Who is better, Geiberger or Maruyama?
Al Geiberger leads with a GOAT score of 83.0 against 83.0 for Shigeki Maruyama — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores Al Geiberger and Shigeki Maruyama level at 83.0. Al Geiberger leads on Longevity, Peak, Honours. Shigeki Maruyama leads on Dominance, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Geiberger wins: Peak, Longevity, Honours
Maruyama wins: Dominance, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/al-geiberger-vs-shigeki-maruyama
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Geiberger leads in 3 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Geiberger | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 |
| 🇯🇵 Maruyama | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 94 | 174 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | GeibergerRetired | MaruyamaRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Major titles | 1 | — |
| PGA Tour wins | 11 | 3 |
| Champions Tour wins | 10 | — |
| Lowest round | 59 | — |
| Ryder Cup appearances | 2 | — |
| Japan Golf Tour wins | — | 10 |
| Presidents Cup appearances | — | 3 |
| Lowest competitive round | — | 58 |
| Highest world ranking | — | 9 |
| Dominance w25% | 74 | 78 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 90 | 86 |
| Honours w20% | 76 | 74 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 90 |
Al Geiberger leads with a GOAT score of 83.0 against 83.0 for Shigeki Maruyama — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Maruyama scores higher on dominance, statistics. Geiberger leads on peak, honours, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Geiberger: 83.0, Maruyama: 83.0.
Make your case for Geiberger vs Maruyama. The scoring is published in full — if you can point at the pillar or the weight you disagree with, we read it. Read the methodology paper.