Who is better, Austin or Beckford?
Charles Austin leads with a GOAT score of 85.4 against 85.4 for James Beckford — 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 Charles Austin and James Beckford level at 85.4. Charles Austin leads on Dominance, Honours. James Beckford leads on Longevity, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Austin wins: Dominance, Honours
Beckford wins: Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/charles-austin-vs-james-beckford
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Austin 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Austin | 0 | 0 | 2.3 | 4.64 | 11.7 | 21.09 |
| 🇯🇲 Beckford | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8.05 | 33.37 | 66.57 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | AustinRetired | BeckfordRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic golds | 1 | — |
| World Championship golds | 1 | — |
| American record | 2.39 | — |
| World indoor medals | 2 | — |
| US titles | 4 | — |
| Olympic medals | — | 1 |
| World Championship medals | — | 1 |
| World indoor golds | — | 1 |
| Long jump best | — | 8.62 |
| National records | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 84 | 80 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 84 |
| Honours w20% | 86 | 82 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 92 |
Charles Austin leads with a GOAT score of 85.4 against 85.4 for James Beckford — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Beckford scores higher on statistics, longevity. Austin leads on dominance, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Austin: 85.4, Beckford: 85.4.
Make your case for Austin vs Beckford. 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.