Britain 4th in the medal table, 19 Golds. That's an incredible. Only China, USA & Russia ahead of us. That's a great fillet to British sport and just London 2012 needed.
Interesting article on the US's interpretation of the medal table:
Olympics: America turns the tables
According to the US media, gold medals don't count for as much as they used to. Wonder why that might be?
It's an odd thing: when the US media report on the Beijing Olympics medal tallies, they show tables with nations ranked by "total medals" won - rather than by gold medals won, which is the more usual way of doing things (since otherwise a bronze counts the same as a gold, which is hardly the case).
And yet - it wasn't always that way in America's media. Compare these two medal tables from USA Today. The first is from the 2004 Athens Olympics. The USA is number one in both golds and total medals - but notice that China beats Russia into second place, despite Russia having many more medals in total than China.
What's the reason for this? Anything to do with the likelihood that China is going to spank America's butt in terms of golds won - but that the USA has a chance to top the overall tally?
Perhaps the US networks should start celebrating bronze medals as the true sign of Olympic achievement? Because there the USA team still has a big lead.
This should show everyone what desperate stupid cnuts the Americans are:
The way Olympic medals work, a medal for a team sport - such as the golds each of the men on the volleyball team was awarded Sunday - counts as just one.
If, instead, the medals awarded to each individual are counted, the totals underscore the American commitment to team sports. They read like this: