Who is better, Bedser or Collingwood?
Alec Bedser leads with a GOAT score of 85.8 against 85.8 for Paul Collingwood — 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 Alec Bedser and Paul Collingwood level at 85.8. Alec Bedser leads on Dominance, Peak. Paul Collingwood leads on Longevity, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Bedser wins: Dominance, Peak
Collingwood wins: Longevity, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/alec-bedser-vs-paul-collingwood
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Bedser 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🏴 Bedser | 0 | 0 | 35 | 79 | 264 | 615 |
| 🇬🇧 Collingwood | 0 | 0 | 45 | 94 | 206 | 562 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | BedserRetired | CollingwoodRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Test wickets | 236 | — |
| Tests played | 51 | — |
| Five-wicket hauls | 15 | — |
| Bowling average | 24 | — |
| First-class wickets | 1,924 | — |
| World Twenty20 titles as captain | — | 1 |
| Test runs | — | 4,259 |
| One-day international runs | — | 5,092 |
| Test centuries | — | 10 |
| International caps | — | 264 |
| Dominance w25% | 86 | 78 |
| Peak w20% | 94 | 88 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 90 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 86 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 90 |
Alec Bedser leads with a GOAT score of 85.8 against 85.8 for Paul Collingwood — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Collingwood scores higher on honours, longevity. Bedser leads on peak, dominance.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Bedser: 85.8, Collingwood: 85.8.
Make your case for Bedser vs Collingwood. 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.