Who is better, Stanley or Dorokhov?
Vladimir Dorokhov leads with a GOAT score of 83.9 against 83.8 for Clayton Stanley — 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 Vladimir Dorokhov above Clayton Stanley: 83.9 vs 83.8. Vladimir Dorokhov leads on Honours, Dominance. Clayton Stanley leads on Longevity, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Dorokhov wins: Dominance, Honours
Stanley wins: Peak, Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/clayton-stanley-vs-vladimir-dorokhov
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Dorokhov 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Stanley | 0 | 0 | 52 | 114 | 266 | 716 |
| 🇷🇺 Dorokhov | 0 | 0 | 55 | 120 | 279 | 639 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | StanleyRetired | DorokhovRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic gold medals | 1 | 1 |
| Olympic MVP awards | 1 | — |
| World League titles | 2 | — |
| Olympic Games contested | 3 | — |
| Years with the national team | 14 | — |
| World Championship medals | — | 1 |
| European titles | — | 2 |
| World Cup medals | — | 1 |
| Soviet league titles | — | 4 |
| Dominance w25% | 80 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 80 | 76 |
| Honours w20% | 84 | 88 |
| Statistics w15% | 84 | 84 |
Vladimir Dorokhov leads with a GOAT score of 83.9 against 83.8 for Clayton Stanley — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Stanley scores higher on peak, longevity. Dorokhov leads on dominance, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Stanley: 83.8, Dorokhov: 83.9.
Make your case for Stanley vs Dorokhov. 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.