Who is better, Patterson or Arakida?
Casey Patterson leads with a GOAT score of 81.7 against 81.6 for Yuko Arakida — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Casey Patterson above Yuko Arakida: 81.7 vs 81.6. Casey Patterson leads on Longevity. Yuko Arakida leads on Dominance, Honours, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Patterson wins: Longevity
Arakida wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/casey-patterson-bv-vs-yuko-arakida
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Patterson leads in 2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Patterson | 0 | 0 | 55 | 119 | 368 | 683 |
| 🇯🇵 Arakida | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 18 | 40 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | PattersonRetired | ArakidaRetired |
|---|---|---|
| AVP titles | 10 | — |
| FIVB World Tour medals | 8 | — |
| Olympic appearances | 1 | — |
| AVP Best Offensive Player awards | 1 | — |
| Seasons on tour | 12 | — |
| Olympic golds | — | 1 |
| World Championship golds | — | 1 |
| World Cup medals | — | 1 |
| Japan caps | — | 120 |
| Hall of Fame inductions | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 78 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 88 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 80 | 62 |
| Honours w20% | 80 | 86 |
| Statistics w15% | 84 | 84 |
Casey Patterson leads with a GOAT score of 81.7 against 81.6 for Yuko Arakida — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Arakida scores higher on peak, dominance, honours. Patterson leads on longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Patterson: 81.7, Arakida: 81.6.
Make your case for Patterson vs Arakida. 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.