Who is better, Duckett or Burnup?
Ben Duckett leads with a GOAT score of 81.0 against 81.0 for Cuthbert Burnup — 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 Ben Duckett and Cuthbert Burnup level at 81.0. Ben Duckett leads on Dominance, Peak, Statistics. Cuthbert Burnup leads on Longevity, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Duckett wins: Dominance, Peak, Statistics
Burnup wins: Longevity, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/ben-duckett-vs-cuthbert-burnup
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Duckett 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇬🇧 Duckett | 0 | 0 | 45 | 95 | 279 | 601 |
| 🇬🇧 Burnup | 0 | 0 | 45 | 96 | 285 | 621 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | DuckettActive | BurnupRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Test runs | 3,000 | — |
| Test centuries | 6 | — |
| Highest Test score | 182 | — |
| One-day international centuries | 3 | — |
| Strike rate in Tests | 87 | — |
| First-class runs | — | 13,614 |
| First-class centuries | — | 30 |
| County championships won | — | 1 |
| Seasons played | — | 13 |
| Highest score | — | 200 |
| Dominance w25% | 78 | 76 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 88 |
| Longevity w20% | 76 | 80 |
| Honours w20% | 74 | 76 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 88 |
Ben Duckett leads with a GOAT score of 81.0 against 81.0 for Cuthbert Burnup — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Burnup scores higher on honours, longevity. Duckett leads on peak, dominance, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Duckett: 81.0, Burnup: 81.0.
Make your case for Duckett vs Burnup. 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.