In Olympic or other world/regional championship events, the top three competitors are awarded gold, silver and bronze medals. In races and most other events, earning any of these medals is an accomplishment.
However, in head-to-head events (often team events, though also fighting contests like boxing and wrestling), where a series of contests with one winner and one loser decides the event, there is a fundamental problem that cheapens the experience of winning silver:
The gold medalist obviously ends their campaign with a championship win. Even the bronze medalist has to win a 3rd place matchup to win the bronze. But the silver medalist gets their medal after taking a loss to the gold medalist.
Unlike, say, races or gymnastics where finishing 2nd out of the field is still an accomplishment, the silver medalist in a head to head event ends their campaign with a loss, cheapening the accomplishment. Often you’ll see silver medalists almost ashamed of having “backed into” their medal, or having “earned” their medal by falling short.
I have a format solution for this head to head problem. It would require one more head to head contest in the medal rounds, but would leave every medalist with a sense of satisfaction and having ended their campaign with a win.
- You get down to the final four competitors as usual. Two pairs of matchups in this semifinal play down to a winner and a loser.
- Don’t play a 3rd place matchup just yet. Instead, have the final two competitors play each other for the gold medal.
- Now, have the loser of the gold medal contest play the competitor that lost to the gold medalist in the semifinal. The winner of THIS contest earns the silver medal.
- Then the loser of this contest plays the remaining loser from the semifinal for the bronze medal.
This way, every medalist ends their campaign with a win, and wearing the silver medal doesn’t feel so much like a loser’s prize.