Women’s Dividend
India left the Aichi-Nagoya Asian Games with a solid tally of 85 medals and fourth place in the continental table. That was 22 fewer medals than at Hangzhou in 2023, and the gold tally fell from 28 to 21. But judging our performance merely by the size of the haul misses the more interesting story. The country’s most striking gains came from its women, who won 11 of India’s 21 gold medals, more than half the country’s golds.
Their contribution was not confined to the predictable territories of cricket and hockey. They won in archery, shooting, boxing, athletics, wrestling, sailing, squash and combat sports.
That is a significant cultural shift as women’s sport in India has often been treated as a collection of exceptional individuals like a Mary Kom here, a P.V. Sindhu there, with each succeeding despite a system rather than because of it.
This Asian Games points to a deeper transformation given the variety of the breakthroughs. Kumkum Mohod became the first Indian woman to win an individual Asian Games gold in recurve archery, while India’s women ended South Korea’s 28-year domination of the team event. Neeru Dhanda’s trap gold ended a 48-year wait. Lovlina Borgohain returned to the top in boxing, while the women’s 4x400m relay supplied India’s only athletics gold.
A country cannot build a durable sporting system by relying on a handful of male stars or on cricket’s enormous commercial machine. It needs more athletes competing in more disciplines, with women increasingly forming the second half of that ecosystem.
There is another revealing feature. Indian women were prominent in events requiring individual skill, precision and endurance where success depends heavily on sustained coaching, equipment and competition rather than sheer physicality. That makes their progress a useful test of whether India is developing sporting institutions rather than simply producing prodigies.
At the same time, the Asian Games also exposes unfinished business. India collected 27 silver medals, some of whom were evidence of genuine progress while others were reminders that reaching the final step remains difficult. There is no denying that competition itself is getting stronger, making personal bests no guarantee of gold.
Nor should women’s success become an excuse to overlook the wider weaknesses. India’s athletics return was modest despite a large contingent, while several established disciplines underperformed. The fall from 107 medals at Hangzhou to 85 is therefore not a triumph disguised as disappointment. In that sense, it is a warning that depth remains uneven.
But the women offer a strong reason for optimism. Their performance suggests that Indian sport is slowly moving from the solo heroine to a repeatable system that produces several successful athletes. The real achievement of Aichi-Nagoya is that India is finally beginning to produce enough women capable of winning medals.



Comments