So how'd they do? If I were a gymnastics judge, I'd give them a 9.3—a respectable performance, but out of medal contention. Let's review the numbers. According to the official medal count, the haul of the top 30 countries fell to 706 medals, pretty close to PwC's projection of 703 medals. But both models misfired in projecting that the traditional powers would sag. The United States instead increased its medal total from 2000 by more than 10 percent, from 93 to 103. Strike one blow for American hegemony! Russia, predicted by PwC to lose nearly 30 percent of its 2000 medals, increased its take from 88 to 92. Despite the images of decrepit gymnastics training facilities that NBC continually aired, Communist-era sporting habits die hard. China likewise increased its medal share. Australia and Germany, which finished fourth and fifth, respectively, in the 2000 medal race, both saw their total medals decline, but not by as much as PwC expected. (In winning 49 medals, the dynamic Aussies may have permanently passed stagnant Germany in the summer Olympics pecking order.)

On the list of medals per capita, India stands solidly in last place, one per billion compared to one per 35 million for second-to-the-last Mexico - so far down to be literally off the charts.

Indian sport writer Rohit Brijnath writes, "This makes little sense to the world... we haven't figured it out either."

As he and other Indian writers observe, India's low per capita income and poor access to sport facilities and training are not full explanations, since some very poor, under-equipped and much smaller African and Caribbean countries have done well in the Olympics.

A more likely explanation lies in the opposite of the Australian phenomenon: an educated society in India that is so focused on academic and vocational education that parents simply are not encouraging their children to excel in sports.