The CrossFit Games DID NOT Find The Fittest On Earth

That’s right — I’m back, baby. Lock in, because we’re about to get nerdy with P-Score. And this is THE WILDEST result I’ve ever seen. Not only did the Games not crown the fittest athlete on Earth, but the programming itself might’ve failed the test.

Quick Review: What Is P-Score?

P-Score is a performance-based scoring system that measures how well an athlete actually performed in an event — not just where they placed. Every second, rep, and pound counts.

How it works:

For each event, we look at three numbers:

• Best score (fastest time or heaviest weight)
• Median score (middle result from the top half of the field)
• Athlete’s score (X)

We then apply one of two formulas:

Timed events (lower is better):
P-Score = 100 – (X – Best) × (50 / (Median – Best))

Reps/load events (higher is better):
P-Score = 100 – (Best – X) × (50 / (Best – Median))

The best performance earns 100 points. The median result earns 50 points. And if you’re significantly below the median? Your score drops into negatives, rounded to whole numbers: -1, -2, -3, etc.

Why only the top of the field matters:

We only consider the top half of the field to calculate the median. Why? Because at the CrossFit Games, that group represents the best in the world. The bottom half often includes injured athletes or those way out of their depth — and that skews everything.

Why P-Score is better:

• Performance matters more than placement. Gaps in time or reps actually count.
• Big wins get big rewards. Blow out the field? You earn it.
• No more leaderboard distortion from fluke performances.
• Fair across domains. One-minute lifts or 30-minute grinders — the scale holds up.

The Games, Rewritten

Now for the big reveal.

Men’s Leaderboard: P-Score vs. Official

That’s right — Hopper didn’t win. (And I take no joy in saying this.)

This kind of shake-up almost never happens. In nearly every case I’ve rescored over the years, the Games leaderboard has largely held up. But this time? P-Score flipped the script.

So what happened?

One Event Changed Everything

Let’s talk about the Back Squat.

In that event, Colten Mertens squatted 570 lbs. The next closest? Nick Mathew at 550 lbs. After that, the numbers fall quickly — 515, then steady drops of 5-10 lbs from there.

So… Should We Have Programmed It?

That’s the real question.

You have two options here:

1. Remove the event. A fair criticism. But let’s be honest — this was one of the most fun events to watch. These are the moments fans live for.
2. Balance it out with more niche events across other modalities. This is the right answer. More on that below.

Throw Out the Back Squat (Hypothetically)

Let’s say we remove Colten and Nick from the back squat entirely. What happens?

Well, without Colten’s 570 lbs (and Nick), the “zero point” line in P-Score rises from 395 lbs to 435 lbs. Why? Because Colten stretches the scoring window so wide that he protects the athletes below him by increasing the expected range.

That’s the double-edged sword of this system — the better you are, the more room you give others to survive.

Even with the event removed? It’s still not enough. Ricky Garard drops to fourth. Jay Crouch moves up to first. Hopper raises to second.

But here’s my stance: You don’t throw it out. You let Colten get rewarded.

The Real Fix? More Niche Events

If we’re going to test extreme strength, we have to also test extreme endurance, skill, and coordination. You can’t just have one niche event — it throws the whole balance off.

“Run-Row-Run” was an attempt at this. It was long, it was brutal, and it tested a completely different capacity. But it wasn’t enough. Why?

Because back squatting 570 doesn’t require elite aerobic capacity — but to do well in Run-Row-Run, you still have to be generally fit, just like all the other events. EXCEPT THE BACK SQUAT.

There was no standalone gymnastics test. No pure skill event. That’s the imbalance. If you’re going to crown the fittest, you need to test weird stuff — in every direction.

Why Niche Events Matter

Here’s my thesis:
The CrossFit Games should test niche capacities.

The Open and Semifinals already test broad fitness. The Games should open the throttle and see how athletes handle the extremes.

These events are what fans love. They’re relatable. Millions of gym rats know their back squat. They could watch Colten and think, “How close am I?” That’s the magic. That’s how you get more CrossFitters.

But what about triple snatches into yoke carries and legless rope climbs? Only CrossFitters know what the hell that means. It’s not inspiring — it’s confusing. The Games is still our greatest marketing scheme.

The Women

For the women, there were barely any changes. The top 10 stayed nearly the same under P-Score. That’s a huge validation of the scoring system. It doesn’t exist just to stir chaos. It simply exposes where the programming and scoring don’t align.

Final Thoughts

The athletes competed under the rules they were given. This isn’t a knock on Hopper — he won under the current system, and I’m happy for him.

But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t ask questions. P-Score shines a light on how scoring and programming interact. A flat, placement-based scoring system lets programming off the hook. It allows lazy structure to hide behind consistent finishes.

Truth is? This year’s Games were great — but by accident. The races were close. The athletes were compelling. The storylines were elite. But that’s luck. You don’t get that lucky every year.

Let’s not leave next year to chance.

For a full look at the Rescored Games results, click here.