Purpose In Australia, surgical selection is governed by the Royal Australasian College of Surgeon (RACS) and the Specialty Training Committees of each discipline. The aim of this paper is to critically review and compare the various selection criteria for surgical training programs in Australia, exploring their strengths, limitations, and potential implications of observed variations. Methodology Two authors accessed the publicly available selection criteria on official college websites for the nine surgical subspecialties governed by RACS in November 2024. Data was collected on individual components involved in selection and categorised as 1) minimum eligibility requirements, 2) Curriculum Vitae, 3) knowledge or aptitude tests, 4) referee reports, 5) interview. Results CV scoring commonly considered academic qualifications, research, clinical experience, rural exposure, attendance at courses, and extra-curricular achievement, with the weighting of each domain varying by sub-specialty. Scoring of examinations were considered by 3 out of the 9 RACS sub-specialty selection criteria. All sub-specialties required referee reports, either proforma-based or as structured interviews. 3 sub-specialties required referees from allied health professionals. Often station-based, limited information was available on the content of candidate interviews, though, 7 of the 9 sub-specialties weighted interviews as the greatest component of selection. Conclusion The Australian surgical training system demonstrates significant variation in selection criteria across specialties. While common elements exist, further research is needed to identify which selection methods and criteria most effectively evaluate and select suitable surgical candidates.