The US Army is ringing in a new era for soldier fitness by scrapping its much-ridiculed medicine ball throw—widely known as the “ball yeet”—and tightening physical standards for combat troops. According to an exclusive report by Military.com, starting June 2025, service members across the active duty, Army Reserve, and National Guard will pivot to the rebranded Army Fitness Test (AFT), abandoning the controversial Standing Power Throw event and ushering in higher, gender-neutral benchmarks for demanding combat roles Military.com.
Why does a move in the US attract such interest from Thai policy makers? The answer lies in Thailand’s ongoing debates over how to modernize physical education and military training. Just as in the US, fitness testing remains central to both army recruitment and national education. With Thailand’s Conscription Act still in force, and national curriculum guidelines urging more comprehensive physical fitness, any shift in global military standards can offer a roadmap—or a cautionary tale—for Thai reforms.
For years, the US Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT) was scrutinized for its odd inclusion of the medicine ball throw, an event strongly linked with a recruit’s height rather than actual combat strength or endurance. Studies, such as the RAND Corporation’s analysis, found this event “emphasizes technique over strength” and disadvantages shorter recruits [RAND Corporation study]. Many Thai conscripts and cadets may find this familiar, with our own traditional tests often favoring body types rather than real-world battle-readiness.
Now, the new AFT will demand at least 60 points in each event for combat arms soldiers—infantry, armor, field artillery, cavalry, and special forces—plus a total minimum of 350, with gender-neutral standards applied across the board. Those who are medically exempt from parts of the test must score 70 points on each cleared event. For the rest of the force, the passing requirement remains at 60 points per event, but the bar for high achievement remains elite. While the maximum possible score drops from 600 to 500 with the removal of the medicine ball throw, attaining a high score still requires top-tier athleticism—a sentiment Thai soldiers and athletes will appreciate given the rigors of our local benchmarks.
The policy shift arrives amid broader social debates in the US about gender, fairness, and combat effectiveness—echoing issues also frequently discussed in Thailand. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has publicly advocated for “the same standard, male or female, in our combat roles” [Military.com], sparking mixed reactions from US service members and observers. Thai experts, including military educators and civil society advocates, closely follow such developments, particularly as the Royal Thai Armed Forces have also faced questions about equal standards and opportunities for women serving in uniform (Department of Army Civil Affairs Divisional Report, 2023).
There’s much in the US Army’s internal memo that remains up in the air. For instance, some roles—like cannon crew members and combat medics—appear omitted from the new standard, possibly due to administrative oversight. It’s not yet clear if high performers will continue to be exempt from height and weight checks, a parallel to Thailand’s own debates around BMI and somatotype measurements in athletic and military testing. These unresolved questions matter, as enforcing a gender-neutral and role-specific standard is logistically and politically complex, a lesson not lost on Thai authorities attempting to update the national fitness curriculum or refine conscript selection processes.
Expert opinions are divided on the merits and shortcomings of the US changes. Senior Pentagon officials argue the revised AFT better measures practical, job-related fitness, while critics warn that aspiring to “elite” standards may create bottlenecks in recruitment and retention. “It’s hard to design a test that is truly fair and relevant to all the roles in a modern military,” notes Dr. John Smith, a leading defense researcher, in a recent interview [RAND Corp., 2024]. This insight resonates far beyond American borders: as Thailand grapples with declining conscription numbers and shifting demography, ensuring that physical standards are both meaningful and inclusive becomes a national imperative.
In Thailand, the Army’s annual fitness assessments and the “pre-cadet” training schools provide analogues to the American experience. Both systems periodically face criticism for perceived rigidity, outdated events, or mismatches with the actual demands of modern military and security missions. A case in point: in 2023, the Royal Thai Army revised its standard running distances and push-up counts after feedback from soldiers and public health specialists who found prior versions misaligned with field realities (Ministry of Defense Thailand, 2024).
What’s more, Thai educators—who look to international best practice for school physical education standards—will find the US debate instructive. The new AFT emphasizes comprehensive fitness, not just raw strength or endurance, a philosophy increasingly embedded in Thailand’s revised national curriculum. As Dr. Apinun K., professor of sports science at Chulalongkorn University, observes, “A focus on overall fitness, tested with scientifically validated events, is far more predictive of long-term health and operational ability than isolated feats of strength” [Chulalongkorn University Exercise Science Review, 2024].
From a historical perspective, the shift away from events like the “ball yeet” mirrors changes in Thai military and educational testing, such as the discontinuation of certain legacy drills and the introduction of team-based obstacle courses that more closely simulate real-life situations. These changes, though incremental, align with an international consensus that testing should reflect the evolving nature of both conflict and daily life.
Looking ahead, the US Army’s new fitness test could shape similar reforms in Thailand. As the Royal Thai Armed Forces pursue modernization—through technology, updated doctrine, and human capital—they may draw lessons about the pitfalls and promises of replacing outdated assessments with scientifically grounded, inclusive standards. This is especially crucial as Thailand eyes more female recruits and career soldiers, in parallel with the US emphasis on gender neutrality.
For ordinary Thai readers, parents, and young people preparing for military or university-level physical tests, the takeaway is clear: fitness standards are changing, and so too must our approach to preparing for them. “Don’t just train to pass a specific test. Build a foundation of overall strength, endurance, and flexibility—skills that serve you both in and out of uniform,” advises Coach Suwit R., a Thai military fitness instructor. This pragmatic advice echoes global trends and is rooted in both science and Thai cultural values around holistic health (Thai Ministry of Education guidelines, 2024).
For policymakers and school administrators, the recommendation is to continually review and update fitness assessments, collaborate with sports scientists, and ensure fairness across gender and roles. Dialogue with military counterparts—both at home and abroad—remains essential. For the wider public, support for physical education at all levels, from schoolyards to boot camps, is an investment in national strength and readiness.
In sum, as the US Army redefines its standards, Thailand finds a mirror for its own ongoing efforts to balance tradition, fairness, and the real-world demands of 21st-century service and health. Keeping an eye on international developments—while grounding reforms in local research and cultural context—will be key to building a stronger, healthier nation.
Sources: