So the struggle for the top spot on the medal list has already been claimed. The Chinese have hit a gold rush this Olympics with little chance of falling behind, leading the USA 45 to 26. Perhaps no one could have predicted such a blowout. A tie, maybe. But what has made the difference in this Olympics as compared with the last? Is it home field advantage? Harder working athletes? A stroke of luck? Perhaps a bit of all of these have turned the tides of the medal count. But a recent Guardian article, True Sport is About Much More That Counting Medals, has a more cynical view of Olympic success. Ed Smith writes:

To the win-at-all-costs lobby, sport is a glorified branch of the manufacturing industry. It is about how many units of victory we can produce, how many gleaming medals and trophies emerge at the end of the conveyor belt. The means of production matters less than the quality of the output. Sport, it is argued, is central to national self-esteem. This demands not only talent, hard work and organisation, but also serious cash. The success of the British cycling team, which benefits from huge government-sponsored investment in the latest technology, proves that the state can give sports a helping hand. Sport is too precious to be left alone by the state.

This is perhaps a truth that we all knew, but don’t want to admit or think about, especially when all we see on the field are individual athletes that have worked their whole lives for a chance at a medal. But with billions of dollars being invested into the most expensive Olympics ever and national pride on the line, there is little doubt that state cash has played a huge role in the outcome of these Games. Indeed, Smith says:

The Chinese Olympic team has been similarly criticised for ruthlessly targeting funds towards only those events where they have realistic medal chances. Where is the romance in sport, China has prompted people to ask, when sporting triumphs are predestined on the accounting spreadsheet?

You be the judge.

Medal Count

GDP