The medal table - minimum requirements

equaliser

Well-known member
You gotta hear for the good old National Lottery - it's made the Olympics much more fun. I haven't watched a single event - I'm on holiday in Greece - but am keeping abreast of the only thing that really matters, the medal table, natch.
We'll never beat the Chinese or the Yanks - they're like Champions League to our top half Prem - but it's always essential we beat the French, and this year so much more so, for obvious reasons. Even if they got 30 gold medals, if we got 31 they'd be crying. The other team we have to beat - for the exact same reason i.e. it will kill them if we do - is, of course the Aussies. They've had to take the pain in the last few - after years where they effortlessly bested us. Stay down, Bruce!
 
BARE minimum is top 5 IMHO.

Should aim for 3rd though, after 3rd, 2nd, 4th finishes in the last 3 Olympiads it would put us back on an upwards trajectory?

Anything higher than that I'd be in dreamland tbh (it did happen in 2016 when we finished above China) US finishing higher than the USA or China with their respective population sizes to choose from would be akin to Lithuania topping a group at the WC that contained Netherlands and/or England respectively.
 
Last edited:
Beating the Aussies is always paramount for me. Be that in the Olympics, cricket or rugby Union.
 
At football on Wed and one of the lads is an aussie and he was saying the medal table biased and really the per capita table is where it is at...

Surely that needs adjusting for the age profiles of the countries involved? A country with a young population surely has a much better chance than a nation with an aging population?

Truth is, the Olympics, over all, is not a team event. There are not overall gold, silver and bronze medals for the nations that do best, are there?

Nations are always going to spin the medal table in a way that makes them feel good. I have no problem with that.
 
The next two Olympics are going to be a tough tester in Los Angeles and brisbane, I can just about bare the French nevermind the USA and Australians 😅
 
It is time some of the sports are changed to remove top professionals competing. Why are Wimbledon champions or top golf players allowed to compete?

Antoine DuPont is another who springs to mind. Football should be kept amateur or under 21’s.
 
It’s the first time I’ve looked at the table didn’t realise we’d win that many golds etc 👍
It’s a shame physical sports weren’t promoted while people were in furlough , we might of had a few more Olympians in the mix
IMG_8595.jpeg
 
It is time some of the sports are changed to remove top professionals competing. Why are Wimbledon champions or top golf players allowed to compete?

Antoine DuPont is another who springs to mind. Football should be kept amateur or under 21’s.
Surely you want the best of the best competing
 
I'm sure I've read that boxing, weightlifting and a few other sports are finished at future Olympics after this one!
 
It’s the first time I’ve looked at the table didn’t realise we’d win that many golds etc 👍
It’s a shame physical sports weren’t promoted while people were in furlough , we might of had a few more Olympians in the mix
View attachment 79722
I heard on the radio this morning that US media has started using the total medals won, as opposed to the number of golds won, as the metric for the medals table. Misinformation worthy of a tin-pot dictatorship.
 
I heard on the radio this morning that US media has started using the total medals won, as opposed to the number of golds won, as the metric for the medals table. Misinformation worthy of a tin-pot dictatorship.
The BBC mentioned that on their coverage.
 
I heard on the radio this morning that US media has started using the total medals won, as opposed to the number of golds won, as the metric for the medals table. Misinformation worthy of a tin-pot dictatorship.
Well we do have the most medals won, that is what should count right? Though I know you like sticking it to Americans whenever you can.
 
Back
Top