The major battle over the Olympic program is no longer just about which sports deserve to be there, but which ones best fit the product the International Olympic Committee -IOC- wants to project over the next decade. With the initial Brisbane 2032 program postponed until an IOC decision in 2026, the board has shifted toward a more strategic logic: this is no longer only about sporting tradition, but also about market value, visibility, governance, and the ability to adapt to new audiences.

That logic was already on display in Los Angeles 2028. In 2023, the IOC approved the addition of cricket in the T20 format, flag football, lacrosse sixes, squash, and baseball/softball as extra sports proposed by the host city, and in 2025 it confirmed a program of 351 medal events with a base quota of 10,500 athletes, plus 698 extra places for those five sports. In that model, the Olympic program increasingly looks like portfolio optimization: protect the core, open windows in high-potential markets, and adjust the size of the product without losing commercial appeal.

The sports arriving with the strongest momentum already show where the IOC is headed

The list of recent winners offers a fairly clear snapshot. Cricket comes in because of the weight of India, its broadcast value, and its ability to expand the global footprint of the Olympic movement in one of the biggest markets in sport. Flag football follows another recognizable logic: the influence of the National Football League -NFL- and the search for a sport with a strong American accent on the road to LA28. Lacrosse sixes brings a fast, TV-friendly format backed by North America, while squash arrives through a combination of institutional persistence, international presence, and a long-delayed inclusion narrative.

Baseball/softball also fits into that equation of host city, market, and local tradition. In Los Angeles, it makes sense because of cultural context, commercial potential, and its fit within the American sports ecosystem, although its value for the future also depends on what happens beyond 2028. The LA28 experience also offers another important reading: the host city still has the power to push sports that connect with its own market and projection priorities. In that framework, the Olympic program is not decided only by tradition, but also by the host’s ability to introduce pieces with local and commercial value within the structure the IOC authorizes.

Historic sports that are still inside, but with less margin

Remaining in the program no longer means being fully protected. In some cases, the IOC has avoided an immediate break, but it continues to pressure sports that still do not offer a fully convincing response in governance, cost, format, or credibility.

Boxing is no longer out of the LA28 program: the IOC granted provisional recognition to World Boxing in February 2025, and in March the Session approved its inclusion in the Games. But that reinstatement has not completely removed the doubts surrounding the sport’s institutional direction. The new federation was created precisely to provide a way out of the vacuum left by the break with the IBA, yet its recent evolution has continued to raise questions because of confusion over its political direction, the withdrawal of Boris van der Vorst, the unopposed arrival of Gennadiy Golovkin to the presidency, doubts over how genuinely athletes’ voices are being incorporated, and controversy surrounding its new mandatory sex-verification rules. In other words, boxing is back, but it still cannot be said to have found the solid, transparent, and cohesive structure the IOC wanted as a guarantee for the future.

Pressure also remains on weightlifting and modern pentathlon, although for different reasons. The International Weightlifting Federation -IWF- will keep a quota of 120 athletes and 10 events at LA28, a very small figure for a historic Olympic sport still conditioned by the long shadow of doping. On top of that, the federation continues to present institutional and financial stability as a task still under construction, meaning the reduction does not just punish the past, but also leaves open the question of how much real room the sport still has if it fails to convince fully on governance, credibility, and sustainability. In modern pentathlon, the quota falls from 72 to 64 athletes for Los Angeles, a blow that was met with “considerable disappointment” by the UIPM even after the replacement of horse riding with obstacle racing. That reduction suggests that the format change alone has not been enough to remove doubts over identity, popularity, and organizational cost within the new Olympic market.

Money, media, and governance: the real filter in the new Olympic program

Behind that distribution lies an economic logic far more visible than in previous decades. The IOC says it redistributes 90% of its revenues to sport and to the Olympic movement, and has placed already secured income for the 2025-2028 cycle at 7.5 billion dollars. That makes the program much more than a competitive list: it is the showcase through which global visibility, access to funding, and political weight are distributed across the Olympic ecosystem.

That is why governance has become such a useful filter for the organization. Transparency, federative structure, anti-doping compliance, operational stability, and adaptation to new demands now carry weight alongside digital appeal, gender balance, and market power. The initial Brisbane 2032 program will be decided in 2026, and it will arrive with that double reading already in place: some sports will fight to get in because they represent new audiences and new territories; others will fight to stay because much of their financing, media presence, and ability to remain globally relevant still depends on that place inside the Olympic ecosystem.