What country has produced the best all around fighters during the past 60 years?

[holmcall]

I am tying to come up with a formula based on per capita champions; that is to say, what country produced the most champions based on its population. A lot of flaws in this, but my assumption is that PR might be the one--or maybe Jamaica.

It won't work. Too quantatative. Needs a qualatative element which is almost impossible to do.

[Hunter]

USA and Mexico

[CGM]

I am tying to come up with a formula based on per capita champions; that is to say, what country produced the most champions based on its population. A lot of flaws in this, but my assumption is that PR might be the one--or maybe Jamaica.

It won't work. Too quantatative. Needs a qualatative element which is almost impossible to do.

I don't see why it should be so hard. We are just dealing with numbers here. Population, number of champions. As long as you don't try to formulize why one champ might be better than another.

What aspect is messing you up?

[Trainer Monkey]

The US
Under the initial question,this would go back to 1948. If we look strictly at Olympic victories,the US has a clear lead,with Cuba and Russia close behind,and even then it gets skewed because many of the Russian victories are under the old USSR,which counts neighboring areas that are no longer considered Russia,and Cuban fighters rarely have pro careers, so the international games ARE their Pro career.
If you extrapolate those numbers to pro careers(and except for the former USSR and Cuba,that would translate normally) most Olympians end up with one title or another,so the US would still be in the lead.

[holmcall]

I am tying to come up with a formula based on per capita champions; that is to say, what country produced the most champions based on its population. A lot of flaws in this, but my assumption is that PR might be the one--or maybe Jamaica.

It won't work. Too quantatative. Needs a qualatative element which is almost impossible to do.

I don't see why it should be so hard. We are just dealing with numbers here. Population, number of champions. As long as you don't try to formulize why one champ might be better than another.

What aspect is messing you up?

A small country could have an inordinate amount of mediocre champs, while a larger one could have fewer (but clearly better) ones. That is too quantatative for me. If you want a fromula that says what counrty pruduced the moost champions per capita. that says nothing about how good they were. It's just numbers which, of course, is one measure. But to get what country produced the BEST, you need something else in my humble opinion.