Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Disable your ad blocker to continue using our website.
Philosophy Explorer wrote:I'm going to hit you with further stats that will make you think further. Currently the UK has 63 medals in the Olympics. The US does have 111 medals, but that's not the significant stat. Michigan has 15 medals and a population of about 10 million while the UK has 63 medals and a population of 65 million so on a population basis, Michigan (which is part of the US) is doing better than the UK and from what I read, Michigan is guaranteed to pick up two more medals tomorrow. Wahoo!
PhilX
15 in 10 million - that's 1 medal for every 150,000 population....
Bramhope (which is part of the UK) has a population of 3,400. The Brownlee bothers who totally smashed the men's Triathlon won silver and gold. I don't know if there is anyone else from Bramhope in the Olymics, but the medal to population ratio is 1 in 1700
So suck on that!
I can feel you cringing crybaby. And I like how the UK uses funding to win medals (for which Jim Thorpe was stripped of his medals because he played semipro baseball).
Philosophy Explorer wrote:I can feel you cringing crybaby. And I like how the UK uses funding to win medals (for which Jim Thorpe was stripped of his medals because he played semiprecious baseball).
PhilX
The Olympics has long passed the stage of being an amateur tournament but the UK team are not paid, what is funded are the coaches and facilities and what has changed is that the team is rigorously selected upon performance results. It's why recently we are doing well in the medal charts but its in overall medals. We don't have the kind of sports scholarships that the US can draw upon for their sportsmen and we certainly don't pay them well if at all compared to many nations as by and large we still think of sports as not really a proper job.
Philosophy Explorer wrote:Since the funding would fall under the Olympic rules, then technically speaking, it's okay. My objection is it feels like a business.
The Olympics has been the most corrupt sports business for many a year now but it always was a political tool for the big nations to play their games out on. America and the Soviets being a prime example.
Another area is where an athlete would get artificial limbs. Are there Olympic rules regarding this?
Philosophy Explorer wrote:I'm going to hit you with further stats that will make you think further. Currently the UK has 63 medals in the Olympics. The US does have 111 medals, but that's not the significant stat. Michigan has 15 medals and a population of about 10 million while the UK has 63 medals and a population of 65 million so on a population basis, Michigan (which is part of the US) is doing better than the UK and from what I read, Michigan is guaranteed to pick up two more medals tomorrow. Wahoo!
PhilX
15 in 10 million - that's 1 medal for every 150,000 population....
Bramhope (which is part of the UK) has a population of 3,400. The Brownlee bothers who totally smashed the men's Triathlon won silver and gold. I don't know if there is anyone else from Bramhope in the Olymics, but the medal to population ratio is 1 in 1700
So suck on that!
I can feel you cringing crybaby. And I like how the UK uses funding to win medals (for which Jim Thorpe was stripped of his medals because he played semipro baseball).
PhilX
Your reaction is predictable and as stupid as anything else you type.
I was simply showing you how moronic your last post was.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
15 in 10 million - that's 1 medal for every 150,000 population....
Bramhope (which is part of the UK) has a population of 3,400. The Brownlee bothers who totally smashed the men's Triathlon won silver and gold. I don't know if there is anyone else from Bramhope in the Olymics, but the medal to population ratio is 1 in 1700
So suck on that!
I can feel you cringing crybaby. And I like how the UK uses funding to win medals (for which Jim Thorpe was stripped of his medals because he played semipro baseball).
PhilX
Your reaction is predictable and as stupid as anything else you type.
I was simply showing you how moronic your last post was.
Correction Hog's Choice. You're showing how predictable you are with your moronic posts. SOB is right about you.
The US is beating out the UK in at least two different ways which is a fact. I don't play favorites the way you do, I just look for the performance to the best of each competitor's ability. What do you look for besides to ridicule other members? Better start looking at a mirror.
Philosophy Explorer wrote:
I can feel you cringing crybaby. And I like how the UK uses funding to win medals (for which Jim Thorpe was stripped of his medals because he played semipro baseball).
PhilX
Your reaction is predictable and as stupid as anything else you type.
I was simply showing you how moronic your last post was.
Correction Hog's Choice. You're showing how predictable you are with your moronic posts. SOB is right about you.
The US is beating out the UK in at least two different ways which is a fact.
PhilX
Yes by having five times the population, and being the most stupid.
