The head coach of UK athletics, the flamboyantly named Charles van Commenee, believes we’re in danger of falling short of our medals target at the 2012 Olympics. A warning all the more humiliating when you consider we’re hoping for only one gold in track and field.
According to this study by UC3M, governments can expect to be rewarded with a gold medal for every £35 million they invest. But this paper from Dartmouth says it’s not all about direct investment; they say GDP per capita is the best indicator of who is most likely to triumph. On their model the UK over performed in both Sydney and Beijing. However if we keep improving at an average rate of 11 medals per games (my maths is suspect, but that’s my rough calculation of our improved performance from Atalanta '96 to Beijing '08), and add one more for home advantage (according to the same Dartmouth paper the host nation can expect 1.8% more medals) then we’re looking at an impressive haul of 59 medals.
It’s a shame the overwhelming (though unexplained) home advantage so prevalent in team sports, doesn’t translate to individual events.
Bradley Wiggins (above), winner of two gold medals in Beijing, has declared the Tour de France his priority over the Olympics next year, to the dismay of British Cycling.
No comments:
Post a Comment