Aichi-Nagoya 2026: The Lap That Changed India’s Asian Games

Image: Pixel Sports\Debjoy Biswas

Vithya Ramraj’s stunning anchor leg in the women’s 4x400m relay gave India its most dramatic athletics moment in Nagoya. But beyond that one golden lap, the 2026 Asian Games told a wider story of 85 medals, new champions, missed opportunities and an Indian sporting system still trying to turn depth into dominance.

There are races you watch, and then there are races where, for 50 seconds, you almost forget to breathe. India’s women’s 4x400m relay final at the Aichi-Nagoya Asian Games was one of those. It had already been a frustrating athletics campaign for India. Medals had come, quite a few of them in fact, but the gold was still missing. On the final evening, in the rain at Nagoya, Kiran Pahal, M.R. Poovamma, Prachi and Vithya Ramraj had one last opportunity to change that.

Kiran started the race for India but could not get the position they would have wanted. India were behind after the opening lap. Then came Poovamma, the 36-year-old veteran who has been running these races for India for what seems like forever. She began eating into the gap and brought India back into contention. Prachi continued the fight on the third leg and, by the time she approached the final exchange, the race had tightened considerably. But China were still in front.

That was the picture when Vithya Ramraj took the baton. Four hundred metres remained. China’s Zuo Xiyu was ahead of her. India were second. And somewhere behind them was Bahrain, with perhaps the most dangerous anchor runner possible — former world champion Salwa Eid Naser. Vithya did not attack immediately. That was perhaps the most impressive part of the lap. With gold in front of her, it would have been easy to become impatient and spend everything in the first hundred metres trying to catch China. Instead, she settled into her rhythm. She stayed close enough, watched the Chinese runner and waited.

One hundred metres passed, then another. Around halfway through that final lap, the race started to change. Vithya began to move. It was not one wild sprint, but a steady surge. The gap to China started disappearing. Coming around the bend, she was getting closer with every stride. Zuo was still fighting, but Vithya now had the momentum. Then came the moment. She went past the Chinese runner. India were suddenly leading the Asian Games final.

But the race was nowhere near finished, because behind them Salwa Eid Naser was coming. Naser had received the baton with Bahrain well down the field and then started picking runners off. One after another. The gap disappeared frighteningly quickly. By the time Vithya had moved past China, Bahrain had become the bigger danger. What had looked like a battle between India and China was now becoming India against one of the finest 400-metre runners in the world.

Vithya had done the hard part. She had caught China. Now she had to survive. Into the home straight, you could see Naser closing. Every metre mattered. Vithya’s stride was beginning to show the effort of the attack she had made on the bend, but she kept going. There was no looking around, no hesitation. Just the finish line. Naser kept coming. The gap became smaller. Fifty metres. Thirty. Twenty. For anyone following Indian athletics, it was uncomfortable to watch. One thought kept coming to mind — surely Naser was going to catch her.

She didn’t. Vithya held her form for those last few metres, leaned through the line and only then could India celebrate. 3 minutes 29.69 seconds. Gold. Bahrain finished in 3:30.21, just 0.52 seconds behind, while China, who had led when the baton reached Vithya, were pushed back to bronze in 3:31.02. India had finally found their first athletics gold of the Games.

What made that final lap special was not simply that Vithya ran fast. It was the way she ran it. She had a target in front of her and one of the world’s best quarter-milers hunting her from behind. She had to judge when to attack China, but also leave enough in her legs to reach the finish. She got that balance almost perfectly. There was another layer to the story as well. Only a day earlier, Vithya had run 54.75 seconds in the 400m hurdles, breaking the long-standing Indian national record associated with P.T. Usha. She had already won bronze in that event and had also been part of India’s mixed 4x400m relay medal-winning team. Now she was being asked to finish India’s last big athletics race of the Games.

Sometimes a sporting event gives you a moment that becomes bigger than the medal itself. For India’s athletics campaign in Nagoya, this was that moment. The veteran Poovamma had brought India back. Prachi had kept them alive. Vithya received the baton behind China, waited for her moment, attacked around the bend, took the lead and then somehow found enough to keep Naser behind her. Four women. Four laps. One gold. And after an athletics campaign full of silver and bronze, India finally had its national anthem at the track.

That relay also became a perfect way to understand India’s Asian Games campaign as a whole. There was plenty to celebrate, but very little came easily. India finished Aichi-Nagoya with 85 medals — 21 gold, 27 silver and 37 bronze — to take fourth place on the medal table. It was comfortably below the record 106-medal haul at Hangzhou, yet still one of India’s strongest Asian Games campaigns. More importantly, medals came across 20 sports, showing that India’s sporting base continues to spread beyond a handful of traditional disciplines.

Athletics once again supplied the largest volume of medals, with 24, but the women’s 4x400m relay produced India’s only gold in the sport. That statistic probably explains the campaign better than anything else. India had depth. Indian athletes regularly reached finals and podiums. But there were too many seconds and thirds and not enough winners. That does not make the athletics campaign poor. Far from it. Gulveer Singh returned with three individual medals and established himself among Asia’s leading distance runners. Vithya had her breakthrough Games. Murali Sreeshankar took another long-jump silver despite an ankle problem. There were medals across the throws, jumps, relays and distance events. What Nagoya showed, however, was the difference between having Asian-level depth and having enough athletes capable of dominating Asia.

And that difference appeared in several other sports as well. Shooting produced 15 medals — three gold, eight silver and four bronze. Those are very healthy numbers until one remembers what Indian shooting is capable of now. Neeru Dhanda was outstanding, winning the women’s trap individual title before joining Kynan Chenai for mixed trap gold. Suruchi Singh and Kamaljeet also delivered the 10m air pistol mixed team title. Yet considering India’s depth in rifle, pistol and shotgun, there were several events where finals and medals could perhaps have become gold.

Archery was almost the opposite story. India did not simply reach podiums; they converted opportunities. Nine medals came from archery, including five gold. Recurve, for years the slightly less predictable side of Indian archery compared with compound, produced some of the biggest results of the Games. The women’s team victory over South Korea was particularly significant, while Kumkum Mohod followed it with individual success. If one sport showed what efficient medal conversion looks like, it was archery.

Boxing also had a very good Games. Six medals and three gold told a completely different story from Hangzhou, where India had failed to produce a champion. Lovlina Borgohain, Parveen Hooda and Ankush reached the top of the podium. Wrestling also improved its conversion, with Aman Sehrawat and Sujeet winning gold as India finished with six medals from the sport. For disciplines where India already has a strong international presence, those golds mattered because they showed the ability to turn expectation into results.

Then came India’s team sports. For Indian supporters, hockey, cricket and kabaddi are always judged differently. A silver medal can still feel like a defeat because India often enter these competitions expected to win. Nagoya delivered almost everything India could have asked for. Both cricket teams won gold. Both kabaddi teams won gold. And, most importantly for Indian hockey, both the men’s and women’s teams became Asian champions.

The women’s hockey gold was particularly special. India had not won the Asian Games women’s hockey title since 1982. Forty-four years later, that wait ended in Nagoya, and with it came qualification for the Los Angeles 2028 Olympics. The men’s team followed by retaining their title and securing their own LA 2028 ticket. For the first time at one Asian Games, India stood on top of the podium in both men’s and women’s hockey. For a country with such a deep relationship with the sport, that was one of the defining achievements of the entire campaign.

There were other stories that may not dominate headlines but deserve to be remembered. Pranavi Urs became the first Indian woman to win an individual Asian Games golf gold. Jay Meena gave India its first Asian Games medal in soft tennis. Mirabai Chanu added another major championship medal with silver in weightlifting. Roshibina Devi again reached the wushu podium. New sports and new names continued to appear in India’s medal column. These performances matter because they show that the medal map is slowly becoming wider.

But a proper review cannot only talk about the good parts. Rowing was a major disappointment after its five-medal performance at Hangzhou. Badminton’s return dropped sharply. Tennis failed to produce a medal, ending a long Asian Games run. Squash still contributed medals, but there was no gold. These are sports where India should expect more, particularly if the ambition is eventually to challenge the three countries above India rather than remain comfortably fourth.

And that is where the final medal table needs some context. India’s 85 medals were 21 fewer than Hangzhou’s 106. Gold medals dropped from 28 to 21. Those numbers cannot simply be brushed aside. If Hangzhou represented a breakthrough, Nagoya showed how difficult it is to maintain that level from one Asian Games to another. At the same time, calling Nagoya a failure would be equally lazy.

India still finished fourth in Asia. Twenty-one champions stood on top of podiums. Medals arrived across 20 sports. Archery moved forward significantly. Boxing recovered. Wrestling produced champions. Women’s hockey ended a 44-year wait. Golf found a historic winner. There were new medal-winning disciplines and several young athletes who should be around when the road to Los Angeles 2028 becomes serious.

So perhaps Nagoya should be seen as a campaign of transition rather than regression. Some of India’s old strengths did not deliver at the same level. Other sports filled part of that gap. Some established athletes struggled, while new names emerged. The overall total came down, but the medal base remained broad. India had enough depth to stay fourth in Asia, but not enough gold-medal conversion to close the gap on China, Japan and South Korea.

And somewhere inside all those statistics is that final lap by Vithya Ramraj. She received the baton behind China. For almost half the lap, she waited. Then she went. She caught China, moved past them and suddenly found Salwa Eid Naser coming after her. There were no tactics left by then. No calculations. Just hold the lead for a few more seconds.

Vithya did.