If I got an Olympic medal I wouldn't be complaining.
It's gold plated. If it was actually all gold, then it would be both very, very expensive and also would bruise if you just pushed your thumbs into it.
Thatguys made a point, then Rainboots disagreed and reiterated the point. I am confused.
WAIT!! Did Rainboots interpret thatguys as saying the gold would bruise the person's fingers if they tried to push them into the medal?
@Rainboots: I could see how you did that. That's how I read it at first. Just read it too fast and switched the "you" and "if."
Gold is a very soft metal so it would bend and become misshapen very easily, that's why they just plate a stronger metal with gold. Basically the same look but it's cheaper and has more longevity
Not that I question you saying that gold is a soft metal, I'm just wondering, how do they have solid gold jewelry and such and it doesn't get all messed up?
actually, it does. if you have any gold jewellery, you have to handle it with extreme care because it can bend out of shape or break very easily.
"All that 'glisters' isn't gold."
The fact that his post is still +YYA is indicative of people's tendancy to agree with posts that sound good but aren't.
Thank you to those who had something to say about the characteristics of gold.
Or maybe they agree that they deserve a gold medal but it would not be feasible tI actually give them one
I think the fact that you won a gold medal in the Olympics would mean a lot more that the possession of a big ol' chunk of gold. Hell, I'd be happy with a certificate saying I was THE BEST IN THE WORLD.
It would very heavy, and very difficult to come by all that gold. Think of all the events there are, and to give out a solid gold medal to those numbers, every 4 years? Gold is very rare, just watch discovery channel!
If you ever want to commit suicide, repeat that last sentence to my mom
In addition to what they said, these Olympics had more gold than any other in their medals.
And also they had to save their money for fireworks.
Meh, it's not like they're going to sell it, so what's the difference? In fact it's better off this way, as Thatguys already explained.
Even if it weren't the case that gold would get messed up, why waste MORE money on it? It's a symbol that you're awesome, not an expensive piece of jewelry to show off wealth.
"I was recognized internationally for being the best in my sport, and all I got was billions of fans, hours of TV coverage, fame, admiration, and a precious metal coated in another precious metal. Life is so unfair!"
Those who live in London will still be paying off these olympics through taxes for some time to come. Can you imagine how expensive it would be to have every single gold medal to actually be solid gold?
As everyone else stated, gold is a soft metal. You can literally peel it off with your fingernails. You can't make a medal out of that.
besides, each gold medal already costs 6oo dollars or so to make. the bronze medal only cost 7 dollars!
That is very very true. And that is the reason there isn't more gold in a gold medal. London would be bankrupt.
I know that, but there is still not terribly much. It doesn't matter though. It's all a symbol. It means you are the best, so it shouldn't matter how much is in it.
Ugg, arguments. Ok here's my opinion. They deserve a real medal because they are the best in the world HOWEVER, that is not feasibly possible. Therefore, one that is symbolizes one is good enough. It's still a symbol of greatness, and they should still be proud, so in the end, they deserve one, even though it shouldn't matter as it's a symbol. That is my opinion. Got it?!? now please just stop!
the only thing I really paid attention to is how it says "all that glisters is not gold"
The bronze metal should be called "bull shit" because that is all that is in it.
Well, it doesn't matter how much it costs to make it, it's worth many many many times more. %98 percent of athletes that go to the Olympics would be very proud to get a bronze.