The title should have been "Of all the guesses made about medal count, some were correct." Had GS been wrong, this would have been a total non-story (as with all the other guesses: "they guessed about something outside their usual domain, and were wrong. Oh well."), and BI would have needed to find someone else who had guessed (sorry, "predicted") correctly.
Why, the ability to look thru form and other sports based statistics is great if your moving into high-frequency-gamberling, no wait I see what they did there.<p>That said it is known that host countries do better as tehy also said "According to Goldman, home countries outperform their expected haul by 54%"<p>Makes you wonder when betting shops and banks will end up converging.<p>But if they were that good and knew there were right based upon some solid maths that they would be able to predict the results then they woud of put there own money were there mouth is. Banks and GS don't do that, they only like to make the predictions and put other peoples money weer there mouths are. Same as a casino in many way, playing the odd's at your expense, only when you win they win and when you lose they win.
Meaningless. Goldman Sachs got the prediction for New Zealand completely wrong along with many other countries. WSJ correctly predicted NZ's total number of medals including the exact number of golds. Maybe I should write an article about that?