Chloe Mannix-Power
Australian sprinter (born 2000)
Chloe Mannix-Power (born 29 November 2000) is an Australian sprinter.
Biography
From Queensland, she is a member of Viking Athletics. A beach sprinter, Mannix-Power is a Northcliffe Surf Club lifesaver and became a three-time Australian Female Open beach sprint champion, successfully defending her title in 2023. In April 2024, Mannix-Power won Stawell Gift in 13.42 ahead of Chloe Kinnersley and Jemma Pollard.
Mannix-Power was suspended between April and August 2025 following a drug test completed at the Surf Life Saving Australia (SLSA) National Championships, which returned an Adverse Analytical Finding for Benzoylecgonine, a metabolite of Cocaine.
In March 2026, she won the 100 m at the Adelaide Invitational. At the event, she was also part of a women's 4 x 100 metres relay team which set a meeting record at the Adelaide Invitational, alongside Ebony Lane, Olivia Rose Inkster and Monique Hanlon. She placed second to Ebony Lane over 100 m at the Maurie Plant Meet later that month. On 11 April 2026, she was runner-up to Georgia Harris in the final of 100 metres at the 2026 Australian Athletics Championships, running 11.52 seconds. She was selected for the Australian team to compete at the 2026 World Athletics Relays in Gaborone, Botswana.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Chloe Mannix-Power” is australian sprinter (born 2000). The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Chloe, Mannix-Power and Australian, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “australian sprinter (born 2000)” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 5, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q139200328. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2000, 2023, 2024 and 2025.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Chloe Mannix-Power”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Chloe Mannix-Power primary sources, Chloe Mannix-Power archive and Chloe research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Chloe Mannix-Power”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Chloe Mannix-Power” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.