The GVG Report

Keeping the talking heads honest, since 1979

September 2nd, 2008

How Did China get so Good?

How Did China get so Good?

 

How did China all of a sudden get so good at the Olympics? For all of China's Olympic preformances, their progress was very linear.

 

China has only been in the Olympics since 1984. That's 7 Olympics. The data for their first two Olympics is skewed because it was so new to their country. The following 4 Olympics show steady improvement therefore I am limiting my analysis to the most recent 5 olympics.

 

Year     Gold     Silver    Bronze  Total     % Change

1984     15         8          9          32         Too Early

1988     5          11         12         28         Too Early

==================================== Start Comparison

1992     16         22         16         54         0%

1996     16         22         12         50         -8%

2000     28         16         15         59         20%

2004     32         17         14         63         10%     

2008     51         21         28         100       80%

 

It looks like China gets about 50 to 60 medals with an increase of about 3 medals per Olympics. Then in 2008 they get 47 more medals, almost double their normal output.

 

If you plot that performance for 2008 they should have gotten about 65 to 70 medals including about 35 gold medals.

 

That would have been a pretty decent performance, but they crushed that with 100 medals and 51 golds. How could this happen?

 

Well I have a theory.

 

Lets compare what events China got their medals in and also see if the winners of those events are based on judges or not.

 

I broke down the events into two categories:

            Category 1: Events where your score is based solely on a judge. These events include gymnastics, swimming synchronized stuff, diving, boxing, judo, taekwondo, etc.

 

            Category 2: Events where your score is based only on time, points, weight, distance, etc. These events include weight lifting, basketball, tennis, softball, baseball, swimming, running, throwing, shooting, badminton, table tennis, etc.

 

The top 7 finishers at Beijing were the US (110), China(100), Russia (72), England (47), Australia (46), Germany (41) and France (40).

 

 

G

S

B

United States Olympic Medals

36

38

36

China Olympic Medals

51

21

28

Russian Federation Olympic Medals

23

21

28

Great Britain Olympic Medals

19

13

15

Australia Olympic Medals

14

15

17

Germany Olympic Medals

16

10

15

France Olympic Medals

7

16

17

 

How do these medals breakdown based on category? See below:

 

 

Gold by judges

Medal by judges

total

United States Olympic Medals

2

15

110

China Olympic Medals

24

40

100

Russian Federation Olympic Medals

6

14

72

Great Britain Olympic Medals

1

5

47

Australia Olympic Medals

1

2

46

Germany Olympic Medals

1

5

41

France Olympic Medals

0

10

40

 

If we take a look at the events won by each country we can see that China won 40 of their 100 medals in judged events. The US and Russia won only 15 and 14 respectively. And of the golds, China won 24 of their 51 golds in judged events. The US and Russia won 2 and 6 respectively.

 

The data that stand out so much is the 24 and 40. They are not even close to any other country. It should have been about 5 golds and 15 medals. That's a difference of 25 medals and would have put China in the 75 medal range where they belong.

 

I think that the judges were swayed by China's generosity of freebies and perks and benefits and a feeling that China is really trying to be a trustworthy member of the world.

 

The downside of all this China loving is that Japan, Russia and Romania got bumped.

 

Russia went from 92 medals in 2004 to 72 in 2008.

Japan went from 37 medals in 2004 to 25 in 2008.

Romania went from 19 medals in 2004 to 8 in 2008.

 

Normally good competitors in gymnastics and diving.

 

My prediction: China gets 70 medals in London in 2012. Back to normal.

 

Filed under General
Tagged with china, olympics