Over 10,500 athletes will be in attendance at the 2024 Paris Olympics that begin on July 26th and run through August 11th. See below for the number of quota spots allowed per sport as track and field and swimming lead the way.
Track and field/athletics has the largest amount of quota spots with 1810 total. Swimming has the 2nd largest with 852, although this number is down from the previous quota of 878 that were allowed in Tokyo. World Aquatics has already sent out a message saying that athletes with the ‘B’ cuts may not qualify due to the quota.
This is because ‘B’ cuts are 4th priority, coming behind the ‘A’ cut swimmers, relay swimmers, and universality athletes. Universality allows for countries that do not have swimmers with ‘A’ or ‘B’ cuts to send 1 male and 1 female swimmer to the Olympic Games. Universality swimmers have a higher priority than athletes who have ‘B’ cuts and are already represented by their country.
Track and field notably has a total of 48 events while swimming has 35 events. Both have men’s events, women’s events, and mixed events.
Track and field and swimming lead the way and are followed by soccer/football (504 athletes from 28 teams) and rowing (502 athletes).
| Artistic Swimming | 96 |
| Diving | 128 |
| Open Water | 44 |
| Swimming | 852 |
| Water Polo | 264 |
| Archery | 128 |
| Athletics (Track and Field) | 1810 |
| Badminton | 166 |
| Basketball | 288 |
| Boxing | 248 |
| Breaking | 158 |
| Canoeing | 126 |
| Cycling | 180 |
| Equestrian | 200 |
| Fencing | 212 |
| Field Hockey | 384 (24 teams) |
| Soccer | 504 (28 teams) |
| Golf | 118 |
| Gymnastics | 318 |
| Handball | 336 (24 teams) |
| Judo | 372 |
| Modern Pentathlon | 72 |
| Rowing | 502 |
| Rugby | 288 |
| Sailing | 330 |
| Shooting | 340 |
| Skateboarding | 44 |
| Sport Climbing | 68 |
| Surfing | 48 |
| Table tennis | 172 |
| Taekwondo | 128 |
| Tennis | 172 |
| Triathlon | 110 |
| Volleyball | 24 teams (288) |
| Weightlifting | 120 |
| Wrestling | 288 |
I’m pro universality as a concept but wouldn’t mind if there was a minimum standard (ie. 700 Aqua points), which probably would eliminate the weakest heat or 2 of 50 & 100 free and free up 30-40 more spots and allow three per country if the third is ranked top 8 globally. Universality can then be more open at Worlds to try and develop those really weak nations.
I think I’m with you. I would love to see some kind of a balanced middle ground.
Where it becomes dicey, though, is in many countries where men’s sport is highly prioritized relative to women’s sports. The current Universality system encourages those countries to at least send women, even if they don’t prioritize resources in that way. A different system might limit that one step on the rung of the ladder.
Sports have gotten so complicated…
Do we really want to see 3 per country from the powerhouses? Unlikely to medal anyway. I am all for a minimum standard points score for Universality or reduce relays to top 12 – I think we want to open to OCT qualifiers but I do not want those spots to go to a third from a country. It will just mean we see less countries represented in semis and finals without really changing the medals.
I think we should add third swimmer per event but keep limit at 26. That would be fine with IOC. But probably never going to be approved by WA. Get rid of the 6th place 1Fr & 2Fr swimmers.
Agree with what you say, but the 6th place for 100 & 200 Free is almost only a US and Australian thing, nothing to do with WA or IOC.
Another possible limitation on the Universitality (which was kind of in place but was then removed this spring). A NOC has to have sent swimmers to at least 1 out of the last 2 World Champs (LCM or SCM) to earn a spot.
I like the idea of the minimum points and after looking at the table 700 seems reasonable, at first I thought that maybe that would be to quick, but I changed my mind.
I don’t see a problem with 3/event from 1 country (still same roster size… Read more »
Yes 100% return to a 3rd per country, i want to see the actual best of the best, not solely regional representation.
But do it sensibly, any 3rd swimmer must be a true medal threat so have a 3rd stiff top 8 standard. Then only the following would get thru and be very deserved:
* The 3rd Aussie 52 Freestyler
* The 3rd US backstrokers
* The 3rd Canadian 200 Im
* The 3rd Japanese 200 Breaststroker
* The 3rd US 55 100 Flyer
Etc
Right now some semis could be very uncompetitive and boring to get into, ie women’s 100 free, where currently Penny Oleksiak is 13th in world but outside the… Read more »
I was astounded how few athletes were in each event at US track and field trials… sometimes all from heats made semis.
Yeah the limit is typically 24 for field events and 36 for track events up to 1500 meters but historically the sprint events have shorter fields than that. There becomes a clear separation at the top and with such a huge gap between trials standard and Olympic standard that the borderline athletes either don’t show up or withdraw late, especially if they have greater opportunity in a different event.
For example, women’s 100 hurdles was impacted this year. Nea Ali jogged the heat because withdrawals meant only 16 athletes were competing. Everyone advanced. The trials A cut was 12.9 and minimum was 13.25. Many collegians are in that range. But they won’t bother trekking to Eugene because everybody know it’s… Read more »
Why not just put up qualifying times? Too simple and fair?
Not the point, so. It’d be neither?
Rowing 502!?!?! How many countries enter the rowing events? And how many countries actually win medals?
Some rowing events have 9 people (8 rowers + cox). If you have 16 men’s and women’s boats entered, that would already be 288 people from just that event alone
LOL at “Breaking” beating Golf, Diving, and Weightlifting.
Bet those Trials get intense with athletes fighting for that coveted Top 2 spot AND under the Olympic “A” standard.
Fortunately breaking is out for Los Angeles 2028. However, I have a feeling there could be pressure on that decision based on Paris. Let’s face it, the younger audience laps up anything that looks like a reality show or talent contest. They can’t relate to doing anything outdoors for hours but a few twists and spins alongside a panel of judges is something they see every week and discuss with friends.
Breaking figures to be a big hit with that crowd. They’ll be miffed it’s excluded from Los Angeles. They’ll expect more events they can relate to. The IOC seems to understand it has to move in that direction.
World Aquatics has a total of 1,384 spots which is still less than the 1,810 that Athletics has (which includes sports like walking).
World Athletics uses Rankings for each event to see who is eligible, if you are not high enough on the ranking you do not get to go. Depending on the event I think it is somewhere between 16 & 40 for each event and they also use Universitality spots.
The ranking system is not based on your 1 single best results but on your best results plus how you have performed in several competitions at different levels.
Do we want swimming to switch to a ranking system that is basically 16-24 athletes higher than… Read more »
Does track and field have roster limitations like swimming does? I watched all of the swimming and track and field sessions and not once did I hear the track and field announcers say anything about roster limits. In swimming, it was a big deal. If track doesn’t, why not?
Also, I know the IOC or FINA made it so that only two per nation got to go because they didn’t want podium sweeps. Why was the same not applied to track and field?
I believe there is. I remember hearing yesterday one of the women who was in the relay pool for the US didn’t qualify because of the roster limit I may be wrong though
Track and Field probably had more different countries participating and winning medals in the 1970’s when the decision was made regarding swimming.
It might have been around the same time that the Semifinals were removed.
The 1980 Moscow Olympics were the last Games that swimming was allowed three entrants per event. I agree that track/field having three per event seems unfair. I don’t think the roster limits were in place back then but not sure. An interesting point is that, after the 1972 Munich Games, the 200 IM was removed from the program and wasn’t part of the 1976 and 1980 programs, but was restored for the 1984 Games. Maybe restoring the 200 IM to the program was a compromise to limit the entrants to two per event?
The total number of athletes is set by IOC. the number is entries per event per nation is an Aquatics decision and could be changed back to 3. Doesn’t need to change the roster size at all. Each country can choose how they pick entrants
I would be a fan of allowing countries to send a third athlete if they have a top 8 time in the world. You shouldn’t be denied a chance at an Olympic medal just because you’re from a country with depth (eg Regan’s trials time was MUCH faster than the fourth best swimmer)
Are you talking 100 Fly?
Realistically that rule would only help the U.S. team and the Australian women sprinters, which seems unfair to me.
I can agree, but I have heard former Olympic champions from countries other than USA & Australia saying that they are for it as that makes the competition even tougher/better.