Australia have barely reached Christmas and the Ashes is already out of England’s hands again. The third Test in Adelaide sealed an unassailable 3-0 lead, and the conversation has shifted from “How do England win the urn?” to “Can England avoid a whitewash?” with Melbourne’s Boxing Day Test next up.
That lopsided rhythm is exactly why the old line keeps resurfacing: the Ashes feels properly competitive when it’s played in England. Strip away the noise and the numbers back the central idea – not a romantic myth, but as a data-driven pattern: England is where the Ashes most reliably behaves like a genuine rivalry, with outcomes shared and uncertainty preserved.
Australia is a one-way traffic for the Ashes
Start with the bluntest measure of competitiveness: how often each side wins when the series is hosted in one country.
Across all Ashes Tests played in England (173), the win rates are almost perfectly level: England have won 54 (31.2%), and Australia 52 (30.1%), with 67 draws (38.7%). That is as close to partiy as a 140-year rivalry gets. The draw rate is not a footnote; it is a part of the competitiveness. A high volume of draws keeps the series alive, delays decider moments, and forces tension to carry deep into the tour rather than evaporating after two defeats.
Now put the same rivalry on Australian soil. In Australia (175 Ashes Tests), Australia win a clear majority: 93 wins (53.1%) to England’s 56 (32%), with only 26 draws (14.9%). You can still get the drama, close chases, heroic spells, and sessions that swing the game, but over time, the venue produces a far more defined direction of travel.
Series outcomes echo the same story. In the England-hosted Ashes series (37 in total), England have won 18, Australia 14, with five drawn series. In Australia-hosted series (also 37), Australia have won 21, England 14, while only two drawn. In plain terms, England gives you more plausible end-states and more shared series narratives; Australia gives you a higher likelihood of Australia closing the deal.
The Modern-era
Then comes the modern era proof that makes the England case feel visceral rather than archival. Australia’s last Ashes series win in England was in 2001. Since then, England-hosted contests have repeatedly resisted a clean Australian takeover, even when they were strong enough to retain the urn through drawn series, such as the 2-2 finishes in 2019 and 2023. That is what competitiveness looks like in practice: not one team always winning, but one team being unable to land the final blow.
The ongoing 2025-26 tour is the counter image that sharpens the argument. England are now winless in 18 consecutive Ashes Tests in Australia, a run that makes “competitive” hard to claim with a straight face, because it implies England often can’t even take a single match to shift the emotional balance of a tour. And this series has followed a familiar script: Australia have now taken a series-winning 3-0 lead by the third Test in six of the seven home Ashes series since 2000. When a contest is repeatedly decided before the final match, the rivalry may still be famous, but the competition is no longer symmetric.
So, we can safely conclude that in England, Ashes results are near-parity and the structure of outcomes keeps contests open; in Australia, the long-run pattern is home dominance and early series shutdowns. The Ashes is not only competitive in England, but England is where it is most consistently competitive by the numbers.
