Medal Count

I am sorry—it’s easier to fulminate against something than write an accolade. Who would read this blog (not that anyone does) if I wrote about my love for Sara Teasdale’s poetry? So I write about the ubiquitous Olympic Medal Count, running along every Bottom Line.


Well, OK, if we need jingoistic self-assurance, and who doesn’t, at least we should weight the medals. Gold should certainly be worth more than bronze. We could arrive at a more realistic sum total: US maybe 872, South Korea 423. In Winter Olympics. So there!

And what the jubilation: "it has been the most successful Winter Olympics the US has ever had". Well, of course, we have garnered more medals than, say 30 years ago when half of the events had not even been invented. Nordic Combined Large Hill has been added for those who did not do well on the Normal Hill. Can Small Hill be far behind? Team Relay Was added in 1988. Too bad Team Relay Large Hill has not been invented, but it is only a matter of time. The US is bound to have more medals. More Jubilation.

And as long as we count, shouldn’t we take into account the size of the country, population, the amount of snow, amount of money athletes are subsidized with, and maybe a few other relevant statistics? Corrected for those ("normalized" the correct term) we might arrive at a more realistic "medal count".

While I am at it, I would like mention that as a former swimmer who swam the same events as Michael Phelps did at the Olympics, I am in awe of his performance there. Yet, I need to point out that when I swam, (around 1956) the total number of swimming events in the Olympics were fewer than Phelps’ total of eight. In 1956, for instance, only seven events were held; had Phelps won them all he could only have had seven Gold medals. Not eight.


The number of events escalate. It is only a matter of time until there will be Olympic Swimming 25 meter events, and who knows, 75, and more. Why ever not? And a new Phelps will have nine Golds in one Olympics. Or even more.