[SeelaypeKet]

On the one hand we have:

Country G/S ratio
USA 2
China 1.56
UK 2
Korea 3
New Zealand Infinity!


On the other hand we have
Germany 0.5
Russian Federation 0.2
Australia 0.083


Of course some variation is to be expected, but the range seems to be too large to be pure chance (maybe someone might like to do a statistical study on it).

What factors other than chance would account for the success of some countries in turning silver into gold, and the abysmal performance of some other (apparently similar) countries.

Also, why is the home team advantage so strong? I mean all the non-home atheletes are really, really trying their very best, aren't they?

[provigil]

Of course some variation is to be expected, but the range seems to be too large to be pure chance It does?

[moopogyOvenny]

At home matches generally favour the home team.. travelling is very yang.

[SeelaypeKet]

It does?

It does to me.

Since there are the same number of silvers and golds a ratio around 1 would be expected.

I haven't done the statistical analysis, but I would be very surprised if a computer simulation of medal distributions with random selection of G/S/B medals came up with similar results.

[SeelaypeKet]

At home matches generally favour the home team.. travelling is very yang.

Can we put it all down to travelling though?

I doubt it.

[provigil]

I haven't done the statistical analysis, but I would be very surprised if a computer simulation of medal distributions with random selection of G/S/B medals came up with similar results.

The medals are not distributed by pure chance, the are distributed by the relative sporting prowess of the representatives of that country.

The sports played in a particular country are generally cultural. Australia has generally done well in watersports such as rowing, sailing, and swimming. Success breeds interest, interest breeds more success. Training methods that promote superiority over competition are refined, and we stay out in front.

Then come along another country with different and better training methods, (or a better doping system) and suddenly the country who was regularly winning gold medals are now winning silver medals.

The ratios are based on chance, but are not random.

(BTW, the word on the street is that we may still hold our advantage in the sailing)

[provigil]

Can we put it all down to travelling though?

I doubt it.

No. There is also the fact a home team can support a larger team. (GB sent 311 athletes to the 2008 Olympics, and 541 to these)

[SeelaypeKet]

The medals are not distributed by pure chance, the are distributed by the relative sporting prowess of the representatives of that country.

The sports played in a particular country are generally cultural. Australia has generally done well in watersports such as rowing, sailing, and swimming. Success breeds interest, interest breeds more success. Training methods that promote superiority over competition are refined, and we stay out in front.

Then come along another country with different and better training methods, (or a better doping system) and suddenly the country who was regularly winning gold medals are now winning silver medals.

The ratios are based on chance, but are not random.

(BTW, the word on the street is that we may still hold our advantage in the sailing)

But that doesn't explain why the new teams don't move into a similar proportion of silver medal places overall, or why the previous gold winners slip to silver, but the previous silver winners don't slip to bronze or nothing.

Why should new strong teams entering the competition cause an accumulation of silvers, rather than a uniform slippage down the table?

[SeelaypeKet]

No. There is also the fact a home team can support a larger team. (GB sent 311 athletes to the 2008 Olympics, and 541 to these)

Surely a larger team, if it results in any more medals at all, should result in disproportionatly more bronzes and silvers, since presumably all the extra team members were not good enough to make it into a smaller team.

[provigil]

Surely a larger team, if it results in any more medals at all, should result in disproportionatly more bronzes and silvers, since presumably all the extra team members were not good enough to make it into a smaller team.

Home turf advantage. They have been training under local condition for a considerable period of time.

Why should new strong teams entering the competition cause an accumulation of silvers, rather than a uniform slippage down the table? I do not think there is a large enough sample to be drawing too many conclusions, and we have only had a few sports contested. The track and field is just starting, the numbers could very well change dramatically.

[Plulpangepler]

Can we put it all down to travelling though?

I doubt it.

Weather conditions would be a big thing, it sometimes takes years for people who move countries to get acclimatised to different heat, cold, humidity.... so a lot of the away athletes will be struggling, to some degree, with the weather.

With the Olympics the home team also has a huge injection of funds for the 8 years building up to the Olympics, the host country will scour the world for the best coaches, build the best training facilities, even sometimes entice foreign athletes to become citizens in an almost desperate bid for a large medal haul.

A lot of Australia's success at recent Olympics, prior to this one of course, can be put down to hosting the Sydney games.

There are notable exceptions, Canada hosted the Olympics and never got gold.

[oneliRafmeene]

I think the home country is allowed to include a greater number of qualified athletes.

[Acrogeokickic]

There's this possibility

"Abstract
The consistently better performance seen by teams in various sporting contexts when playing at home is referred to as the 'home advantage'. Various explanations have been put forward to account for this robust phenomenon, though none has yet focussed on possible hormonal factors. In an initial study, we showed that salivary testosterone levels in soccer players were significantly higher before a home game than an away game."

[FYvWldC0]

I think an interesting statistic is the medals per head of population. If you are China of course you are going to win a lot because you have 20% of the world's population to chose athletes from, but if you normalise the results by the population of individual countries it looks way different.

[Thomas12400]

I see now.

This is not about low-sulphidation epithermal deposits and low copper granites caused by partitioning of copper into early crystalising hornblende, thereby forcing silver into electrum.

(Shakes head).

I suppose I should've guessed: there were too many replies for this to be a magma-and-geochemistry question.

[provigil]

I suppose I should've guessed: there were too many replies for this to be a magma-and-geochemistry question.

Oh well, maybe next time.

[Dokescoonse]

I was wondering what the hell this thread was about for a while there too... right to the last paragraph of the OP.

I mean, "turning silver into gold"? What sort of alchemy is this?

[palantownia]

"and the abysmal performance of some other (apparently similar) countries."

I hope you are not referring to Australia. With one gold, twelve silver and seven bronze medals, our athletes have produced 20 performances that are in the top three in the world. We made the finals of just about everything in the pool, on the rowing course and at the velodrome which puts us in an elite group of the best eight or six in the world. I do not regard such a result as "abysmal". So other teams are winning gold while we are winning silver, so what? Our athletes do not warrant the criticism they are getting from the media, they are doing the best they can.

[bpejjssoe]

"and the abysmal performance of some other (apparently similar) countries."

I hope you are not referring to Australia. With one gold, twelve silver and seven bronze medals, our athletes have produced 20 performances that are in the top three in the world. We made the finals of just about everything in the pool, on the rowing course and at the velodrome which puts us in an elite group of the best eight or six in the world. I do not regard such a result as "abysmal". So other teams are winning gold while we are winning silver, so what? Our athletes do not warrant the criticism they are getting from the media, they are doing the best they can.

My thoughts exactly!

Australian's, sometimes are truly a "weird mob" [at least when it comes to our sports men and women]

[palantownia]

While on the subject of the Olympics, did you see these piccies?

http://au.sports.yahoo.com/photos/ol...GVyeQ--;_ylv=3