| mai said: @crissindahouse That's Great Text Wall of China here :D Not sure if it worth it? @all My point is pretty clear and ain't worth such vivid discussion, population matters but not in the way you think. There're more important things I mentioned above that might overcome a lot of circumstances. GDR is a good example. People may rant about dopings, but the fact that some GDR team members did use dopings, doesn't make them bad athletes. By your logic if GDR population is 1/4 of FRG population it should have scored only 2-3 gold medals in 1988 olympics? But they've scored 37! Thirty f**king seven with a population not being much bigger than modern Netherlands! 90% of gold medals couldn't be only due dopings, it's statistically impossible. Admit it, they were just better athletes than FRG athletes or modern Germany athletes. Germany decline as a sports nation since then, proves that population isn't a decisive factor. |
It's pretty much been proven that all of East Germany's metals in swimming and track and field are a result of heavy doping you want to see the real metal count for East Germany for the 1972, 1976, 1980 and 1988 then subtract all the swimming and track and field metals. Again Germany's history of doping in sports most likely began in the 1936 Olympics you don't go from 20 to 89 total metals even though you sent a little more then three times as much athlets to the 1936 games compared to 1932. My guess is that at least 20 of those 1936 German Olympic metals involved some kind of doping.
