This is nothing to do with any controversy or dodgy dealings, it's purely a view that they invested in winning golds, and that in the medal tables, a gold in the 100m is the same as a gold in the 10m trap shoot.
I was slightly surprised to see them so high up on the paralympic medal tables, especially when in the few events I've seen, I've not seen a single chinese medallist.
The difference between 1 (china) and 2 (GB) is massive, far disproportionate to that in the Olympics. Paying someone to compete against Usain Bolt would be an inefficient use of resources, but paying people to hit a target from 20 metres away, would be pretty cheap in comparison.
It's similar to trading I guess, the gold medals in the 100m are overpriced, and the ones in the random events are underpriced, so you buy those instead.
Not begrudging them, just a Friday afternoon view.
T
When you say "did China buy the olympics", the average person thinks about bribing the refs. Based on your post, the more suitable phrase would be "did China invest in olympic athletes".
But I guess you used this inflammatory/misleading title to get people to click on this thread.
On topic: It's not unusual for governments to give support to athletes. Over here in the states, people pay to go to a gym/get a coach. In China, it's the other way around - the government spots talent at an early age and pays for all the kids' training/education/food/housing/etc.
yes the title is designed to get people to click on it. I'm saying they picked which events to win and invested in those, rather than investing in those that have support for them (western style).
Note though that not many of China's medals are in individual events that require a certain innate talent. Their medals are in events where the athlete can be drilled to 'perfection' - shooting, gymnastics, archery, diving. They aren't good at relays and team sports because they aren't trained to think originally, to come up with things on the fly. They are good at succeeding when told "do this dive, and do it in this way, and practice it practice it practice it", but encouraging and nurturing original thought is not done in China.
While your analysis on the CCP's concern for legitimacy is fair, what you've described above is both wrong and xenophobic.
Only 5/83 gold medals (6.02%) of China's gold medals came from the sports you have identified (shooting, gymnastic, archery, diving). 29 (34.94%) came from athletics, 21 (25.3%) came from swimming among other gold medals in cycling, rowing and table tennis. As least get your facts right before you go on a xenophobic tirade against another country's talented athletes.
Source: http://www.london2012.com/paralympics/country/china/medals/index.html
If this is the thinking ability of a banker on average then the industry is certainly going down.
What the fuck are you talking about?
How you've survived long enough to learn to use a computer is mind boggling.
It's private vs. public. Sports in the US are a private enterprise and as a result the more popular sports get invested in.
It's not much different than the US not spending a shit load on curling, squash, or ping pong. In one country it's the free market that decides which sports get invested in and in the other it's the government.
Was this a revelation to you?
This capital allocation mechanism worked so well in their Olympic performance, it's rumored that they may adopt a similar mechanism in the Chinese economic system.
Misleading thread title but I do think we (in America) should be more intelligent about allocating training resources.
Number #1 in total medals and #1 in gold is not enough for you?
They can't even rig the games and win... They need to get a fucking clue.
When did they rig the games? Source?
good for them, money is wonderful, how many golds can india afford? wow, they are really fcuked
Recusandae qui nulla qui ad. Laboriosam omnis cum velit nisi est. Molestiae voluptatibus voluptas officiis. Quaerat quos occaecati quidem sed laudantium quas.
Voluptatem fuga est aut voluptatem est animi. Voluptatem quo voluptate minus voluptatem qui aut. Sit neque et harum quo distinctio sint. Atque sint nisi quis quos sint. Similique qui libero veniam saepe rerum. Et saepe nihil qui et perspiciatis omnis.
Sed maiores ut expedita qui sit ducimus provident tenetur. Exercitationem id similique in laudantium veniam. Et aut adipisci pariatur fugiat.
Labore omnis quaerat sint porro nemo a. Quia autem beatae cumque alias. Modi voluptates corrupti architecto. Quis ut autem rerum qui ut provident. Placeat aut eaque porro sequi optio.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...