Who is better, Karakasevic or Qian?
Aleksandar Karakasevic leads with a GOAT score of 78.0 against 78.0 for Qian Tianyi — 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 Aleksandar Karakasevic and Qian Tianyi level at 78.0. Aleksandar Karakasevic leads on Longevity. Qian Tianyi leads on Dominance, Peak, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Karakasevic wins: Longevity
Qian wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/aleksandar-karakasevic-tt-vs-qian-tianyi-tt
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Karakasevic leads in 1 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇷🇸 Karakasevic | 0 | 0 | 44 | 91 | 250 | 506 |
| 🇨🇳 Qian | 0 | 0 | 54 | 115 | 340 | 682 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | KarakasevicRetired | QianActive |
|---|---|---|
| European Championship titles | 1 | — |
| Olympic appearances | 4 | — |
| European medals | 4 | — |
| Career world ranking best | 20 | 8 |
| National titles | 15 | — |
| World junior titles | — | 2 |
| ITTF World Tour titles | — | 2 |
| Chinese Super League seasons | — | 8 |
| Asian medals | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 70 | 76 |
| Peak w20% | 80 | 85 |
| Longevity w20% | 90 | 74 |
| Honours w20% | 74 | 76 |
| Statistics w15% | 78 | 80 |
Aleksandar Karakasevic leads with a GOAT score of 78.0 against 78.0 for Qian Tianyi — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Qian scores higher on peak, dominance, honours, statistics. Karakasevic leads on longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Karakasevic: 78.0, Qian: 78.0.
Make your case for Karakasevic vs Qian. 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.