Katharine Merry’s verdict on the 2025 athletics year

This year has shown athletics to be robust and fast-paced enough to deal with the major slings and arrows that have headed its way.

Athletics hasn’t been without its challenges in 2025 but, when I think back on the past 12 months, I’m left with the strong feeling that it’s been a really good year overall. It very much helped, of course, to have had such a successful major showpiece – in this case the World Championships in Tokyo – and they absolutely nailed it in Japan.

The positivity generated from those nine days of competition shone brighter than the negative headlines that we have had to wrestle with, such as the high-profile doping bans, the dreadful idea that is the Enhanced Games or Grand Slam Track’s failure not only to achieve its aim of changing the sport but even to simply pay the athletes. 

I also feel that 2025 reminded us about the depth and breadth of our sport. While we have firmly established champions in many events, there have been a number of new names coming through, taking their opportunities, winning medals or making headlines with their performances. Athletics doesn’t stand still and, because of that, it’s always going to throw up new names, new narratives and new conversations. 

Innovation and doing things a bit differently has been a recurring theme this year, too. Grand Slam Track was supposed to be a prime example of that and there were some good ideas within the project, but it well and truly came up short.

How damaging has its collapse been? It has been damaging to the individuals involved in it and for the people who have struggled financially – whether that be athletes or other contributors – as a result. The sport as a whole could certainly have done without it and, with any innovation, especially with such a big name attached to it, you want it to fly. 

But things move on quickly and one of the positive aspects to have come out of the whole affair has been that track and field has shown itself to be robust enough to cope with it not working out. Grand Slam Track certainly didn’t bring everything else crashing down with it and I actually think that the women-only Athlos event in New York at the end of the season helped to repair some of the damage. 

Michael Johnson tried to set Grand Slam up in such a way that it was going to be some great saviour, but it wasn’t and it was never going to be. Given that it was pitting itself against the well-established Diamond League, it was only ever going to run alongside or maybe enhance our sport. 

And everything is so fast-paced now that the focus has already started to turn towards next year, and events such as World Athletics’ new Ultimate Championships, so it doesn’t take long for people’s attention to be diverted elsewhere.

Looking even further ahead, there has been a lot of talk recently about the LA Olympics in 2028, following the release of the athletics schedule. One of the main discussion points to come out of it is the fact that, unlike in years past, athletics will start right at the beginning of the timetable and the opening day will feature all four rounds of the women’s 100m (prelims and round one in the morning, following by the semis and final in the evening), while the men’s competition will be split over two days.

I’ve got absolutely no problem with that plan. Some people have said: “It’s not fair that men are not doing the same” but why should the men and women run on the same schedule? 

In my opinion, it’s not detrimental for the women and I like the fact that you then spread out the two big finals that people all want to watch. Just because something’s been done a certain way before doesn’t mean that you can’t mix it up and that’s why athletics has gone to the beginning of the Olympic timetable. The sport needs eyes on it. It has needed eyes on it for a long time and, if you get an opportunity to potentially showcase a 100m final for each sex on different days, why wouldn’t you be doing it?

Unless I’ve missed it, I have yet to see any female athletes claiming it’s a bad idea, either. I saw the well-known Jamaican sprints coach Stephen Francis say it’s anti-women and that it’s a regression, but I don’t think it is. I haven’t got an issue with it at all and the distance means it’s all possible, too. 

None of the major players will be involved in the preliminary round in any case and they’ll be more than capable of breezing an 11.00 or 11.10 in the morning before coming back and smashing the semi and the final. I’m confident that the majority of the competitors will be happy to get the whole thing done and dusted on day one.

Hopefully there will be a healthy British presence in those latter stages and I was heartened to see that Dina Asher-Smith has sorted out her long-term training situation. Having left Edrick Floreal’s group last year, she is back in Texas but will be led by Michael Ford at Baylor University.

This is going to be a fascinating period in her career. She has just turned 30 but her very good friend Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce has pushed the boundaries of what is possible for a sprinter to achieve in their thirties and I don’t see any reason why Dina can’t continue to go onwards and upwards. I genuinely believe we’ll see the best of her again. She still ran decent times this year, even at such an unsettling time, so if she can find contentment in this new set-up then the results will come. 

Her fellow Brit Amy Hunt showed this year what can be done when everything is in sync on and off the track and there’s a wonderful rivalry starting to build between the two of them. That’s one of just many subplots that will be very much worth following as we move forwards. One thing’s for sure – 2026 is not going to be dull.