When India’s athletes marched into Glasgow for Commonwealth Games 2026, they carried more than national expectations. Behind the Indian contingent lay a government investment of Rs 53.09 crore, spent over several months on overseas training camps, exposure competitions, coaching, equipment and sports science support.
By the end of the Games, India had returned with 39 medals- 13 gold, 17 silver and nine bronze, despite competing in a significantly reduced programme that excluded traditional medal-heavy sports such as shooting, wrestling, badminton, hockey and table tennis.
On paper, the arithmetic is straightforward. India spent roughly ₹1.36 crore for every medal won in Glasgow. But that headline figure hides a more nuanced story. Some sports produced remarkable returns, while others required much larger investments for comparatively modest podium finishes.
Boxing delivers the biggest return
No discipline justified its funding better than boxing. The Sports Ministry invested more than ₹10 crore in preparing India’s 14-member boxing squad, including overseas training and international exposure.
The return was immediate. India finished with 10 medals, including a record seven gold medals, making boxing the country’s biggest contributor in Glasgow. That works out to roughly ₹1 crore spent per medal, among the strongest returns across India’s major funded disciplines.
Olympic bronze medallist Lovlina Borgohain added another Commonwealth medal, while Sakshi Chaudhary, Preeti Pawar, Priya Ghanghas, Jaismine Lamboria, Sachin Siwach and Ankush Panghal all climbed to the top of the podium.
Weightlifting quietly offered even better value
Weightlifting rarely commands the same attention as athletics or boxing, but from a financial perspective, it proved one of India’s most efficient investments.
The government spent ₹7.5 crore preparing the 12-member squad, which trained in Birmingham ahead of the Games for acclimatisation. The result was eight medals- one gold, six silver and one bronze.
That translates to less than ₹94 lakh per medal, the lowest cost among the disciplines for which government spending figures are available. Mirabai Chanu‘s historic third consecutive Commonwealth Games gold provided the headline, but the depth of the squad ensured consistent returns across the competition.
| Sport | Govt. spending (₹ crore) | Medals won | Cost per medal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Athletics | 20.0+ | 10 | ~₹2.00 crore |
| Boxing | 10.0+ | 10 | ~₹1.00 crore |
| Weightlifting | 7.5 | 8 | ~₹93.75 lakh |
| Judo | Not disclosed | 4 | — |
| Para athletics | Not disclosed | 6 | — |
| Para powerlifting | Not disclosed | 1 | — |
| Overall | ₹53.09 crore | 39 | ~₹1.36 crore |
Source for govt spending- Ministry of Sports and Youth Affairs
Athletics received the biggest investment
Athletics accounted for the largest share of government spending. More than ₹20 crore was invested in the 32-member contingent, whose preparations included high-altitude training in Colorado Springs in the United States and training blocks in Switzerland, Turkey and South Africa.
The team returned with 10 medals- five silver and five bronze. From a purely Commonwealth Games perspective, that works out to roughly ₹2 crore per medal, making athletics India’s costliest major medal programme in Glasgow.
The numbers, however, require context. Athletics is India’s largest Olympic sport, requiring bigger squads, longer foreign training blocks and investment across multiple disciplines rather than a handful of medal contenders. Much of the spending was designed not just for Glasgow but also as part of India’s long-term Olympic preparation.
CWG success not the only objective of sports being funded
Viewed purely through a financial lens, India’s Glasgow campaign cost approximately ₹1.36 crore per medal. Yet reducing elite sport to a simple cost-per-medal calculation risks missing the broader objective of government investment.
Sports such as athletics are funded not merely to maximise medal counts at the Commonwealth Games but to build Olympic success, where qualification standards, competition depth and global benchmarks are considerably higher. Even so, Glasgow offers useful lessons.
It is also worth noting that some elite athletes, such as Neeraj Chopra, finance a significant part of their own coaching and support systems. However, that level of financial independence typically comes only after years of international success, commercial endorsements and sponsorships- an advantage most emerging athletes do not yet have.
Boxing and weightlifting converted the government investment into medals with remarkable efficiency, while athletics continued to absorb the largest share of funding in pursuit of longer-term international success. For policymakers, the Games offer another data point in an increasingly important conversation: not just how much India spends on elite sport, but how effectively those investments translate into results.