The Destroyer of Finance

 Back for more Olympics.

 This was the end of Olympic softball and baseball until at least 2016 for reasons not really explained by the IOC.  While I’m OK with the end of softball (despite the US loss to Japan, it’s still not really a competitive global sport), I’m not very on board with the elimination of Baseball.  At least 10 countries could, if they wanted to, field very competitive teams and 4 or 5 more teams could, and have, fielded competent if not competitive teams in the past (including China).  Further, the champions have been fairly evenly distributed… unlike, say, badminton where China has won 11 out of 24 golds and 30 out of 76 total medals.

 Badminton, however, as goofy as it sounds, is an awesome sport to watch and I will not be the one to suggest it’s elimination.

 Let’s look at some other places worthy off being cut out of the games tough:

 1) Equestrian, All: The games are about human people showing off their skill and athleticism, no?  Equestrian is about animals.  Oh, sure, if you put me on one of the gold medal winning horses not only would I manage to kill the horse, but I’d also manage to kill myself.  I don’t deny that it takes a good rider… and trainer.  However, you take the same rider (and trainer) and put them on a braying donkey, and they won’t win either.  I don’t see the Westminster dog show at the Olympics.  I don’t see the frisbee catch at the Olympics.  I don’t see horses sprinting a mile and a quarter at the Olympics. Further, this ”sport” might be among the LEAST accessible to the poor nations and people of the world.  Equestrian needs to be on the very short list of sports heading out the door at the games.  Also, 6 medals?  6?  Really?

 2) Synchronized Diving: Stupid.  It’s hard enough to get a good competition where judges are involved, especially one where the judges are as far away as they are in diving and for an action that is so fast in its completion.  Adding a second person to judge complicates the judging and compounds judging errors, not to mention being a totally unnecessary addition to the games.  4 medals?  Out.

 3) Rhythmic Gymnastics.  Hard?  Yes.  Requiring intense practice, athletic ability, and fine skills.  Check.  Olympic level competition?  No.  Just because every failed ballerina and artistic gymnast needs an activity to keep their dreams alive doesn’t mean the IOC has to subsidize failure by continuing to sponsor this travesty of yet another judged competition.  Sure, it’s cool to watch and impossible for a common person to do, but it’s not up to Par for my Olympics.  2 medals?  Out.

4) Badminton: what?  I just said that this was safe?  Well, it is, but the gold medal for mixed doubles isn’t.  Tennis and freaking ping pong (which misses this list my the narrowest of margins) don’t see the need for “mixed” doubles, and neither do I.  Badminton should be grateful it gets the same number of medals as the actually globally competitive sport of tennis and accept the loss of its mixed gold with dignity.  1 medal?  Out.

 5) Trampoline:  See Rhythmic.  It’s not the IOC’s place to sponsor dreams for failed gymnasts just because Trampoline is also hard.  2 medals?  Out.

 6) Shooting.  I’m a big fan of a little bang bang on the range, and even of shooting targets (hey-o!), but I’ve got to admit some of the shooting is being a little generous.  10 meter shooting?  With a rifle?  Shit.  Take out the 10 meter competitions totally.  I’d like to see them bring back the 800 and 1,000 meter competitions, though.  4 medals?  Out.

 I’ve eliminated 19 medals, while still retaining the suspect ping-pong (oh, I’m sorry, “table tennis”) and synchronized swimming.  Given that I’d like to investigate the following additions:

 1) Baseball: bring it back, fools.  +1 Medal

 2) 800M and 1,000M shooting: at least 2 medals, maybe 4 if the girls want to play.

 3) Cricket: it’s a huge and important sport in no less than 5 countries on 4 continents including the second most populous nation on earth.  It’s more than you can say for badminton or ping pong. +1 medal (do women play cricket?)

 4) Rugby: Bring this shit back already.  And no, it’s not just Britain and New Zealand asking to bring it back.  How the IOC can pass over rugby for squash and karate bottles the mind, especially when they can’t even judge the martial arts they’ve got without sparking controversity and roundhouse kicks to the face. +1 medal.

 5) Golf:  I know, not very athletic, but loads of skill and a world wide sport.  +2 medals.

 So I don’t replace all the medals and that’s fine.  You can add a couple medals to golf for national team events if you want, or have room to add truly worthy competitions later.  None of the sports I’ve put back in are purely judged events, which is good.  There is rules enforcement in Cricket, Rugby, and Baseball, but the impact is usually minimal.  800M and 1,000M shooting is a big upgrade over 10M shooting because it requires all the same discipline over muscles and breathing as 10M but also a mastery over the shooters environment (wind, humidity, temperature).

 I am an Olympic freak.  For 1444 days every four years, I will not even think about a wide range of sports, and yet for 17 days I’ll follow (or try) every minute of tons of obscure competitions.  This doesn’t count my companion obsession with the winter games as well that led to being the treasurer of a curling club in Texas.

 So now the summer games are over and the question becomes, “Who won?”  Well, China had the most gold medals with 51.  Does that mean China won?  The US countered by winning the most medals overall, which ought to count for something.  So did the US win?

 From an athlete’s perspective, getting a gold medal is the pinnacle of acheivement (for most sports, at least).  However, most athletes would also be estatic to win a silver or a bronze.  I like to gauge the medal count by a somewhat common points system: Gold is the pinnacle and gets 10 points, Silver is great and gets 6 points, and bronze is superb and gets 4 points.  If you were a competitor, would you rather have 1 gold or 3 bronze medals?  It’d be a close call, I’d think… or if you’d rather, would you rather have 1 gold and three bronze or 2 gold (thus eliminating the competitive desire to be best at at least one thing)?  This point system usually carries down through 6th place, but since that data isn’t really collected at the olympics (or even determined at all in some cases), we have to discard points 3,2,and 1.

 In the end, I declare China the winner of the 2008 games with 748 points over the USA’s 732 points.

 The rest of the top 10:

 Russia with 468

 Britain with 328

 Australia with 298

 Germany with 280

 France with 234

 South Korea with 222

 Italy with 180

 and Japan with 166.

 For the most part it follows the raw medal count except where Japan passes by Ukraine (and China passing the US of course).  UN Security Council represent!

 In 2012 look for China to maybe pull back a little in the medal count based on the fact that many of China’s medals came from judged events and a home crowd DOES impact the judging.  I’m not implying that the judges don’t try to do their unbiased best, I’m just saying it’s next to impossible to have a human subjective opinion influenced to some degree by the reaction of a crowd.

 Regardless, 2012 will likely be the last time there is any debate about the medal count winner as in 2016 and beyond China’s population and government backed programs will certainly overwhelm the US.  I saw a good suggestion that instead of donating $3 of your taxes to the damn presidential campaign fund, we should have the option to donate it to the Olympic program.  Probably be a much more popular option.