetheless and will probably move up in medal listings as the games progress, although I suspect that China will be the overall winner this year.

I think a lot of comments about how boring the olympics are has to do with that dented national pride as well as the fact that Americans are somewhat less sporty than average (pure speculation based on hamburger consumption) although women's beach volleyball certainly has done wonders for viewing quotas ;)

Another problem is that Americans, IMO, tend to overhype anything they see as a potential winner. The NYTimes had an article last week "Built To Swim" on Michael Phelps, heaping praise onto the young man in a manner similar to the way that MacDonalds visitors heap extra dressing onto their food in no less than four pages. If that wasn't building the man up for a fall then I don't know what was. Michael Phelps is an amazing swimmer, make no mistake, but so are Ian Thorpe and Pieter van den Hoogenband and both have the advantage of experience in coping with olympic nerves.

I also suspect that Americans, who invested large sums in sport during the cold war in the war of national prestige over the east block, and cruised along in the post cold war years after their former competitors fell apart, are now suffering from a lack of focus and the fact that other emerging nations such as Australia have a better focus in winning at the games.

But cheer up. If China does emerge as an international competitor to the US, I'm sure that the US will once again knuckle down and get that sweat pouring for some national prestige.

Re:Ian versus Michael

[ywl]

You didn't watch too many Olympics, did you?

It was always like that - at the beginning, China lead in Medals but as the medals of track & field come in, US and the European countries catch up. China is just in general better at the earlier events.

I wasn't watching very closely. But unless I've missed some new Chinese track-and-field stars, or US is being badly pressed by the other European nations in these areas, the same is likely to happen.

I'm Chinese but I'm still going to say: don't worry, US is likely to be number one in both gold and total medal counts. The second was usually either Germany or Russia but I don't know this time. Their performance so far has been lackluster.

Re:Ian versus Michael

[Anonymous Coward]

(pure speculation based on hamburger consumption)

heaping praise onto the young man in a manner similar to the way that MacDonalds visitors heap extra dressing onto their food in no less than four pages

Yeah, all americans are fat, lazy, and eat nothing but McDonalds. Just like all South Afrikkkans are either baby-raping HIV infected natives, or little scared-shitless former nazi colonialists who long for the days of aphartied.

you fucking douchebag

Re:Ian versus Michael

[theolein]

Did I meantion Americans in that sentence about McDonalds, you fucking oversensitive fat pig.

Re:Ian versus Michael

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it was simply impled through the previous sentence about "hambugrer consumption", you stupid, goat-raping faggot.

Re:Ian versus Michael

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, I tired of this. I swam for a USS club team(United States Swimming) for several years. A guy I completed against (Nat Dusing) was on the US 400 free relay. So I know swimming.

The Ian vs Michael thing is dumb. Michael is an IMer meaning his best events are the 200 and 400 IMs. He already won the 400 IM and will win the 200 IM in a couple of days, by large margins and in WR times. In addition, he holds the WR for the 200 Fly which he will win tonight. Ian is a freestyler and the 200 is his second best event. They are completely different types of swimmers who swim different events. Ian couldn't even qualify for the games in most of Micheal's events, but Micheal could compete in all of Ian's and just about anyone else's. Micheal has to pick and choose which events he will likely win. That is a big difference.

Also, for you Aussies out there, the US has only lost one world championship ever and it was in 2001 and never lost the Olympic meet (scored by the taley or the medals). The US puts swimmers in every finals and has medalists in almost every event. The Aussies have a few great stars, but not nearly the same depth. But the world is slowly developing the same depth that the US has always had generally because they are now training in the US on NCAA teams. BTW, the US will win this Olympic swim meet going away again.

Re:Ian versus Michael

[matt_sinclair]

Are you kidding me? The US has 300 million people, give or take a few. Australia has 20 million, plus or minus. You do the math.

Re:Ian versus Michael

[theolein]

Ahmen, I really don't know why no one sees this. And although everyone gets upset when his or her nation doesn't suddenly win gold, I personally do enjoy it when once in a while the Americans don't clean out the whole circus.

Re:Ian versus Michael

[Anonymous Coward]

"Did I meantion Americans in that sentence about McDonalds, you fucking oversensitive fat pig"

Your whole piece was a another mindless attack on Americans, no matter how subtly you tried to put it, you arrogant, pathetic, cowardly frog-eating, European moron!!

Re:Ian versus Michael

[Bricklets]

It's interesting reading through these comments now that the Olympics are almost over. Predictions and such, etc.

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, US is unlike Australia surrounded by deserts

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[Reapy]

I hate medal counts. I thought the olympics were about bringing countries together and sharing a similar culture through sporting events that we all seem to understand.

I don't get out much and don't travel much and don't see that much. I like to take a look at the starting blocks and see that everyone looks the same. A swimmer is a swimmer the world around, no matter what nationality they are from. Same build, same posture, same look and everything.

But please, please don't judge everyone based on their media. I hate our media and can't stand watching tv. The olympics are the most tv i've watched in the past few years (since the last ones), and I don't pay attention to it for the same reasons you state. It's all complete bs. Well, I guess that does represent the majority of people. Oh well.

Did it see the US losing at Basketball?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Did it predict that? So called dream team losing to PUERTO RICO?!!?!

BAHAHAHAHAHahaahhaAHAHA!!!

Re:Did it see the US losing at Basketball?!

[LilMikey]

That game was freakin pathetic. The US got completely trounced by the little Arroyo dude that was apparently a Maverics cut. I guess Arroyo isn't gangsta enough to play professional ball but not a single one of them 6'8" dudes could defend the quick little pip-squeek.

What I watched of our rowing, beach v-ball, and gymnast teams was great though!

Re:Did it see the US losing at Basketball?!

[sommes]

Arroyo does play professional basketball for the Utah Jazz.

Re:Did it see the US losing at Basketball?!

[LilMikey]

No joke? Hmm... thought I heard the announcers talking about how he was a backup gaurding Stockton or some crap but I guess that was someone else. If you haven't guessed, I'm not a basketball guy.

God at last!

[spectrokid]

I thought we would have an entire /. discussion about the olympics without anybody mentionning the dream team. Obligatoury Fawlty towers quote: "Don't mention the war!!"

Re:Puerto Rico Representative

[starphish]

Puerto Rico does have a Representative in Congres.

http://www.house.gov/acevedo-vila/

Dream team?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think anyone called this year's team a Dream Team. The good players almost all stayed home.

Re:Prediction: some sports are stupid

[WormholeFiend]

the next sport to be included in the Olympics, if China has its way, is Wushu... is that considered the bottom of the barrel?

actually the four minute mile

[ivano]

was broken, or at least within a few seconds of it, in the 18th century (see this weeks edition of New Scientist). The reason why we went backwards was that the Victorian British believed that athleticism should be an amateur pursuit. Before that it was competitive with the winner receiving money more than prestige (hence it was also well documented and timed - since the people who put up the money didn't really want to part with it). When I get home I can give details (NS even when I subscribe to the print addition doesn't allow me to look at the present edition's artciles)

Ciao

Re:actually the four minute mile

[ivano]

a foot racer called Powell in 1787 attempted a four minute mile. In a trial he did it in 4 minutes 3 seconds. His time in the real event hasn't been recorded. The wager was 1000 guineas (78000 pounds in todays (british) money)

The first 4 minute mile was recorded in 1770 by one James Parrott

Marathon events including times of 2 hrs 11 minutes in 1753 and 2 hrs 10 minutes in 1769. This would have won gold until 1967 (yes, yes I know). The current record for the marathon in 2 hrs 4 minutes 55 seconds in 2003 (Paul Tergat of Kenya)

Also of interest, since 1912
- the pole vault has increased by 53% (where technical improvements are a major influence), as less technological dependent sports have these figures
- 23% for high jump, and
- 18% for long jump.

Ciao

tell that to the South African relay team

[Anonymous Coward]

Money put into them by there country : 0$

Facilities : mediocre

Doping Doctors : Its South Africa a normal Doctor is a rarity.

The Unique Chance to beat the Crap out of the US : Priceless

The unique Chance to beat Australia who is recognized as having the best swimmer in the world : Icing on the cake.

Re:tell that to the South African relay team

[Jeremy Erwin]

The mean rarely tells the whole story, particularly in the case of South Africa, where apartheid had spawned massive inequality.

Besides, Neethling, Ferns and Schoeman train at Arizona State University. I don't know where Townsend trains.

Another model has different predictions

[jarit0z]

Here is another paper published in the Review of Economics and Statistics, claiming to predict Olympic performance in Athens. The predictive factors are similar but they get very different results, mainly the drop in medals for the top countries is definetely not as large. Model was devised by two B-School professors who started doing it for Sydney 2000 with very good results.

He said skill, not talent

[Chuck Chunder]

Skill is learned and obviously benefits from money, facilities, training as well as an individuals natural talent.

200 free

[siskbc]

The fact is, it would have been a pretty major upset for Thorpe to lose to Phelps. It was always goignt o be a race between Hoogie and Thorpe, NOT Thorpe and Phelps - it was only moron commentators who were talkign up the clash that begged to differ.

You're absolutely right - the commentators needed to talk up Phelps' attempt for 7 golds - Particularly here in America - which obviously is now over.

That said, Phelps did make it a decent race, as his time was closer to Thorpe's than it was to the 4th place finisher. As you mention, he did set a personal best in his attempt, and there's no shame in that. He also had a real chance at silver (vdH was closer to Phelps than Thorpe).

But ultimately, this was a one-man race from the beginning. And there are some of us Americans whose memories include Sydney and what Thorpe did there. He's not an all around swimmer, but he kills in the free.

Re:200 free

[goss]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but was it not also a US record, not just a PB?

Re:200 free

[siskbc]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but was it not also a US record, not just a PB?

'Twas, I forgot to mention that.

Re:Athletes train in other countries - Good!

[freezin fat guy]

Very true although in the case of hockey you also need to consider that the course of American hockey has been largely influenced by Canadian talent. Canada still supplies the most players to the NHL as well as many top coaches and consultants. In fact some American super stars and top coaches are either Canadian immigrants or first generation Americans born to Canadian immigrants. It doesn't make them any less American but it's no different than the way so many countries develop their talent under superior American programs and then claim the gold for themselves.

But the opposite is also true. In 1996 Canada sent a traditional fast skating, high scoring team to the World Cup while the U.S. sent a heavier defensive team - and took home the gold. It was a superior strategy that changed the course of the game even in Canada. Every team we've submitted since has been more defensive in nature.

Integrating hockey training programs between the two nations has borne superior results. It's great to see people work together to increase the quality of international athletics.

MOD PARENT UP!

[Anonymous Coward]

+5, sarcastic/funny

Re:Admit it, Australians own the pool per populati

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but baseball, basketball, American football are more polular in the US to a much bigger degree!! swimming is not a huge sport in ANY country..

Of course, not too many people are interested in competative swimming events, especially in the U.S.A. That must be why my public high school (circa 1992, in the suburbs of Kansas City) spent a few hundred thousand dollars to build an olympic sized swimming pool and for the school's swim team.

Predictable?

[palpatin]

Obviously! It's mathematics! Phsycohistory, if you will. The Seldon Plan is unfolding nicely! :)

Re:Puerto Rico Representative

[Anonymous Coward]

Puerto Rico does have a Representative in Congres.

However, they can't vote or introduce legislation. Although I believe they can speak in an official capacity for the territory of Puerto Rico. So technically they are a "representative", but lacking direct influence on legislation or other acts of Congress. IMHO, they are more like federally supported observers and advocates for Puerto Rico, chosen by the people of the territory.

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[Anonymous Coward]

> Can't you just accept that sometimes althletes from other countries might be better than
> the USA ones?

That was a rhetorical question I assume?

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[aiabx]

There was, IIRC, a Nike ad at a previous Olympic Games stating something along the lines of "You didn't win the silver...you lost the gold". That's the kind of mean-spirited bad sportsmanship that's ruining the games. The events I enjoy watching the most are the ones where the competitors shake hands and smile after the event. That's when I feel that there is some purpose to the games after all.
-aiabx

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[Anonymous Coward]

There was, IIRC, a Nike ad at a previous Olympic Games stating something along the lines of "You didn't win the silver...you lost the gold". That's the kind of mean-spirited bad sportsmanship that's ruining the games. The events I enjoy watching the most are the ones where the competitors shake hands and smile after the event. That's when I feel that there is some purpose to the games after all.

I agree, there is a difference between a desire to win against someone and a desire to humiliate them.

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[Danny Rathjens]

Can't you just accept that sometimes althletes from other countries might be better than the USA ones?

That's why the USA kicks ass in the olympics, we _have_ a bunch of those better folks from other countries. Thirty members of this year's USA team were born in other countries. I always thought it was neat that you couldn't tell who the American athletes were by their race, either. :)

Immigration to other parts of the world does seem more common nowadays, though. I often here the announcers mentioning athletes that have played for more than one country.

Not true

[Anonymous Coward]

Australia may be a very large country in the territorial sense and the Netherlands just a speck of dust, but in terms of population they are not that far apart. The Dutch number 16 million, the Ozzies about 20 million. Also keep in mind there were two Australians in that pool.

Re:Admit it, Australians own the pool per populati

[xerph]

Of course, not too many people are interested in competative swimming events, especially in the U.S.A. That must be why my public high school (circa 1992, in the suburbs of Kansas City) spent a few hundred thousand dollars to build an olympic sized swimming pool and for the school's swim team.

A public high school in Kansas building a pool is hardly indicative of a national trend favoring swimming.

Not as good at field hockey...

[Psymunn]

Of course canada gets more then it's fair share of medals in the winter olympics. lets face it, Canada is one of the few places in the world where people jsut care more about the Winter games. Track and field, swimming, good stuff sure. But not the most entertaining to watch. Give me Snowboarding, Bob Sledding, or even (dare I say it) curling. I'm happy. Oh yeah, and Hockey. Olympic Hockey is amazing to watch. So diffrent to NHL.

Michael Jordan's team was the only REAL Dream Team

[Anonymous Coward]

The only REAL dream team on basquetball was the first one back on Barcelona '92. The team with Michael Jordan and Larry Bird. That was a REAL Dream Team, a real pleasure to watch.

The following teams just can't compare with the first one.

Re:Athletes train in other countries - Good!

[freqres]

Integrating hockey training programs between the two nations has borne superior results. It's great to see people work together to increase the quality of international athletics.

I whole-heartedly agree. Sports are going world-wide and best-of-breed. One just has to look at the major sports leagues in the U.S.

The NBA is getting more and more international players and these olympics are proving that non-U.S. born players have greatly improved at the game (which is also funny because the U.S. team is being coached by Larry Brown, a guy who demands defense, team-work and passing and had a Detroit Pistons team with these skills win a NBA championship, and the so called 'Dream Team' is getting beat by teams superior at passing, defense and teamwork). Major League baseball has loads of players from Latin America and is starting to see more and more Japanese players. The NHL, while previously being dominated by Canadians, is a blend of North American, European and Russian players now. I guess the exception is football (futball Americano). Discounting the little watched NFL Europe, I guess this sport just doesn't have a large worldwide following.

And these are just the sports that I'm familiar with being a U.S. citizen. I have seen in the news about some U.S. soccer players going to play in European leagues and with the NHL lockout looming, pro hockey players have been signing contracts to play in the European and Russian leagues. This also leaves out lots of sports I have no exposure to. Maybe someone else can comment on the state of players in soccer (or if you prefer football), rugby, cricket or whatever leagues.

All in all, I'm in favor of expanding previously local sports to the international stage. It only improves the entertainment value of the game by raising the level of competition. How long will it be until sports leagues include teams from distant countries or at least play them in some kind of play-off format. Maybe we eventually will truly have world champions.

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[sharkdba]

Immigration to other parts of the world does seem more common nowadays, though. I often here the announcers mentioning athletes that have played for more than one country.

Which begs the question: which country is the migrating athlete supposed to represent? Supposedly an athlete is born in country A, lives there for 16 years, then migrates to country B. At age 20 he competes at an olympic event and win a medal. Can either country claim his win (regardless of which one he represents)? Country A can say that he was born and raised there (hence making him who he is), but country B can say that he trained there (and improved his sporting skill enough to win).

This will happen more and more, so this issue should be addressed.

The fix was in

[oliphaunt]

Did anyone watch the coverage of the Puerto Rico / Iraq soccer game on Sunday? The fix was clearly in... the ref called back a PR goal for no apparent reason, and let many many Iraqi fouls go uncalled over the last 20 minutes of the game.

Even NBC's announcers were commenting "The referee needs to take control of this game," and "I don't know what the referee is thinking by not calling that a foul." In contrast, the Iraqis were given free kicks for minor infractions again and again... it's almost like someone told the ref that Iraq needs to win a couple of games, just to show the world how liberated they have become.

Re:The fix was in

[gaderson]

Actually, I did. The game was pretty rough all around. And, down two-nil the Costa Ricans seem to be giving a lot more than they were getting--teams behind tend to get a little frantic (and the Latin Americans seem to bet the better actors too--though it was tough to see who was being fouled or who was diving to get a foul.) Also, remember, the rules state that it's up to the ref's discression to call--he really only has to keep the clock and keep track of who put it out of bounds; Calling Fouls. And, I was watching on Telemundo, where the announcers sounded very pro-hispanic and were also dismissive of the refs (don't know much Spanish, but, it seemed apparent from their tone.)

I must say I was impressed with the Iraqis. They passed well and played as a team, unlike the Costa Ricans who seemed to try and feed it to their best players and see if they can dribble past the other team. They also had a very loud and supportive crowd to watch (the Costa Ricans were getting booed every time the touched the ball.) I also watched Ghana beat Paraguay--a like the US and Serbia & Montenagran being beat in Basketball it's fun to watch the big boys get their comeuppance. But, like the outrage of the Americans, South Koreans doing well in the World Cup, the 'powers-that-be' are not happy--but more fun for us viwers. (My Mom always found the Olympics that were boycotted by the US or Soviets fun because it gave a chance for the others to win something.)

Re:The fix was in

[MrClear]

It was Costa Rica.

Costa Rica's forward, Diaz was pushing people left and right and was only called once. The refs were equal opportunity blind on that, as far as I could see. The offsides call was bogus, but it was close enough to be an honest mistake. I'm glad that Iraq put in two goals because, if they had won by one point, there would have been trouble. Both of Iraq's goals were very well hit, though, so it's fair that the game went to them.

Re:The fix was in

[oliphaunt]

yes, of course it was Costa Rica. I'm dumb, mea culpa, forgive me... was not meant as a troll.

I'm also thinking of the sequence immediately before the first Iraqi goal, from the corner kick... they had 3 or 4 corners in a row, and I thought that the second one was bogus, i.e. that Iraq kicked it out, and everyone was going the other way, and then the ref gave them a corner AGAIN. Overall, the officiating seemed pretty suspect to me.

yes they do

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.athens2004.com/en/ParticipantsCommittee s/newParticipants?pid=TPE

citizenship

[Danny Rathjens]

Yeah, I was thinking that the criteria is simply citizenship. e.g. Martina Navratalova is representing the USA since she was naturalized as a U.S. citizen. But people maintaining dual citizenships seems more common nowadays, as well; so citizenship alone can not be used to decide. I suppose it just boils down to whoever the athlete claims they are playing for.

p.s. "begs the question" does not mean what you think it means.

I wonder how this applies to India

[lambadomy]

There was a series of articles in ESPN magazine a few months ago talking about the development of sports internationally, and one of the pieces focused on India and their relative lack of advancement or overall skill in most olympic or professional team sports, other than cricket. It talked about various factors, from lack of infrastructure to lack of interest or social norms that emphasized non-physical competition or activities, none of which I'm really qualified to speak on. I was just wondering if there is anyone here from India or familiar with it that could say if they think this idea true or not, that India is not only "behind" atheletically but will likely stay that way despite GDP growth.

pet peeve of mine

[Knights who say 'INT]

Statistical estimators being broadcasted without sample variances, t-stats or significance tests.

I mean, would it KILL them to print a standard coefficient table or equation?

Disclaimer: Yes, I teach econometrics.

sure why not ultimate fighting too

[gelfling]

that's exactly my point. it seems that there really is only one or two court sports and one or two fighting sports yet we get treated to 4000 different indigenous pointless variations to the same damn thing.

Re:sure why not ultimate fighting too

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, they have lots of fighting sports competitions: at least judo, boxing and wrestling in two styles, each in a number of different weight classes for both men and women.

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[Anonymous Coward]

Immigration to other parts of the world seems more common....

Ok so now the USA invented immigration? And the rest of the world is learning about this immigration idea and starting to follow the US lead. Thank you again USA for inventing a basic concept and cluing everyone in. This doesn't rank up there with the more famous US inventions of 'Freedom' and 'Voting' but not bad!

Re:Olympics are almost obsolete

[Gumby]

The Olympics days (years?) are numbered. At the rate that medical advances are taking place, we will soon be placed in a position of banning people who had Muscular Dystrophy therapy as a child or red blood cell therapy for anemia. We will either only allow "pure" humans to compete - which I think will contribute to racism - or the doors will be wide open - and only the enhanced athletes will be competitive. I think it would be better to just retire them - with a grand finale in 2012. That would get some big ratings.

Number of golds misleading

[amightywind]

One of the problems with tracking the medal count is that a medal means a lot more is some disciples than others. Consider the ridiculous number of swimming medals awarded for breaststoke, butterfly, backstroke, freestyle, dog paddle, etc. The permutations are endless. The result is a good swimmer wins several golds. Not bad for a few minutes of moderate exersize. I find this irksome. I sometimes think that every UCLA senior on the swim team wins Olympic gold. The prize is devalued.

Then look at another sport like road cycling. You have a road race and time trial hotly contested by several hundred of the greatest endurance athletes in the world. They kill themselves for 2 golds. Being on the podium is a real accomplishment.

How do countries fair in marquis events like track and field or gymastics, rather than archery, or sailing? My point is it there must be a better figure of merit to capture the amount of glory drawn to a nation by winning than just the number of golds.

Re:Number of golds misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't have any problem with the number of golds awarded for swimming at all. I think its very appropriate.
After all, swimming is one of the most popular sports on the planet.
Its the number of golds awarded for obscure sports like shooting, archery, even judo which is really annoying, seeing that only a very small percentage of the world's population actually participate in these sports.
The number of medal for these sports is way out of proportion to their real impact in the world of sports.

Credit Due...

[radius-one]

Wasn't the statistical formula in questions created by Dartmouth College professor Andrew Bernard and Berkeley's Meghan Busse? Did John Hawksworth from PricewaterhouseCoopers really come up with this formula? Are the editors and fact checkers over at MIT's 'Review of Economics and Statistics' slacking off?

South Africans - less talk, more action.

[Anonymous Coward]

American 'sledging' only inspired SA swimmers.

It was a truly great weekend for South African sports all round. It started out with SA putting the All Blacks (New Zealand) in their place with a huge victory during the Tri-nations Rugby match; and finished off with the Men's Freestyle relay with a world record victory over the much hyped US and Oz teams.

Can't wait for this Saturday were we get to watch the boys in Green and Gold put the Ausies to shame and win the Tri-nattions. I realise that most of you will probably not even know what I am talking about, but I urge you to catch the game - even if your interest is Rugby is little more than a curiosity. It will be a game worth watching.

Regarding the swimming, Read it and weep sports fans:
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=6&cli ck_id=4 &art_id=vn20040816134443685C456501

No lame excuses please!

Proudly South African

Re:South Africans - less talk, more action.

[c00kiemonster]

all glorty to the saffa team winning the 4 * 100 , at least we lost to a southern hemisphere team ,

What Americans really think...

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF!!!! 6 of my 500 channels are table tennis and half naked men for 2 weeks?! this bites... I'm gonna hook up my computer to the big screen and play doom3.

2 weeks later... We'll either hear about the medal count and we will have beaten the sh** out of all the other countries and we'll feel somewhat happy about that for a few minutes until we remember it was at gay sports we don't care about, Or we will have lost the medal count and it will never be mentioned.

The only sport i'm interested in is football.

Talk about disinformation.

[jotaeleemeese]

Copa America finished 3 weeks ago. The winner, Brazil, did not qualify to the Olympics. The runner up, Argentina, is doing great in the Olympics, thank you very much.

The Olympic football competition is designed to be a weakened tournament with age limits (all but three playesr have to be younger than 23). Having said that Portugal fielded Cristiano Ronaldo, on e of ther best players in the past Euro Cup in which he was fundamental to reach the final.

In synthesis you know jackshit what you are talking about and Iraq are doing a great job.

Re:Talk about disinformation.

[Minna Kirai]

Copa America finished 3 weeks ago.

Correct. And now the football season is over, and the players are on the yearly vacation. It's important for their training schedules that they have this time off to relax.

The winner, Brazil, did not qualify to the Olympics.

Wrong. Whole countries don't play football. The Brazilian players that won Copa America didn't even try to enter the Olympics. None of the good ones did.

The Olympic football competition is designed to be a weakened tournament with age limits

Which reinforces my point that Iraq's accomplishment isn't great, because actually good teams were excluded.

Having said that Portugal fielded Cristiano Ronaldo, on e of ther best players in the past Euro Cup in

Uh, Ronaldo was the ONLY player on Portugal's Olympic team to have been in the Euro Cup. All the rest of their Olympic contenders weren't good enough to be in the real championship earlier.

If Iraq had played against the true Portugese team, their victory would be worth something. But all they beat were 2nd-string substitutes.

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[Danny Rathjens]

Noone claimed the USA invented immigration. If you had even a slight knowledge of world history, you would be aware that our nation consists entirely of immigrants; many of whom arrived here recently.

For some anecdotal evidence; of my group of friends in highschool, they were born in Italy, Colombia, Cuba, Pakistan, China, Korea, and Israel. One other and myself were the only two of the group born here.

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[mister_tim]

In our current post-modern, whatever climate, the Olympics are seen to be about bring people together, I guess because out and out competition is not politically correct.

I don't think they are originally about that though - the motto, "Faster, Stronger, Higher" shows that it is about individual performance, and about bettering yourself and being better than others. The whole thing about sharing cultures is just a modern tack-on to an old competition that is about being better than everyone else in the world.

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[Alaska Jack]

Yes, we also invented hypersensitivity too. I proudly note you seem to have picked up on it.

- Alaska Jack

netcraft reports the olympics is dying

[Anonymous Coward]

and BSD :D

psychohistory...

[aggiefalcon01]

Of course, the science of psychohistory would have predicted it all much sooner, more accurately, and more precisely.

Spirit & climate

[POds]

Do some countries have more spirit, when it comes to sport than others? I'm Australian and the olympics means a lot to me and to my fellow country men. I think i heard Australia has the second largest team at this olympics, second only too the US. Or maybe it was second largest team out of the 'away teams' (all but greece?). I have no doubt that a countries unemployement rate, economy and population play a huge role in the medal tally or one countries acheivments at any international event. But i feel that some countries arnt as interested as others. I've always felt like the american public where never that interested in the olympics because of their own home grown professional sports. I'm not stating this as fact, this is just what i've felt over the past few olympics. Olympics for an Australian is to show the world that we are the best or damn close to it. Australia has a population of 17->18 million and although a strong economy, not the strongest, but that goes hand in hand with our population as well. Despite our size, Australia seems to do very well in the olympics. But also, we seem to do very well at professional sports such as Rugby and recently our soccer has been getting better and i've always considered us to have a pretty good basket ball out fit.

Having said that, i think spirit goes a long way for Australia, we only have to look at the paraolympics where i believe in sydney, we had the largest medal tally? What does this say about us? We love our sport, do we love it more than other countries? If we loose a limb, do we stop or continue to play? Many parts of Australia have sunydays all year round and this is possibly a great asset for us in terms of sport and possibly why we love our sport so much. We can play sport, no matter what season... (maybe except tassy)..

Thats all i wanted to say. I think one might also consider the climate of a country and the spirit.

Re:Spirit & climate

[Bricklets]

The olympics are actually a pretty big deal in the U.S. Part of that may be because we're winning so many medals (thus it gets reported in the news more often), but a huge part of it is simply patriotism. There's a lot of patriotic pride in the U.S., and these athletes are there representing our country. We try to give them as much support back home as we can so that they can do their best and represent us well.

Granted not everyone is interested in the olympics and certain sports are more popular than others. But generally, I think you'll find great enthusiasm for the competition in America.

Re:Ian Thorpe... (we are good, but)

[POds]

I dont think i particulary like the yanks.. not that i ever did, i enjoy it a lot when we spank you... But this isnt out of hatred, its only because you dominate. You may notice a similar kind of 'hatred' for the most dominate team in the nfl or nhl?

Basicly, Australia is a great sporting nation, but this is mainly because of climate and because of our climate sports are a part of our culture. Even fat kids play sport in Australia!!! But the fact remains, most of Australias population lives on the coast. Im not sure of percentages, but i wouldnt be surprised if it was above 70%. Infact, it should be far more than that... I could be in the 90s. That fact plus that parts of Australia have sunlight all year round is are good ingrediants for a successful sporting nation.

Also, Australia seems to have a fairly low degree of natural desasters. Sure we have floods and droughts, but they only work in our favour. A drought will only make us flock to the oceans, assuming its hot during the dought and a flood will have us swimming weather we like it or not.

So dont feel bad if we seem to be better compared to our population or economy. It has to do with nature and our life style... And those fat kids who are pressured into playing sport by the family and friends!

Re:Ian Thorpe...

[nickthisname]

"You North Americans are such bad losers."

Well I'm sure that Canadians are happy that you managed to include them in your +5 Rant, since they are North Americans geographically.

But since I'm also very sure that you actually meant that U.S. citizens are bad losers I want to make two points clear:

1# the proper phrase is "sore losers". And yes we are!
2# Name a country that is not.

There is an old saying you may want to remember, it goes like this: "Nobody likes a sore loser, but everybody hates a sore winner."

ANTE GAMHSOU

[Anonymous Coward]

Ante kai gamhsou mounopano pou tolmas na amfisbhthseis th nikh twn Ellhnwn stis katadyseis!
Afou pisteyeis toso poly oti einai ka8ara 8ema ekselikshs to poios pairnei ta metallia, profanws eisai apogonos ostrakoeidwn kai pi8hkwn.
Kai st' arxidia mou an den katalabaineis tipota apo osa grafw, de 8a katsw na sta metafrasw kiolas!
Palio malaka.

Re:South Africa just ONE gold and PLENTY of talk!

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me see... so far South Africa has won a grand total of just ONE gold medal in these Olympics, and ZERO silver, and ZERO bronze, that is ONE THIRD the the # of Gold medals won by the Great Michael Phelps alone. We haven't even talked about the 2 bronzes that King Michael has won, more than the entire country of South Africa.
Where exactly is the "more action" at?
Its more like "South Africa, little achievement, PLENTY of talk" to me.

Puerto Rico - biggest cry babies on the planet!!

[Anonymous Coward]

What fix, dude?
When are you clowns going to accept defeat in fair combat without whining?
Puerto Ricans are going to take first prize in any competition for being the world's worst losers and biggest whiners and cry babies!
You whined, and lashed out when you were clobbered by the USA in Olympic basketball qualifying in Puerto Rico earlier this year, and you are still whining right on to the Olympics.

Tell me, when did Puerto Rico EVER win any major soccer competition in its pathetic history? Has Puerto Rico EVER even gotten to the quarter finals f the World Cup before? Nope.
Ever been anywhere in the soccer competition at the Olympics. No.
So why does there have to be a "fix" put in before anyone ca beat you then?
You have always managed to lose quite well by yourselves without any fixes.
And the superb Iraqi football team, that managed to beat Portugal, one of the best football teams in Europe and on the entire planet, certainly don't need no stinking "fixes" to smoke a third rate country like Puerto Rico!!

Thorpe NOT even in same class a King Phelps!

[Anonymous Coward]

Ian Thorpe is strictly a one trick pony, being really good at just the easiest swimming stroke of them all, the freestyle.
He is out of his depth when it comes to the harder strokes, like butterfly, backstroke,breaststroke and the IM's.
What is truly amazing about the great Michael Phelps is, he is either the best or second best in the world in nearly every stroke there is, with world records at some time at THREE different strokes.
Thorpe simply doesn't even come close.
Put Thorpe in an Olympic IM, backstroke, breaststroke or butterfly event and he won't even came close to getting a medal.
Michael Phelps on the other hand sill got a bronze in the 200 freestyle, which is not his specialty, and is about his weakest event. That is simply awesome!!

At his first Olympics as a major swimmer, at the Sydney Olympics, Thorpe won just one individual gold (the 400 m freestyle), having been beaten by Hoogie in his own signature 200 m freestyle by Dutchman Hoogie. No one beats Phlps at his signatre events of the 200 and 400 IM's or the 200 butterfly either.
Meanwhile, Phelps has already won TWO individual golds at his first Olympics as a major swimmer, with more to come.

Phelps is going to go away from these Olympics with more gold medals(5 golds) than anyone else, and more medals altogether (8 medals than anyone else).
Thorpe can't even came close to doing that.

Another thing, Phelps keeps getting better while Thorpe is basically going backwards.
Between last year and this year, Phelps has set over 7 world records, including 5 world records at last years World Championships alone, the best performance in swimming history.
Thorpe on the other hand last set a 200 freestyle world record waaaay back in 2001.
He hasn't even come close to his world record time for over 3 years.
Fast forward to Beijing in 2008 and Phelps is simply going to get even better and can take out Thorpe in Thorpe's own best even too, the 200 freestyle.. In addition to Pehelps dominating his own events even more strongly.
Meanwhile, that 7 Gold medals at one Olympics is still on.
Beijing, here comes Michael The Great!

Re:South Africa just ONE gold and PLENTY of talk!

[Anonymous Coward]

You Yanks are truly unbelievable!

Take the population of South Africa (if you know it), and multipy by the relative size of the U.S. population (if you know that), scaled and compensated for GDP and the number of people above the poverty line...and then who's tally is most impressive.

Re:South Africa just ONE gold and PLENTY of talk!

[Anonymous Coward]

"You Yanks are truly unbelievable"

No one is as unbelievable as you white South Africans. The crimes you guys committed under apartheid still leave mankind shuddering in utter horror.
Plus you are arrogant, sneering,insufferable creeps who are quick to dish it out, but go whining to mama when you get a taste of your own medicine.

"Take the population of South Africa (if you know it), and multiply by the relative size of the U.S. population (if you know that), "

How pathetically predictable.
You come to slashdot boasting loudly about the swimming prowers of South Africa, and how you smoked America in the 100 X 4 freestyle relay.
You get your boast called out, and you resort to crying to mama about how tiny, bitsy your South Africa population is, and how poor people are in South Africa etc etc.
Well GROW UP!
Shoulda thought about that before you came shooting your mouth off.
But just for the record, even a tine country like Slovakia, with just 5 million people has already won to the tune of 4 medals, including 1 gold, and 1 silver, while South Africa, with 46 million people, languishes at just 2 medals!

Now lets take the USA versus south Africa.
America has at most 290 million people, south africa has 46 million souls.
290/46 gives you 6.3. Lets be generous and make it 7.
So going by your premises for weaseling out of this fight that YOU started, America should have won only 7 times the the # of medals that South africa did, right?

Well America now has 29 medals, versus a measly medals for South Africa, leaving America with a massive FOURTEEN TIMES the number of medals South Africa has. America still clobbers South Africa. LOL!!
Going by Gold medals we still smoke South Africa 10 to 1.
Another thing swimming is not a particularly popular sport in America either, with most fathers spending their time teaching their children how to play baseball, which is America's true sport. The next most popular sports include basketball, American football etc etc.
Swimming is way down the list.
And before you talk about how poor South Africa is, I happen to have been to South Africa, the whites live like kings, with swimming facilities every bit as good as what we have in the statesa d with black servants that they keep paying poorly.
Since ALL the South African swimmers were white anyway, you can't very well use that old poverty excuse now can you?

You gotta go slow on those Dutch Schnapps you guys keep imbibing all the time, dude

Medal Count

[napesjp]

At the end of the 2004 Olympics, the US finished with 102 medals. The last time they finished with more in the summer games was 1984 (174). I thought they were supposed to have a "significant drop" in the medals this year. Good theory!