There are those who suggest that my mad levels of patriotism render me incapable of forming an objective opinion where Team USA is concerned... and those people are probably correct. However, in all seriousness, why are some countries going by only gold medals rather than overall medal count in determining the Olympic national placement?
I mean, if we're only counting gold medals, why even give out silver and bronze? Why would those medals exist at all if they're not intended to factor into the medal tabulation in any way?
Really, neither way makes sense to me.
The "traditional" way of doing it that only counts gold doesn't make sense because then you're saying silver and bronze don't count at all which means they shouldn't exist. But, then, the "American" way of counting isn't much better because it counts bronze and silver just as much as gold which also doesn't make sense because it means bronze is just as significant as gold.
Wouldn't it make the most sense to use a graduated scale? 3 for gold, 2 for silver, 1 for bronze, or something like that?
That way silver and bronze medals can justify their existence but we wouldn't have to pretend all medals are the same. Best of both worlds...
... Oh, and by the way, the USA would be up 160 to 156 at this exact moment by that scale. That fact is completely coincidental. Had no bearing on my post whatsoever.