There has been a bit of bally-hoo in the press about China putting an end to US Olympic dominance, a dominance which doesn’t seem to jibe with history. I took a look at the medal counts for the Summer Olympics, and since 1956 (not counting the boycott years of 1980 and 1984, a total of 11 Olympics) the US has topped the gold medal chart five times. Not bad, but three of the five have come since 1996. From 1956 to 1996, the US only placed first twice, finishing second to the USSR in 1956, 1960, 1972, 1976, 1988, and to the Unified Team in 1992. In fact, in 1988, the USA finished third behind both the USSR and East Germany. Now admittedly we have had a bit of a good run since 1996, but I’d hardly call the US track record over the past fifty years of Olympiads ’dominant.’
Nor would it seem prudent to link gold medal tallies with the health or prosperity of a particular country or economy or to the stability of its political system. After all, in the years between Seoul and Barcelona, of the top 10 countries in terms of overall gold medals in 1988: the top two (USSR and GDR) ceased to exist, four others (Romania, Bulgaria, South Korea, and Hungary) saw authoritarian regimes replaced by…less authoritarian regimes, and we all know what happened in the PRC (#8 in ’88 with five gold medals) the summer after the Seoul games.
As for me, I’ve always enjoyed it the most when the table of medals is long rather than top heavy, so that all countries can savor the chance to claim an Olympic champion among their own. I also think there’s something fitting to China topping the medal charts, given how important acheiving that goal is to people here. While most of my friends and family back home bemoan the upstart surpassing two past champions in a suprising bid for greatness and respect after years of humiliation (by which they mean the Tampa Bay Rays, currently 3 games ahead of the Sox and a whopping 9 in front of the Yankees in the AL East standings), it’s been a joy to watch the joy that China’s haul has brought to the people of Beijing.
Thanks for breaking down the numbers and pointing out that a country’s big pile of gold medals certainly doesn’t correspond with its international dominance or even its stability. It seems more to do with its sports culture: the Soviet Union poured resources into individual athletes, and China has seemed to follow this model. In the US, the talent tends to be more spread out. (Peter Hessler does a good job talking about this contrast in Oracle Bones.)
Both models work well for cultivating impressive athletes; the question is, who has more fun?
I don’t know how this affects your calculations, but 1976 was also a boycott year (http://tinyurl.com/5r8nhm). It’s tempting to suggest it’s the forgotten boycott because it was “only” African countries upset with New Zealand for a rugby tour of South Africa. Huh, I didn’t realist 1988 also had a boycott….
And remember, the PRC has only been taking part since 1984, which may, perhaps, contribute to the perception of American dominance.
But as a proud citizen of a small country, let me say that from our point of view the length or top-heaviness of the medal table is meaningless. Us little country people know that the top end of the table is for the big boys like America, China and Russia who have much vaster pools of talent and resources to draw on. We take a different approach and focus on those sports where we can do well. We don’t need a lot of gold, but if we can kick us some Yankee, Chinese, Russian or Aussie arse in one or two sports, we’re happy. As such, it was a bit of a blow to see our equestrian team crash out so drastically this year- that’s one sport we’ve always been strong in. Our rowing team was looking superb through the heats and quarters, and there was talk of getting all eight crews into the finals (note: that’s not even all the rowing events, only the ones we could get crews for. Each Olympics we have a different mix of rowing crews depending on how our rowers are doing in each event), but after yesterday’s semis we’re looking a little shaky. Illness in the case of Mahe Drysdale is not helping…. Gotta wait till Super Saturday. Point is, we don’t care about topping the table, and indeed the race for the top of the table is not much different from the NBA or Premier League- we know the big teams and the big names, and the hardcore sports freaks follow it religiously, but it’s of purely academic interest for most of us, and not much interest at that. Instead, we play to our strengths, and so long as our teams have given it their best shot, we’re satisfied (note: Rugby is not a sport, it’s the national religion. The principles outlined above do not apply to rugby).
Sam G: Sports fans from small countries have more fun. It’s easier for us to set back and just watch the sport.
Sam,
I think the sports culture point is an important one. Few countries have the resources or drive to match something like China’s 119 program.
Chris,
Yeah, it was hardly a scientific survey…more of I’m bored and the workday is almost over.
Thanks for your input from the ‘small’ country perspective. Hope things pick up for NZ.
Er, ‘dominance’ doesn’t have to mean ‘sole dominance’ or ‘unchallenged dominance’, does it?
I think the fact that, in living memory, America has just about always been either first or second in the medals table, and – since the collapse of the Soviet Union – always first, is pretty damned “dominant”. And consistently, over a long period of time, too.
China wants that Olympic medals No 1 spot, at least partly because it is emblematic of her wider ambitions to one day displace America as the world’s leading economic power. I think the Chinese would have been just a tad less excited about this whole Olympic adventure if the CIS had somehow managed to top the medal table again last time out. I mean, really, where is the competition there? (They were probably pissed off about that Indian win, though!)
Mind you, it ain’t over yet. We’re barely a third of the way in, and I suspect America’s going to do better in the remaining events.
Of course, I’m actually rooting for China on this one. Comeuppance time, Yankee oppressors!
Froog,
Bah! You’re just bitter about Yorktown plus as a foreigner you can’t possibly understand US culture and, for that matter, you’ve just insulted 300 million Americans with your insensitive remarks aimed at reminding us of our century (and a half) of humiliation under British rule without giving credit for our peaceful rise in the 19th century.
Wow. It can be fun to be a fenqing.
And yes, for any actual literal-minded fenqing lurkers, I’m joking.
Cornwallis surrendered – I didn’t!
i just wish they did something like the triplecast in ’92, a sort of c-span for olympic sports where showing the competition itself far outweighed insipid commentary, and the range of sports shown dwarfed anything on american TV since.
i used to love the olympics for the very fact that i could actually see athletes from other countries, playing sports i could barely grasp and never played. these days, i can’t even bear to turn the TV on.
Wu Ming,
They do have numerous channels involved it seems…USA, CNBC, MSNBC, etc. I will say that I’ve seen more features and commentary on non-US athletes on NBC than I’ve seen on non-Chinese athletes by CCTV, but that’s hardly saying a lot.
It was hardly unexpected, but CCTV’s coverage of the Games so far has been woefully lacking in international flavour or professionalism.
On the topic of international flavour, home support and petty restrictions seem to have removed a lot of colour from the events I’ve seen on TV so far. Then again, that might just be a by-product of CCTV’s broadcasts.
As for the medal tally, China was always going to top the table with most golds. It won’t even be close.
There has to be some examination, I feel, of the obsessive way they’ve gone about achieving this, though. Those girls were NOT all 16!!