Olympic medal per capita

Weep before the Glorious Anglo Nation of New Zealand

Other urls found in this thread:

finance.yahoo.com/news/nordic-countries-more-olympic-medals-154500949.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

finance.yahoo.com/news/nordic-countries-more-olympic-medals-154500949.html

one of these lists is incorrect

>finance.yahoo.com/news/nordic-countries-more-olympic-medals-154500949.html
yours is 3 days old

>Implying medals per capita matters.
The population of a country doesn't matter, all that matters is it's athletes

and most of your athletes are dindus so what does that say about america?

So number of athletes does not correlate with population for western countries?

you do realise that the population means the pool of athletes in a high population country is much larger

explain India fucknut

they have alot of potential athletes but they are shit at sports because they are indians

There are not wnough events for the us to win enough medals to top this list. Also, alot of athletes competing for other countriees are americans, theu just did'nt make the team.

>There are not wnough events for the us to win enough medals to top this list.
What does that even mean? Not enough meme sports that only Americans play?

>Also, alot of athletes competing for other countriees are americans, theu just did'nt make the team.
Then they are shit. Any examples of such people winning any medals?

this doesn't mean anything until the end of the olympics, since some sports take longer to reach the finals

Son I am proud.

For the glory of the family most honorable father

Population is a very small factor in determining the prevalence of athletes. There are several other factors such as environment, culture, and economics.
Just saying higher population means more athletes and that's why we're winning is a total cop out

>per capita

>environment, culture, and economics
The prestige of the Olympics is about comparing those factors between nations. Not weighing in population makes no sense though.

Not really, since the number of athletes a nation can send does not correlate with population. It's the athletes who are competing for their country, not the entire population. If we're going to talk per capita, we should talk about medals per athlete

So how many American athletes with a realistic chance of winning a medal were not allowed to go to Rio?

Who knows, that doesn't really matter though

It's about getting more rolls of the dice. A higher population means a higher chance of getting good genetics for a high-level athlete and a higher population also raises the odds of getting high-level athletes.

Ok. Why does the number of athletes allowed per country matter then?

And yet population does not matter?

Because they're the ones competing. How are you not getting this?

See

>country is only good at soccer
>can't even win a medal in that category

They're a hybrid dindu created over hundreds of years of eugenics, for physical work. Nearly a separate species from the average sub Saharan

We really do need to break down medals by race though. Arab batons buy Africans fir track and field, so when their country wins a nation it doesn't matter. This example of creating citizens for medals is true for many 1st world countries as well.

Which race really is the best, objectively? I can't find the study anywhere.

>8 medals
not to downplay your accomplishment, but that really isnt that big of a number

Haha Americunts btfo : )

What?
Is the sport that matters? Ethiopia doesn't have a hockey team and Mongolia doesn't give a shit about running hurtling. So how can we do any comparisons in meme sports?

What's wrong with that? It's just a good way of showing quality over quantity.