| PDF said: That chart of AoA proves nothing. Why does it matter how many people you have per gold medal? It should only matter the amount of gold medals. explain to me why it matters? |
Because if you consider the population size, then the medal count (and success in sports in general) actually says something about how good that country is in sports.
If you don't understand that obvious fact, try this: imagine the European Union becomes one country, then it would easily have the most medals. Does that mean Europeans are suddenly better at sports than before the EU became one country? Of course not, it just means they live in a bigger country now.
In reverse, imagine the USA splits up into its states. None of those states would get anywhere near the number of medals the USA as a whole wins now. Does that mean Americans suddenly became worse at sports? Again, of course not, it just means you're all living in smallish countries now.
In general, the medal list does give a good idea of what the best sports countries are. Of course you can't consider small countries with only 1 or 2 medal winners, that sample size is too small to get a decent statistic.
Australia probably IS the strongest sports country in the world, if you look at it objectively. Other remarkable sports countries are Cuba, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Hungary, ... . The USA is mediocre by all objective measures. And my own country (Belgium) is outright poor in sports.
