- Robin Levinson-King
- BBC Toronto reporter
Image source,Getty Images
The Tokyo Olympics came to an end, and the medal list was once again dominated by a big country like the United States, which topped the list with the most medals. However, if you take into account the population and the economic level of each country, what kind of medal list will you see?
When calculating the medals and trophies that countries have won on the stadium, the feeling of reappearance yesterday is always extremely strong. Every four years, the same countries—the United States, China, and Russia—have won one medal after another.
The 2020 Tokyo Olympics is no exception.
The United States has won a total of 113 medals, including 39 gold medals, ranking first among all countries.
So, what makes a country like the United States dominate, while other countries lag behind? Economists and data geniuses have many theories.
David Forrest, an economist at the University of Liverpool who studies Olympic forecasts, said: “From the perspective of the medal model, what matters is the population, income level and political system. These are still very clear.”
Forrest said that population is important because the more athletes a country has, the more likely it is to produce truly competitive leaders.
Take a country like Luxembourg as an example, with a total population of 633,622. This time, 12 athletes were sent to participate in seven events, but they did not win medals. At the same time, the United States, which has the world‘s third-largest population, sent 613 athletes to participate in 35 competitions, and won the world‘s largest number of medals.
Taking the total population as a reference, certain countries have performed particularly well in the Olympics.
The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) proposed a different ranking method, that is, the number of medals won per million people as a reference base.
By this standard, although San Marino, a small European country with a population of only over 33,000, has only won three medals, it ranks among the best, while the United States is not even in the top 20 and can only be ranked 60th.
However, the population alone is not enough to guarantee a country dominates the podium.
Forrest said: “A very poor country will not have the resources to transform the potential of athletes in the population into the actual ability to compete on the world stage.”
“They must first have the ability to participate in sports. For example, they may have a good talent waiting to be developed in swimming, but in fact they do not have basic sports facilities like swimming pools.”
He said that poorer countries have also won Olympic competitions, but they tend to be lower-cost sports, such as wrestling, while richer countries also perform well in expensive sports, such as equestrianism and sailing.
If calculated according to the level of per capita GDP, China and Russia, which rank second and third in the total number of medals, actually do better than the United States. According to this ranking, China ranks first, Russia ranks second, and Kenya ranks third.
The United States, which usually tops the Olympic medal list, lags behind 15th in this alternative ranking.
There are also cultural and political factors. Forrest said that countries that used to be republics of the former Soviet Union often have an advantage because the communist regime of the former Soviet Union has established a strong sports infrastructure.
Comparing the size and wealth of countries, the performance of the Commonwealth countries has also been better than expected. Forrest believes that this is because the United Kingdom has not only created and developed many sports as we know it today, but has also brought its passion for sports to all parts of the world.
A typical example of British influence is Australia, which often ranks among the top ten in the world in the total number of medals.
Another extremely important factor is what a country has chosen as a national sport.
In India, cricket is a national sport, but it is not an Olympic event. India is also very good in hockey. Although this is an Olympic event, even if the men’s and women’s teams win, there are only two medals in total. In sports that are participated by individuals, such as gymnastics, swimming and track and field, each athlete has the opportunity to win several medals.
Forrest said: “In general, being keen on team projects is not helpful for the country to win more medals.”
Simon Gleave, director of sports analytics at data company Nielsen Gracenote, said that these various factors make it very difficult to accurately predict the number of Olympic medals. If you only refer to variables such as population and GDP per capita, you tend to underestimate some of the best performing countries.
He said that referring to past competition results can better predict which country will be better this time, but this is still only a rough estimate.
He told the British Broadcasting Corporation BBC: “You can’t find countries that are progressing or regressing fast, and I think this is the more interesting part.”
In order to better evaluate the Olympic champions, Griff not only takes into account the athletes’ past performance, but also the performance of each country in other international sports competitions since the last Olympic Games.
After considering this factor, he had predicted that India would actually achieve the best result ever, but India was really the case: the total number of medals ranked 33rd in the world. This greatly exceeds the historical record of 51st place in the total number of medals set by India in 2008.