And the olympic winner is… the Soviet Union?

With the Olympics wrapping up many countries will be looking at the final ranking and assessing how well they did. Already the spin wars are brewing. A few American newspapers are trying to talk up a favourable story for the United States by emphasizing certain aspects of America’s medal tally: more gender parity in its medals, lots of team medals which only count for one even though lots of athletes get medals.

Others – including some other American newspapers and the official Olympics Medal Standings – recognize the dramatic rise of China and prioritize rank according to Gold Medals won.

But for all the talk of the rise of China and its challenge to the United States, one simple fact remains, much of this jostling for position is made possible because the USSR has been wiped off the map.

Indeed what is amazing – and has gone relatively ignored –  is how well the USSR would have done at the Beijing games were it still intact.

Admittedly it would still have trailed China in Gold Medals won – 44 (USSR) to 51 (China) – but it would still have bested the United States 36. However, it is over in total medals won where the USSR would have crushed everyone. Combined, the countries of the former Soviet Union won an astounding 175 medals in Beijing, leaving both America (110) and China (100) far in its (theoretical) wake. Indeed even using the New York Times scoring system (gold = 4 points, silver=2 points and bronze=1 point) the mighty USSR athletic machine would again crush the competition 353 points to China’s 274 and America’s 256.

What makes this feat all the more impressive is that their combined population has not grown (indeed it is in decline in most places), nor, I imagine, has funding for sports likely improved all the much. If anything, things are likely more difficult vis-a-vis funding – particularly in relation to the sums invested by the Americans and the Chinese. A sporting generation has passed since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 – indeed many of those competing probably can’t even remember those calamitous events 17(!) years ago. What keeps the USSR a formidable Olympic contender? Is it the social capital of trainers, coaches and professionals, is the the legacy of physical infrastructure or a political culture that rewarded athletic excellence? It would be interesting to know – somehow a centrally planned approach for creating Olympic success has survived its apparent balkanization and decent into decentralization exceedingly well.

The table below, and so much of the work for this post, was done by Richard Dice who tabulated all the data and kindly forwarded it to me. Thank you Richard.

Current Rankings
Gold Silver Bronze Total
USA 1 36 38 36 110
China 2 51 21 28 100
Soviet Republics Rankings
Gold Silver Bronze Total
Russia 3 24 21 28 73
Ukraine 9 7 5 16 28
Belarus 13 4 5 10 19
Kazakhstan 19 2 4 7 13
Azerbaijan 27 1 2 4 7
Lithuania 27 0 3 4 7
Georgia 31 3 0 3 6
Uzbekistan 31 1 2 3 6
Armenia 31 0 0 6 6
Latvia 51 1 1 1 3
Estonia 57 1 1 0 2
Kyrgyzstan 57 0 1 1 2
Tajikistan 57 0 1 1 2
Moldova 69 0 0 1 1
USSR 44 46 85 175
Hypothetical Ranking by Medals
Gold Silver Bronze Total
USSA 1 44 46 85 175
USA 2 36 38 36 110
China 3 51 21 28 100
Hypothetical Rankings by Golds
Country Golds Ranking
China 51 1
USSR 44 2
USA 36 3
Hypothetica NYT Rankings
Country Medal Points Ranking
USSR 353 1
China 274 2
USA 256 3

4 thoughts on “And the olympic winner is… the Soviet Union?

  1. james

    Cool Medal Count!I saw something similar done with the EU27.I'm mostly interested in medals won per capita.I found this widget that displays who won the 2008 Olympics from different perspectives.It displays medals won by total medal count and gold count.In addition it can show medals won per million inhabitant and per million dollar GDP.I think you might like it:-)http://www.youcalc.com/apps/1219403616554?appli…Its easy to put on your blog A straight medal count isn’t necessarily the most fair:-)

    Reply
  2. anon

    I suggest that the general population of countries that fall under the “former” umbrella, whether it's former USSR or former Yugoslavia or wherever, succeeds so surprisingly often as a result of those people's desire to prove their worth. If you're a recently independent nation, especially one that has been seeking such status for some time, you're pretty damn motivated to get out there and show your former compatriots / rivals / civil war opponents who's boss; and they're in the same boat, which provides the competition that raises everyone's games to new heights – often times past the heights of more stable, western nations.

    Reply
  3. anon

    I suggest that the general population of countries that fall under the “former” umbrella, whether it's former USSR or former Yugoslavia or wherever, succeeds so surprisingly often as a result of those people's desire to prove their worth. If you're a recently independent nation, especially one that has been seeking such status for some time, you're pretty damn motivated to get out there and show your former compatriots / rivals / civil war opponents who's boss; and they're in the same boat, which provides the competition that raises everyone's games to new heights – often times past the heights of more stable, western nations.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s