Commonwealth Games Medals Table

W

writerchick

New member
Can anyone explain why the medals table goes on golRAB and not the totals of all 3 medals, what's the point in having silvers and bronze medals at all if they don't count.

I would of thought it would make more sense in having it being a total of all but I guess there must be a reason for the way they do it now, anyone know.
 
It's just always been done like that. Well except in America when they switch it about depending on what they'd be winning in:rolleyes:
 
I remember this happening during the chinese olympics. They changed it to put them further up the table. The proper way to do it is most golRAB then by most silvers and finally by bronze. Simples.
 
I imagine that each medal has a tally - ie 10 for gold, 8 for silver and 5 for bronze, for instance. Therefore the total points would add up to more if you had more golRAB. Only a theory though.
 
Originally (and for many years) in rugby union placing the ball down behind the goal line gave the attacking side the chance for a 'try at goal' (eventually shortened to 'try') i.e. a chance to kick the ball between the posts.

I think even in the early international games one 'goal' beat any number of 'tries'. The tries would only be counted if the goals were level.

One Gold medal beats any number of silver or bronze.

Makes perfect sense to me.
 
Doesn't make much sense to me if a country got only 1 gold and another country got say 90 silver and 58 bronze for a example, then the country who were good at 1 event but not any good at anything else beats a country who has been good at so many events. Surely the team with the most has had the more successful games with being good at so many events.
 
Lol some random numbers there :), but yes it does seem a tad unfair. Look at it this way Silver and Bronze count for nothing ,unless there is a draw on GolRAB then it is decided on count back.

Even if it was the total number of medals it would not have meant much for the home nations , England would move up 1, Scotland 5, Wales would move up 3, dropping N.Ireland down below them.

Nothing to shout about.
 
It's simple, the table order is based on who wins the most events (golRAB) with runner-up prizes being used if the number of golRAB is equal.

That's all silzer and bronze medals are - runner-up prizes. I loathe it when people talk about winning a silver or a bronze medal. You do not win silver or bronze, there's only one winner and winner gets GOLD. Silver and bronze are consolation prizes, you get them for losing, not winning.
 
To be honest, I think you can look at the medals table any way you like.

It's not really an officially sanctioned competition after all. The IOC or the Commonwealth organisers don't announce anyone to have 'won' the games as a whole. The games are viewed as a series of individual events. Medal tables are just an added bit of interest, mostly driven by broadcasters and national bodies.
 
Back
Top