Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging has advanced significantly with the advent of parametric mapping techniques, particularly T1 and T2 mapping. These advanced techniques provide valuable insights into a wide range of cardiac conditions, including ischemic heart disease, cardiomyopathies, inflammatory cardiomyopathies, heart valve disease, and athlete's heart. Parametric mapping offers a quantitative assessment of myocardial tissue properties, addressing the limitations of conventional CMR methods, which often rely on qualitative or semiquantitative data. However, challenges such as standardization and reference value establishment hinder the wider clinical adoption of parametric mapping. Future developments should prioritize standardization to enhance clinical applicability and optimize patient care pathways. In ischemic heart disease, CMR mapping can provide detailed information on myocardial edema, scar detection, and treatment response monitoring. T2 mapping is particularly useful for detecting myocardial edema, while T1 mapping can assess the transmural extent of myocardial infarction and visualize permanent myocardial injury without the need for contrast agents. For cardiomyopathies, CMR mapping can visualize changes in myocardial composition and spacing, aiding in the diagnosis and personalized treatment strategies. T2 mapping is valuable for distinguishing hypertrophic cardiomyopathy from physiological left ventricular hypertrophy in athletes, and T1 mapping can help identify diffuse fibrosis and early-stage disease. In inflammatory cardiomyopathies, CMR mapping can detect subtle alterations in myocardial tissue, enhancing diagnostic accuracy and facilitating patient monitoring and therapeutic evaluation. For aortic valve stenosis, CMR mapping can identify diffuse interstitial fibrosis, which is challenging to detect with LGE. Native T1 mapping and extracellular volume fraction (ECV) are valuable for assessing diffuse myocardial fibrosis and its prognostic significance. In arrhythmic mitral valve prolapse, CMR mapping can identify high-risk features, such as fibrosis and ventricular remodeling, which are associated with increased arrhythmic risk. For athlete's heart, CMR mapping can differentiate adaptive cardiac remodeling from cardiomyopathies, though data on athletic populations are limited and require further research to establish reference values. The main challenge in the widespread adoption of CMR mapping is the lack of standardized protocols and reference values. Future advancements should focus on standardization to optimize clinical pathways and improve patient care.Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging has advanced significantly with the advent of parametric mapping techniques, particularly T1 and T2 mapping. These advanced techniques provide valuable insights into a wide range of cardiac conditions, including ischemic heart disease, cardiomyopathies, inflammatory cardiomyopathies, heart valve disease, and athlete's heart. Parametric mapping offers a quantitative assessment of myocardial tissue properties, addressing the limitations of conventional CMR methods, which often rely on qualitative or semiquantitative data. However, challenges such as standardization and reference value establishment hinder the wider clinical adoption of parametric mapping. Future developments should prioritize standardization to enhance clinical applicability and optimize patient care pathways. In ischemic heart disease, CMR mapping can provide detailed information on myocardial edema, scar detection, and treatment response monitoring. T2 mapping is particularly useful for detecting myocardial edema, while T1 mapping can assess the transmural extent of myocardial infarction and visualize permanent myocardial injury without the need for contrast agents. For cardiomyopathies, CMR mapping can visualize changes in myocardial composition and spacing, aiding in the diagnosis and personalized treatment strategies. T2 mapping is valuable for distinguishing hypertrophic cardiomyopathy from physiological left ventricular hypertrophy in athletes, and T1 mapping can help identify diffuse fibrosis and early-stage disease. In inflammatory cardiomyopathies, CMR mapping can detect subtle alterations in myocardial tissue, enhancing diagnostic accuracy and facilitating patient monitoring and therapeutic evaluation. For aortic valve stenosis, CMR mapping can identify diffuse interstitial fibrosis, which is challenging to detect with LGE. Native T1 mapping and extracellular volume fraction (ECV) are valuable for assessing diffuse myocardial fibrosis and its prognostic significance. In arrhythmic mitral valve prolapse, CMR mapping can identify high-risk features, such as fibrosis and ventricular remodeling, which are associated with increased arrhythmic risk. For athlete's heart, CMR mapping can differentiate adaptive cardiac remodeling from cardiomyopathies, though data on athletic populations are limited and require further research to establish reference values. The main challenge in the widespread adoption of CMR mapping is the lack of standardized protocols and reference values. Future advancements should focus on standardization to optimize clinical pathways and improve patient care.