This is one of the most ridiculous ideas I have ever read. I could see if it was a big factor but it isn't. That is like saying a team with a 25 point lead in a track meet means nothing because the final winner of the 440 relay wins the meet. His idea is that all the other events mean nothing.
If you look at the total medals we have it won. If you went by the system of 3 points for gold 2 points for silver and 1 point for bronze then we would still win. If you did like track meets and award 10 points for gold 8 points for silver and 6 points for bronze then we would still win.
I have seen meets where a team that had more first places still lost to another team that had more of the later places finishes.
Dan Wetzel outdid himself in ridilculousness on this one.
If it were reversed the Canadians would think so too.
The Link
If you look at the total medals we have it won. If you went by the system of 3 points for gold 2 points for silver and 1 point for bronze then we would still win. If you did like track meets and award 10 points for gold 8 points for silver and 6 points for bronze then we would still win.
I have seen meets where a team that had more first places still lost to another team that had more of the later places finishes.
Dan Wetzel outdid himself in ridilculousness on this one.
If it were reversed the Canadians would think so too.
The Link