Page 8 of 11

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:25 am
by Crimson Ryan
Sailors? wrote:Sod the USA, we kick ass for the size of us.

That's very true. USA probably had twice the amount of athletes over every other competing country bar China..

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:36 am
by south carmain
actually being the hosts we were required to enter athletes to every event so we had the most

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 11:07 am
by Sailors?
Yeah we had fuck loads in there, doesn't mean we were great in those events. But by population alone, if we had anywhere near the amount of people to choose from we'd wipe the floor with those yanks.

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 11:12 am
by south carmain
yeah probably, after all most of the athletes we entered wouldn't even qualify normally, and the Americans had an advantage in swimming, the Amount of events Phelps has the opportunity to get gold in is a lot more than any other sport at the olympics

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 1:10 pm
by Sonikku
I heard the Queen was looking down at her fingernails when the Brit Athletes walked in at the end of the opening ceremony.

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 2:07 pm
by Sailors?
Yeah she doesn't really give a crap. Too old for this shit.

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:48 pm
by Crimson Ryan
south carmain wrote:actually being the hosts we were required to enter athletes to every event so we had the most

Really? I didn't know that. Probably be the case in 4 years though :P

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 6:54 pm
by Neo Matrix
There were probably a lot of "qualified as host" berths (eg: the football team), but I can't think of a medal that was won by someone who didn't qualify by right in the first place. For example in the Athletics, they all got either the A or B standard to qualify, no handouts there... I'm sure it was the same for cycling.

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2012 2:46 am
by Axm
I get you brits arguement over population advantage, its a vaid one, but I think most Americans are just happy we beat China and Russia. They all did abit better then us in Bejing(besides swimming ofcourse) so its satisfying to know we whiped the floor with them. Its Mars next bitches. Dont worry, you lot can ride shot gun if you want.

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2012 10:15 am
by Neo Matrix
All-time leader on that medals per population modifier is New Zealand apparently...

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2012 10:21 am
by QWERTY
Neo Matrix wrote:All-time leader on that medals per population modifier is New Zealand apparently...


That's because essentially no fucker lives there! Even though it's a beautiful place. I think we (as a Brit) did amazingly well purely due to home advantage. You can say all you want about athletes giving 100% the whole time, but when you have a crowd of people geeing you on it gives you an added shot of adrenaline. I'll be very surprised if we see another medal count of that nature at Rio.

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2012 2:13 pm
by Neo Matrix
Oh definitely, I'd agree with home advantage being the reason we did that well. I just know it's NOT simply because we had an athlete competing in every sport like south carmain seems to be inferring.

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2012 2:14 pm
by south carmain
Neo Matrix wrote:I just know it's NOT simply because we had an athlete competing in every sport like south carmain seems to be inferring.

I never said that, it's as if you barely read anything I say, crimson thought America entered the most athletes, I corrected him saying because we're hosts we entered the most athletes

and just to quote myself
yeah probably, after all most of the athletes we entered wouldn't even qualify normally


at least read what I say properly before putting words in my mouth

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2012 3:56 pm
by Neo Matrix
Maybe it's me misinterpreting what you're saying, but that second quote is what gave me that idea... If I'm wrong, fair enough, but that's the direction I was seeing it.

Re: 2012 Olympics

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2012 4:03 pm
by south carmain
I meant that the amount we entered is irrelevant because most of the surplus entered wouldn't of even qualified normally hence making no difference at all, someone who has is 40 seconds behind the world champion won't get lucky and win gold