This has got to be the most biased, americanized article i've read since some time...check out the video link on the article too... The video and article fallaciously tries to explain the 'training differences' between US and China---about the US sportsmen excelling in their sport due to PASSION and FLAIR...as compared to China's policy of 'forcing' extremely young children into training camps. I am quite disgusted by how they try to portray that chinese athletes are products massed out from training camps, while US athletes are a more passion/talent-orientated bunch who "chooses their preferred sport according to interest, rather than being 'forced' into a sport that their bodies are suited to." (especially gymnasts). I personally think that sports like gymnastics is unique and that it strongly requires, and makes perfect sense, to conduct such physical examinations, since some body builds are definitely not suitable for the sport... It is true that these kids enter the training camps at a very tender age---definitely before they are mature enough to make lifelong decisions for themselves. However, it is unreasonable to conclude that children are forced into a sport they don't like...At an age where one is unable to make decisions for themselves, is it wrong for parents to decide what's good for them??Training camps are not concentrations camps, and parents wouldn't send their kids to be ill-treated anyway. Sure training regimes in those camps can be tough, with specially crafted diets adhered strictly to etc...but all of these are indispensible part and parcel of professionalism. Such professionalism is existent in other countries. Can any US athlete come up and tell me "I got my gold medal today despite training much less than those chinese athletes!! My training is so slack and i totally didn't miss out on any pieces of childhood life as compared to the regular child, yet i got to where i am today!!" Would any chinese athlete say " i got my medal today although i don't like my sport...i got forced into it but due to the hours clocked training i secured a medal! Talent is secondary, and can be fully compensated by body-punishing training regimes!" That'd be total ******** right? Of course i've seen statements made on the same wavelength---like claims about Lin Dan being a machine which relies on brute power and speed, but has less flair than TH/LCW. Personal choice is important. If Markis Kido was more into basketball than badminton, no one would be able to stop him from participating. However, there is a chinese saying:心有余而力不足...which means your zeal for something falls short of your own capabilities. In addition, i would like to cite a piece of information---some time ago a singaporean wrote in to the press to complain about her daughter not being able to secure a place in the National University of Singapore's School of Medicine, despite having fantastic grades and being so very interested in medicine. She complained that there was no room in singapore for one to pursue his own interests... I feel sad for the daughter but my point is sometimes there's a reason why government systems, quotas and policies are put in place and not everyone can be happy. How many singaporeans are 'interested' to serve in the army? You'd say "how can national defence be compared to winning olympic medals?" Well...in my opinion, the morale and spirit of 1.3billion chinese, the overall global outlook china produces, the economic and social impacts brought about by holding the Games as well as the shiny pieces yielded, are far more significant than our armed forces. Of course you'd argue that out of the bulk of kids sent to training camps, there are millions who trained just as hard, but they didn't make it. Might seem pitiful at first thought, but the trend is that many such athletes secure jobs as coaches overseas(and they get paid more than the writers who wrote those articles). They also grow up with some moral values, and usually doesn't go around abusing drugs or using firearms to kill and rob. And before you tell me that these athletes miss out on education, we should take a look at how many US kids do not make it to college at all (whether or not they pursued sports)...my point is, making a commitment to put your son into a training camp is a huge one, and definitely shouldn't be taken lightly, but training camps do not really ruin anyone's lives, nor pose any severe societal problems, though some might regret the path when they see lucrative opportunities beyond the sporting world. The article also capitalised on shallow arguments as excuses---such as China drawing athletes from a larger populace. Or about china "[embarking on a program in which it placed particular emphasis in competitions that awarded many medals and where world competition wasn’t particularly robust]." Let's see. Isn't this what sporting excellence is about? We want to see the best sportsperson on the world stage. If the athlete is a selected one in a billion, the better. We want to see development of less robust sports. Furthermore, a sport has to meet IOC's standards in participation before it could join the list of olympic sports. Lastly, how would an olympian feel if he reads this article and realises some people see them as mere products comparable to a commodity manufactured in bulk at a China factory? How would it feel if your passion is undermined?
hmmm, if Markis Kido is a China baddy player, he would not have been selected into the China team - too short, MK at 1.68 m is the shortest male player this OG. That is not even considered potential medal material. It has been discussed before China has minimum height requirement for their players. The China female gold medalist in weighlifting & broke the OG record, was asked to change sport from Judo to Weightlifting, cos she was deemed too short for Judo. I dunno how much she liked or not like Judo, who knows, she could have been a world beater in that sport too. Some countries, as long as the althetes show good results in their chosen sport, they're in the squad.
isn't that sort of similar to what the aussies did with their sports program? highly successful as well, i might add.
The Olympic spirit is about celebrating "individual achievement and international cooperation." I agree with ESPN writer Gregg Easterbrook that having a international competition of medals is against this spirit. People win the medals, not countries. It's ok if it's just fun, but I can't take the medal count seriously.
Just giving my 2 sens-I would say.. ..i think all athletes in the Olympics have some sort of passion, flair and dreams..No matter from what countries they are from. ..but i think the point of the author's article is mentioned here: "In China, they wouldn’t have had a choice. A sports star, like the property a house is built on, is owned by the government. The pursuit of sport is for national pride. The motivation is societal, as opposed to capitalistic in the United States." It basically boils down to the mindset and philosophy of both countries. For the U.S. Olympians, the general mindset for after the games have ended tends to be on rewards (mainly monetary) and what'll await if an athlete accomplished Gold medal(s), usually one will get major endorsement deals (e.g. Phelps, Carl Lewis etc.). The big corporations would already eye the big winners and use their achievements to pocket in their own cash. Of course, there are a few other athletes who would play just to win a Gold medal, as they have tons of cash already set for them for the future (for example the NBA players in the "Redeem Team"). In addition, here in the U.S., most of the Olympics' events' training/preparation/sponsorship are funded/owned privately. In the U.S. there are only a few major govt. sponsored programs for these type of Olympics events (maybe they'll think twice and have one in the future?). Further, young kids in the U.S. are already influenced by the 3 major sporting leagues (NBA, NFL & MLB). The mindset, one can say, has already been groomed to pursue & play in those big-money leagues rather than to train in Olympics type events (e.g. swimming, gymnastics, diving, judo, karate etc.); if not to earn as much buckaroos. And quite a few of the U.S. Olympians pursed/forked out their own Olympics training and preparation funding out of their own pockets (even some of the U.S. badminton players are regular employees). Some other athletes are regular everyday employees who are sponsored by their own companies (some of them even work for Home Depot, a home improvement type retailer). So, if one doesn't have enough funding or sponsorship from his or her own pockets or from a private institution, in the U.S., then one can say bye2 to that Olympic dream.. Different story with China....
I never known the medal counts need to be divided by a nation. Now you tell me, why CHN has 1.3B, and they can only send 3 badminton players, where nation XYZ has say 2 million, can send 3 as well. If you want medal counts to reflect the population, then # of entries need to reflect that as well to be fair to begin with. Then, CHN should fill in 16 players, and IND has another 16 in 64 entries, as they combine to be nearly half of world population. They can not find enough guys to kick a ball? Then tell me why 90% of the world can't find a person to smash a shuttle or do a nice flip in gymnastics?
However, if you take MP out, you can say the US team is a total failure??? As their entire team only has less than 30 Gold??? And they have to rely on 1 guy (and a few teammates) to boost their total to be 40% more? Come on, show some respect to all the participants...
Regardless which way to count, the fact is CHN is improving. You can argue their system, or feel sorry (actually, a lot of them feel happy and proud) for some of the atheletes, the fact is, they can produce a lot of top athletes in whatever you like or don't like ways.
The huge difference is that smashing a shuttle and flipping in gymnastics pays a whole lot less then kicking a ball through a goal. I'll agree with one person's view that the infrastructure for organize football might not be fully developed in China but, really they need to be able to at the very least qualify for the World Cup. Anyways, I am sure the only gold medal Americans really cared about in this Olympics was Basketball. Had they lost that game I'm sure most Americans would of felt this Olympics was a disaster. I'll agree that the article is Americentric, but he's writing for American readers after all. I think he should of just showed how the two styles of producing world class athletes are different, not that one is necessarily better than the other, but then again its a sports writer which I assume they don't have to be as unbiased as someone who writes for foreign affairs.
There is only "1" winner in each "specific" event, and that winner gets a "gold" medal. The gold medal symbolizes the success of the winner, while the silver and bronze is just saying "nice effort, try harder next time". Therefore, only gold medal counts make sense. It's like saying someone(from China, for example) won 8 silver + 1 bronze in all swimming events is better than Michael Phelps who won 8 gold... I wonder who would be considered as the better man under the U.S method of medal counts.
this reminds me of the early days when the first japanese cars (toyota, datsun) were sold in the US, their cars were laughed it and ridiculed. Now japanese cars and their manufacturing ethics are copied. 10 years ago, china never heard of beach volleyball or windsailing, now the the women won silver and gold. I'm not boosting china but if countries that are busy twisting data to make themself feeling good about themselves and not looking ways to improve themself, just look at GM, ford and chrysler now compared to honda and toyota.
The table used by the IOC is based on the gold medals . Yes, I agree with taneepak and bananakid. It should be based on the gold medals count. .
china is not stupid. It is far cheaper to train one swimmer that can earn several medals than to fund and train a team of soccer players, only to earn 1 measly medal. Think!!
of course the US would choose a new way to measure success, like weight of the metal content. 8 gold weigh more than 8 silver + 1 bronze, therefore, US wins!!!hehehe If that fail, we can use value of metal. If melted down, 8 gold worth many times than 8 silver + 1 bronze sorry if i had offended some amercian frens here, i was just poking fun on that article.
Olympic success will and always will be measured by the number of gold medals a country has won. it has been that way for a long time now, i don't even know why this is an issue right now.
The author sounds no more than a sour loser. First he complains how the medal should be counted, then he cries about the Chinese population and sport system. Win is a win. Like the Canadian never complains Kenya has more gold medal than we do.
I agree with all the sentiments above, a lot of this is just American propaganda. China won fair and square, the USA needs to deal with it, seriously.
