Significance of winning Olympic medals

| by N.S.Venkataraman

( September 01, 2012, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) Why some countries win so many medals in Olympic games, some countries win only a handful of medals and some do not open the score board at all.

A careful study and review of the medals received by various countries in the London Olympics show interesting trends.

Is USA winning the largest number of medals of 104 due to its economic prosperity and social development ? Or, has the huge success of US sportsmen in Olympic indicate any superior level of discipline and determination and scientific approach to the games ? Can the US government and administration claim any role in such huge success of US in London Olympics ?

The next largest medal winning country is China with 88 medals and the political and social climate in China is far different from that of the prevailing conditions in USA . It is well known that people in China do not enjoy the type of personal freedom that the American citizens have. Inspite of the different conditions in USA and China, both the countries have shown spectacular results.

It is said that the Chinese government have put forth much efforts in training and moulding its sportsmen in methodical way who participate in the Olympic games. However, this cannot be considered as the main reason for the success of China, as governments of several other countries have put forth similar efforts. Of course, while the initiatives and efforts in countries like USA and Great Britain( which has won 65 medals), have been largely sponsored by the private sector, in the case of China , the initiative has been essentially driven by the government.

However, looking into the medal tally of other countries, it becomes evident that even countries suffering from political conflicts and economic deprivation and unstable governments have succeeded in getting medals. At the same time, countries better placed in terms of political stability and economic conditions have fared no better. Further, there is no reason to think that larger the size of the country and its population, the medal tally would be better.

The striking case is that of Ethiopia, which is a country in serious economic misery but has managed to win as many as 7 medals. Another striking case is that of a country having serious conflicts like Afghanistan, which has managed to get one medal. Countries as small in size as Trinidad Tobago have won 4 medals and a city state like Singapore could get 2 medals and a tiny country like Chinese Taipei could also manage to win two medals.

At the same time, a large country like India with population exceeding one billion can manage to get only 6 medals, inspite of the Indian government reported to have spent substantial money in training its sports men participating in Olympic games.

There are several countries like Sri Lanka , Pakistan, Vietnam who could not open their tally at all.

Now the question is why some countries get so many medals, some get only a handful and many do not get any medals at all.

Obviously, the success in the Olympics appear to be largely due to initiative of the individual sportsmen and their merits. While the governmental support can help certainly the success cannot be attributed only to the external support enjoyed by the sports persons.

In any case, in the competitive world, there is no doubt that the number of Olympic medals won by a country certainly determine the rating of the country in the world view. In the case of ratings based on political , social or economic criteria, there would always be difference of view and there may be no finality. In the case of ratings in sports, there is no confusion as who is better and who is not so better.

While the individual sports man carry the glory on their shoulders, the country that they represent are equally glorified. To this extent, the countries that get less medals or no medal should have reason to feel disappointed . Of course, they have a chance to prove in the next Olympics , if they have appropriate elements in them.