The first comparison has priority
UKA’s 2026–2028 vertical-jump placing rule first compares attempts at the last height cleared. Total failures up to and including that height become relevant if the first comparison remains equal. Summing every earlier cross immediately can give the wrong ranking.
Two athletes finish with 2.06 metres. Athlete A cleared it first time after two earlier misses; athlete B cleared it second time despite no earlier misses. The first comparison favours A. Looking only at earlier consistency would reverse the relevant priority.
Use two columns in order
Record attempts at 2.06 in the first column and accumulated failures through 2.06 in the second. Consult the second only if the first does not separate the athletes. This keeps the hierarchy visible instead of blending both quantities into one informal quality score.
The example assumes both athletes have the same final successful height and does not extend to combined-event exceptions or every remaining first-place tie. It explains why a results row can place a jumper with more earlier crosses above another with fewer. The height most recently cleared supplies the first countback question.
Questions answered
Are total earlier failures always the first tie-break?
No.
Why can A rank above B in the example?
A used fewer attempts at the last cleared height.
Sources & further reading
Official references for the subjects discussed. Service terms and device software can change.