%202024%2008%2019%20Hank.jpg)
19th August 2024
Hey Hank,
In regards to your video about an Olympics mystery I guess what you mean is ‘who won the Olympics’ in 2024. It reminded me of a story a gym teacher told me back in middle school. He had won the track meat by pressing his worst entry but the other school had gotten gold and bronze.
It would come to the point that at least in running the winner was determined by the performance of all competitors based on some kind of collective score. You could say that this was average time or the like, but in this case he had mentioned long distance.
The teacher said that he paced the last runner in his group and kept them motivated where as the last runner of other schools had slowed to a trot and was hardly running. Thus every person from our school had come in with a much better time than the collective time of other competitors.
This would be useless in determining a winner of the Olympics as the sports do very wildly but there are a few ideas that come about from this concept. If every country sent the same number of people then it would be a simple idea of assigning every competitor a rank per event and then calculating who had the highest rank over all.
If you want to go by medals won, which is a whole lot simpler, I can tell you the best way. Simply, a gold medal would have a score of three, silver is at two, and bronze a one. I guess you could argue this is too simple, but we are looking for a simple concept.
In this way a country winning more high quality medals could win over a country that won more total medals. Again, this only works if you say that all countries have an equal entry. If a country cent one person to the Olympics and they won three gold medals they would have an average score of nine. That would make it so that any country could win.
Wins vs. entries opens up a whole new can of worms and is much harder to calculate. America being large and diverse is the most likely to win by volume. Chine is bigger but not as diverse and India doesn’t appear to take an interest. I believe the classic match-up is the US vs. Russia but that wasn’t in the cards this time. Then again most countries could send more people if they wanted to but those people would be less likely to win.
As another thought, the Olympics are an idea of good will and our world coming together to set aside our differences and be one body. In the spirit of the Olympics every country that participated won. They did their level best and that’s all that really is important.
The world won. The world came together and sent a message of hope for a brighter future. We got a massive amount of people together and we didn’t resort to violence. The world came together and felt happy. That was the win.
Then again, what do I know?
Richard Leland Neal
In regards to your video about an Olympics mystery I guess what you mean is ‘who won the Olympics’ in 2024. It reminded me of a story a gym teacher told me back in middle school. He had won the track meat by pressing his worst entry but the other school had gotten gold and bronze.
It would come to the point that at least in running the winner was determined by the performance of all competitors based on some kind of collective score. You could say that this was average time or the like, but in this case he had mentioned long distance.
The teacher said that he paced the last runner in his group and kept them motivated where as the last runner of other schools had slowed to a trot and was hardly running. Thus every person from our school had come in with a much better time than the collective time of other competitors.
This would be useless in determining a winner of the Olympics as the sports do very wildly but there are a few ideas that come about from this concept. If every country sent the same number of people then it would be a simple idea of assigning every competitor a rank per event and then calculating who had the highest rank over all.
If you want to go by medals won, which is a whole lot simpler, I can tell you the best way. Simply, a gold medal would have a score of three, silver is at two, and bronze a one. I guess you could argue this is too simple, but we are looking for a simple concept.
In this way a country winning more high quality medals could win over a country that won more total medals. Again, this only works if you say that all countries have an equal entry. If a country cent one person to the Olympics and they won three gold medals they would have an average score of nine. That would make it so that any country could win.
Wins vs. entries opens up a whole new can of worms and is much harder to calculate. America being large and diverse is the most likely to win by volume. Chine is bigger but not as diverse and India doesn’t appear to take an interest. I believe the classic match-up is the US vs. Russia but that wasn’t in the cards this time. Then again most countries could send more people if they wanted to but those people would be less likely to win.
As another thought, the Olympics are an idea of good will and our world coming together to set aside our differences and be one body. In the spirit of the Olympics every country that participated won. They did their level best and that’s all that really is important.
The world won. The world came together and sent a message of hope for a brighter future. We got a massive amount of people together and we didn’t resort to violence. The world came together and felt happy. That was the win.
Then again, what do I know?
Richard Leland Neal
No comments:
Post a Comment