Analysis and summary last updated: 26 September 2026. Now includes African, Asian, Central American & Caribbean, NACAC, Oceania and South American championships (pages 4 and 5), so some figures differ slightly from earlier versions.
Senior only: every analysis here looks at senior championships and senior performances; U20 and other age-group results are not included. The one exception is page 6 (performance funnel), which includes performances from age 18.

Recommendation

In field events, UK Athletics should select every athlete who holds a Road-to-[championship] Qualifying Position - by entry standard or ranking - and reject no one. For field, there should be no extra selection test.

Why:

  • Field takes longer. Field medallists are older and need more senior championships before their first global medal than track medallists (Group B).
  • Field can't be predicted. Field qualifying marks swing about twice as much as track, and no method forecasts them well enough to deselect on (Group C).
  • One bad year means nothing. Most javelin medallists had a season below the funnel (Group B).
  • Field is declining against track. GB & NI is sending fewer field athletes, winning fewer field medals, and Beijing 2027 makes it harder still (Group A).
  • Europe already does this (Group D).

If UK Athletics thinks its judgement picks future field medallists better than qualification does, it should publish the evidence.

Field's share of medals: GB & NI vs Europe

Share of Olympic/World and European medals won in field events, by four-year period. GB & NI is bottom of comparable European groups (detail).

If UK Athletics doesn't want to adopt the recommendation, or publish statistical evidence for keeping its current approach, then at least:

  1. State the 2032 goal and report against it. Athletics Unified (2020) promised a GB & NI athlete in every discipline by 2032, with annual progress reports. None has been found, and UKA's 2025 Strategic Report doesn't mention it.
  2. Publish the selection tools when the selection policy is first published, enable scrutiny of them, and allow the policy to be revised in light of feedback.
  3. Don't deselect a field athlete on a projected qualifying mark. Even the best method is out by over a metre in javelin.
  4. Recognise that in some events it is perfectly normal for future medal winners to be below the funnel before their first medal, so don't deselect on that basis.
  5. Use one test. The policy switches between capability, likelihood, ability and potential.
  6. Have the selection process's predictive value independently tested, and publish it.

A. Field is declining against track in GB & NI, and the Beijing 2027 rules will make it harder still

1. How does GB & NI's medal rate - medals as a % of entrants - compare with the rest of Europe?
All events

GB & NI's medal rate (medals as a % of entrants) is rising and has been at or above Europe's in 4 of the last 7 periods - but track is driving it, while field has fallen from 31% of GB & NI's entrants to 22% and is in decline.

Read the full analysis »

2. How does GB & NI's % of medals that are field compare with the rest of Europe?
Track vs field events

GB & NI's share of medals that are field is falling and is now the lowest of any European country group (2024-2027), as field becomes a shrinking part of the team.

Read the full analysis »

3. Under the new Beijing 2027 rules, how many Category C-or-better meets does the UK host?
All events

The UK does not host enough Category C-or-better meets (5 in 2026, ranked 16 of 46 European countries), which will matter for selection if UK Athletics keeps leaving out athletes who hold a Road to [championship] Qualifying Position.

Read the full analysis »

B. Field takes longer: field medallists are older, need more championships first, and often dip below the funnel on the way

4. Are field medallists older than track medallists?
All events compared

Field medallists are older than track medallists: 27.5 years on average at an Olympic/World medal, compared with 26.1 for track.

Read the full analysis »

5. How many major championships do athletes compete in before their first Olympic/World medal?
All events compared

Field athletes compete in more major championships than track athletes before their first Olympic/World medal: 3.8, compared with 2.6 for track.

Read the full analysis »

6. How many javelin medallists fell below UK Athletics' performance funnel before their first medal?
Men's and women's javelin only

60% of Olympic/World javelin medallists fell below UK Athletics' performance funnel before their first medal, and 11% were below it for half or more of their seasons, so deselecting a javelin thrower for falling below the funnel makes no sense.

Read the full analysis »

C. Field can't be predicted well enough to deselect anyone on

7. Is the mark needed to reach a final harder to predict in field than in track?
All events compared

The mark needed to reach a final is much harder to predict in field than in track, and hardest of all in the throws: it swings 2.9% between championships in the throws, compared with 1.2% in track.

Read the full analysis »

8. Can the javelin qualifying mark be predicted well enough to deselect on?
Men's javelin only

No method predicts the javelin qualifying mark well enough to deselect on: even the best is typically out by 1.3m, and ranking on current form over-predicted in 10 of 10 editions, so a predicted mark is little better than a guess.

Read the full analysis »

D. UK Athletics stands out in leaving qualified athletes out – unchallengeably, and at field's expense.

9. How did UK Athletics select for Birmingham 2026, compared with other European federations?
All events

UK Athletics was the only federation found leaving out athletes who held a Road to Birmingham Qualifying Position - at least five were not selected, including five field athletes - while nine of the ten federations with their own internal standard ignored it and sent their qualified athletes.

Read the full analysis »

10. Can a field athlete left out on the panel's judgement challenge it?
All events

A field athlete left out on the panel's judgement cannot challenge it: the appeals procedure excludes the panel's "judgement and discretion", the call that matters most in the field events, where predictions have been shown to be unreliable.

Read the full analysis »

11. Do athletes have any say in UK Athletics' selection policy?
All events

Athletes have no vote in UK Athletics' selection: the Athletes' Commission is only a non-voting observer, and the athlete engagement strategy the governance code requires isn't published.

Read the full analysis »

12. Did UK Athletics' tighter selection from 2023 hit field harder than track?
Field vs track compared

UK Athletics' tighter selection from 2023 hit field harder than track: new field caps fell to 0.0% at Budapest 2023 and stayed under 10% for three more editions while track's did not, with no field medal gain to show for it.

Read the full analysis »

Counter-arguments considered

A panel can see things no dataset captures - injury, a technical change, form on the day - and budgets are finite. But the statistical claim, that judgement picks future field medallists better than qualification does, is not supported by Groups B and C.

What this is

Everything here is from public World Athletics data or published governing-body documents, sourced on each page.

England Athletics' Field Events Review (May 2025) found field and combined events are 43% of Olympic athletics medals, yet since 2000 the UK has won 6 in the jumps, 6 in the heptathlon and 2 in the throws. Steve Backley (Athletics Weekly, April 2024) calls the decline structural. The Review deliberately left senior selection to UK Athletics. This project covers that gap: selection, appeals and the statistics behind selection judgements.

Pages 6 and 8 use javelin, where this site's data is most complete.

The full series as one document

Printable version - use Print » Save as PDF. Data updates every few days as World Athletics publishes results, so figures can change.

Limitations

  • Panels weigh things this data can't see: injury, form on the day, head-to-head.
  • Four-year periods hold unequal numbers of championships (2024-2027 is two-thirds through): compare shares and rates, not counts.
  • Pages 4-6 and 8 look at successful athletes, so they show who a criterion would wrongly have excluded, not who it rightly excluded.
  • Page 5: about 10 to 19 medallists per event. Non-European area championships are included from 2000 only (European from the 1980s).
  • Pages 6 and 8 are javelin only.
  • Page 3 counts meets; World Athletics hasn't yet published a full 2027 calendar.

Reproducibility

Pages 1, 2, 4-8 and 12 query World Athletics data live. Page 9 uses federations' published selection policies; pages 10 and 11 published UK Athletics and governance documents, paragraph-cited. Page 3's meet counts are live; its event table is a dated snapshot. Corrections welcome.