Calisthenics parks in numbers

Every figure on this page is counted from our own database, not estimated. Below the tables you will find how we count — and which comparison we deliberately do not publish.

As of 2026-10-11

What we have mapped

• 29,657 — mapped spots
• 107 — countries
• 9,733 — cities and towns
• 11,039 — with an equipment list
• 3,563 — with a sourced fact
• 21 — with a photo

“Mapped” means the spot is in our public database. It does not mean we have visited it.

What is actually installed

Share of the 11,039 spots that carry an equipment list. A spot counts once per device type.

Device labels arrive from many sources in different spellings (“Pull-up bars”, “Pull Up Bars”). They are normalised into these eight groups before counting — a raw label count would understate pull-up bars by 17.2 percentage points.

How well equipped

Number of different device types per spot.

Where the data comes from

Per country: how many spots we hold, and how many of them came from OpenStreetMap. This is the number that decides how complete a country is — and it varies enormously.

How complete are we?

Where a country keeps an official register of its outdoor gyms, we can say exactly how much of it we hold — and how much we do not. These are the only two such registers we measure against so far.

“Reviewed” counts the entries we imported and looked at, including those we rejected. France shows a large gap between reviewed and published because its type “Aire de fitness/street workout” also covers machine-based fitness areas, which do not belong on a calisthenics map — 322 of 622 were rejected on sight. Register sizes were read from the official APIs on 2026-08-22; an audit script re-checks them.

Why this replaces the planned density index

The plan called for a “parks per capita” comparison wherever an official full survey backs the data. Recalculated against the database, no such survey exists here: Helsinki holds 115 of its 132 spots from LIPAS, Vienna 34 of 112, Warsaw 28 of 369 — and of the registers themselves we hold between 12.8% and 28.1%. A density figure would again describe how deeply we imported, not how many parks exist. Measuring the gap is the honest version of the same question.

How we count

Counted are all spots that are publicly visible on the map. Most come from imports (for example OpenStreetMap, workout.su, calisthenics-parks.com and official registers) that were approved in bulk; spots added by users appear immediately and are reviewed by moderators afterwards. Rejected submissions and duplicates merged into another entry are excluded.

The as-of date is the most recent day on which a spot was added to the map or approved by moderation. Later corrections to existing spots (for example to their equipment) do not change it. It is not a deployment date.

Equipment shares are based only on the spots that carry an equipment list, never on the full inventory. The base is stated with every table.

Why there is no “parks per capita” country ranking here

It would be wrong. Russia holds 6,791 spots, 6,604 of them from the Russian community site workout.su; the United States, with more than twice the population, holds 648. Per capita Russia would come out far ahead — but that measures how thoroughly volunteers have mapped a country, not how many parks stand there. A density comparison is only sound where an official full survey backs the data, and, as the register section above shows, we have no such survey.

Citing these figures

Please name the as-of date and link to this page. The raw figures are available as JSON: https://calisthenicslivemap.com/api/v1/seo/statistics

Spot data partly from OpenStreetMap contributors, licensed under ODbL. OpenStreetMap