The point of your comment is that money buys medals and that GB spends money in cycling (where there are more medals to be won) in an attempt to boost its position in the medal tables without needing to compete in other sports. That's certainly the point of the article (which I have read) and it's both unfair and untrue.

As I explained, GB of all nations has won golds in a more diverse range of sports than any other nation so the sentence in the article that "Few countries rely as heavily—or as overtly—on a single sport to boost their medal totals" is absurdly wrong and is directly contradicted by the next few sentences about how Italy, the US and China do exactly what they are claiming GB do. The implication of you're comment about cycling is that cycling is the only reason GB is able to punch above it's weight which is not fair to the rowers, gymnasts, athletes and others who have won.

Maybe you aren't aware of the amount of backhanded comments with accusations of cheating there has been over the last week but I expect some people assumed that was what you meant.

So in other words you're being downvoted because you're partly wrong, the article is partly wrong and where you aren't wrong the implication is unfair to other competitors.