The “best of the best” in athletics are preparing to compete in the inaugural World Athletics Ultimate Championship that gets under way in Budapest this weekend.
The three-day competition will see 26 Olympic champions from Paris, 26 world champions from Tokyo last year, and this season’s top athletes battle it out to be crowned the best in track and field.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Many return to the stomping ground in the Hungarian capital after successes at the 2023 World Championships, while others have racked up global titles after breakout performances throughout the year.
Here’s Al Jazeera’s all-to-know guide to the meet:
Who, what, where and when at the Ultimate Championship?
The Ultimate Championship is an invite-only competition featuring the Olympic gold medallist, World Championship gold medallist, Diamond League winners, and the best performers of 2026 based on the World Rankings qualification system.
It runs from September 11-13 in Budapest and will become a biennial feature in World Athletics’ calendar. The sport’s global governing body chose 2026 to launch the event in between the World Championships, and, in Olympic years, use it to round out a highly competitive season.
Jamaican sprint legend Usain Bolt, an ambassador for the event, said it was “great to see track and field going in a different direction”.
“It’s going to be great to see the best of the best,” the eight-time Olympic gold medallist said at a news conference on Thursday before the event.
“This was one of my greatest things. I’ve always lived to compete against the best and I would thrive in this moment.”
The former sprinter Usain Bolt, now 40, still holds the world record in the men’s 100m and 200m [Bernadett Szabo/Reuters]
What is the Ultimate Championship prize pot?
The $10m prize pot will see winners of each event bag a record $150,000.
That’s more than double the $70,000 given at last year’s World Championships in Tokyo, and three times what was awarded by World Athletics to Olympic champions in Paris. Second place takes home $75,000, third place $40,000, all the way to $2,000 for 16th-place finishers.
Relay teams will split $80,000 among themselves, followed by $40,000 and $24,000 for second and third place, respectively.
The Ultimate Champion also walks away with global “bragging rights”, World Athletics President Sebastian Coe said before the event as he explained its significance to the sport.
What’s new at the Ultimate Championship?
For one, there are no medals. It’s part of World Athletics’ “reimagining of awards” that replaces the traditional accolade with a customised trophy for the Ultimate Champions based on individual tokens.
All events will be direct semifinals or finals rather than starting off as heats. Athletes competing in the men’s and women’s 200m will select their preferred semifinal heat and lane based on their seed order.
A tie for first place in a vertical jump will be decided by a jump-off rather than be shared, while athletes in throwing events will have four attempts down from the typical six, that too in the 8:8:6:4 model.
The mixed 4×100-metre relay will feature in Budapest after its debut at the World Relays earlier this year, with each quartet competing in national kits.
Why is Ultimate Championship getting criticism from a few athletes?
A number of events have been excluded from the Ultimate Championship, including shot put, triple jump, women’s hammer throw, and discus throw, as well as long-distance track events like 3,000-metre steeplechase and 10,000-metre.
World Athletics said its decision was based on viewership and priority for faster-paced events.
Olympic discus champion Matthew Denny and former world champion and two-time triple jump champion Pedro Pichardo were among the athletes who lamented the decision on social media.
Denny, current world number two, explained that the prize money “can change a career and a life” and implored World Athletics to reconsider its stance on public interest driven by its own statistics.
“Innovation should not come at the expense of opportunity.”
World record watch
These athletes are already the creme de la creme in their field and are most likely to set a world record, based on this year’s performance:
Men’s Pole Vault: None other than Sweden’s Armand ‘Mondo’ Duplantis, who has broken the world record 15 times and most recently this March.
Men’s 800m: World lead Emanuel Wanyonyi has repeatedly threatened fellow Kenyan David Rudisha’s 1:40.91 set at the London 2012 Olympics.
Women’s 800m: Audrey Werro is fresh off her 1:53.70 set on home soil at the Zurich Diamond League in August. The Swiss’s time is third all-time and dangerously close to the 1:53.28 set by Jarmila Kratochvilova in 1983.
Men’s 400m hurdles: Brazil’s Alison dos Santos recently smashed the record in Zurich, five years after Norway’s Karsten Warholm clocked 45.94 at the Tokyo Olympics.
Women’s 100m hurdles: Zurich magic extended to the women’s 100m hurdles as USA’s Masai Russell stormed to a 12.09 to cap off 12 straight wins this season.
The U.S. Air Force is targeting an approximately $10 million unit price, excluding sensors and certain other systems, for a drone to succeed the MQ-9A Reaper. The cost of a fully kitted-out Reaper today is generally reported to be between $30 million and $50 million. The Air Force is also now pushing to accelerate the program to acquire the new drones, dubbed the Massed Modular Aircraft (MMA), amid what it admits are “concerning” Reaper losses in the course of recent operations against Iran.
Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Niemi, the service’s Chief Modernization Officer, told reporters that the goal was for the MMAs to be “closer to half” the cost of a Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), at a roundtable at the Pentagon yesterday, according to Breaking Defense. He also said the service was hoping to see the price tag on its future CCAs fall to around $20 million after full-rate production of those drones gets underway.
A row of USAF MQ-9A Reapers. USAF/Staff Sgt. Ariel OShea
Beyond cost, the Air Force has previously said that it wants the MMA drone to perform the same general intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) and strike missions as the MQ-9A. To that end, stated program requirements to date include a speed of at least 200 knots true airspeed, a munition and sensor payload capacity of at least 2,800 pounds, an unrefueled combat radius of at least 2,300 nautical miles with payload, the ability to self-deploy one-way at least 8,000 nautical miles, and the ability to operate from runways no longer than 6,000 feet. The MMAs also need to be highly modular and use open architecture mission systems to make it easier to integrate new capabilities and functionality down the line.
With all that in mind, Niemi’s MMA cost “estimate includes only the cost of the air vehicle, without being fully missionized,” an Air Force spokesperson clarified after yesterday’s roundtable, per Breaking Defense.
The MQ-9A is out of production, but, as mentioned, the full cost of each one in Air Force service today is generally pegged at between $30 million and $50 million, depending on the sensors, weapons, and other mission equipment they carry. Speaking yesterday, Lt. Gen. Niemi explicitly used the $50 million price point to underscore the MMA program’s unit cost target, as well as explain why the Air Force does not view the newer, in-production MQ-9B as a path to meeting its current needs. General Atomics developed the MQ-9B from the Reaper, but the former is a significantly evolved design with substantial differences from its predecessor.
“If you don’t like losing an MQ-9A that cost on the order of $50 million, with the sensors, you’re probably not going to like losing an MQ-9B at a higher price point,” Niemi said at yesterday’s roundtable, according to a separate report from Air & Space Forces Magazine.
An MQ-9B drone. General Atomics
“There’s a, I think, sort of a misconception that because the MQ-9B is in production, we can walk down there with a big fat check and have 100 of them this year,” the general also said, Breaking Defense also reported. “That’s not reality.”
Niemi acknowledged that tradeoffs will have to be made to find an MMA design that is substantially lower cost compared to the MQ-9A.
“You’re going to have to certainly give up something,” he said, per Breaking Defense. “There’s no doubt if we try and pursue the exact same approach that we had with things like the MQ-9, we’re going to get something that costs about the same as an MQ-9.”
However, “what makes the MQ-9 special has nothing to do with the aircraft itself. Like there is no cutting-edge technology for how fast it flies, how high it flies, how far it flies, all that is proven, decades-old technology,” he added, according to that outlet. “So, if you’re focusing on the truck, and you do it in a way where you’re able to make some smart design compromises … we do think you can drive the cost down.”
Niemi said that he expected the MMA, in very general terms, to look much like an MQ-9, including that it would likely also be turboprop powered and have a similarly shaped main wing.
A US Air Force MQ-9A Reaper. USAF
“I think it’s all going to be proven stuff, because that’s how I’m going to drive down the cost so I can get to that goal that I laid out,” Niemi, added.
For its part, General Atomics has had choice words in the past regarding discussions about the costs of the MQ-9A and MQ-9B, as well as their capabilities, particularly in light of recent losses. We will come back to the matter of attrition in a moment.
“Some say we need cheaper, disposable aircraft, so that we can use them and throw them away, or lose them and not feel bad about it. No one is talking about actual capability, ready today,” C. Mark Brinkley, a spokesperson for the company, told TWZ back in June after new discussions about a Reaper successor for the Air Force first began to surface. “No one is talking about all of the hard lessons, already learned, about icing and weather and weapons integration. No one is talking about the multiple survivability upgrades available for the existing platforms and the lack of investment in those.”
“These make-believe weapons that don’t exist have the luxury of being anything you imagine them to be,” Brinkley added at that time. “Unscratched lottery tickets, promising all of the win and none of the lose [sic].”
USAF
“I think it’s really unfortunate that MMA has been branded as a ‘Reaper replacement’ because it misrepresents what America needs now and what we need later,” he told us last month. “We need an immediate backfill solution to a critical shortage of unmanned MALE [medium altitude, long endurance] ISR/Strike. We need to get going on that now. MMA isn’t a backfill solution, or even a bridge to a backfill solution. This isn’t that.”
Brinkley was speaking here in the context of a discussion about Wildfire, a new drone General Atomics is now developing in response to the MMA requirements.
Wildfire “addresses all of the concerns posed by the MMA solicitation. We can deliver years earlier and maintain the same high quality. You can have everything that makes Reaper special, plus more, at a price that doesn’t break the bank,” Brinkley also told Breaking Defense for its story yesterday.
All of this brings us back around to the matter of MQ-9A losses and the Air Force’s efforts now to accelerate the schedule for the MMA program.
Air Force officials have offered glowing assessments of the MQ-9A’s performance in operations against Iran, despite these losses, but have also said that the level of attrition is worrisome. That reality, in turn, had major impacts on discussions that led to the current MMA program.
“Although we have plenty of MQ-9As today, we are going through them at a rate that is concerning to us,” Niemi said yesterday, according to Air & Space Forces Magazine. “There’s not a lot of good options to immediately replace those aircraft.”
When the MMA program was first announced in July, the stated goal was to have an initial operational fleet of 20 of the drones in service by 2031. The Air Force is now working to push that timeline to the left, but still sees fielding of the new drones as being around three years away, at least. The service eventually hopes to acquire at least 180 MMAs.
“I can’t buy an MMA today. The reality is, based on the budget and other constraints, that I’m not going to buy a whole lot of MQ-9Bs today either,” Niemi conceded, per Breaking Defense.
It is important to remember here that the Air Force has already tried multiple times to develop a replacement for the MQ-9 without success. In that time, the idea of what a successor to the Reaper would look like has changed dramatically. As we’ve written previously:
“The Pentagon has long worked on the basis that a future conflict with a peer rival, and especially with China in the Pacific, would see it facing highly robust anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) scenarios. With that in mind, previous Reaper replacement studies had suggested that low observability would need to be incorporated into the design.”
“The latest thinking seems to reject that, or at least reorient the program toward a lower-cost platform of the kind that the Air Force would be able to field in mass, as well as to absorb the anticipated attrition in a high-end conflict. This does not preclude this airframe from featuring low-observable elements. In fact, it most likely will. But those would be more aggressively balanced against cost.”
MMA is also looking at a wider slate of potential vendors. General Atomics, which has long had a monopoly on the U.S. MALE combat drone market, is not the only one angling now for an MMA contract.
A rendering of a stealthy concept Northrop Grumman previously put forward as a possible MQ-9 replacement, underscoring how the thinking in this regard has changed over the years. Northrop Grumman
“…the U.S. drone landscape has changed considerably in terms of manufacturers. A few years ago, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and General Atomics would have been seen as the front-runners for the MQ-9 replacement. Now, there are more contenders, often with a founding focus on rapidly scaling up production at low cost. Still, these firms have much to prove, especially considering the risk in replacing an aircraft as important as the MQ-9. At the same time, in the more advanced drone space, the legacy defense ‘prime’ contractors are also making major progress in leveraging new technologies to reduce production costs and migrating away from exquisite, very expensive drones as their default offerings.”
The possibility was reportedly raised yesterday that the MMA program could ultimately lead to the fielding of multiple types of drones through successive incremental development cycles. This is exactly how the Air Force is running its CCA program now.
With the Air Force now pushing for a more aggressive schedule for the MMA effort, more details about the designs it is considering may begin to emerge relatively soon. The service certainly has a pressing need already for these drones after so many MQ-9A losses.
