Who is better, Beardsley or Barratt?
Craig Beardsley leads with a GOAT score of 80.5 against 80.4 for Holly Barratt — 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 Craig Beardsley above Holly Barratt: 80.5 vs 80.4. Craig Beardsley leads on Dominance, Peak, Statistics. Holly Barratt leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Beardsley wins: Dominance, Peak, Statistics
Barratt wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/craig-beardsley-vs-holly-barratt
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Beardsley leads in 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Beardsley | 0 | 0 | 50 | 124 | 373 | 428 |
| 🇦🇺 Barratt | 0 | 0 | 45 | 95 | 272 | 575 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | BeardsleyRetired | BarrattRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World records set | 2 | — |
| Pan American titles | 1 | — |
| US titles | 5 | — |
| NCAA titles | 2 | — |
| World ranking number ones | 3 | — |
| World Championship medals | — | 1 |
| Commonwealth medals | — | 2 |
| Australian titles | — | 4 |
| Short-course world medals | — | 1 |
| Olympic appearances | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 82 | 74 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 86 |
| Longevity w20% | 64 | 84 |
| Honours w20% | 78 | 78 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 82 |
Craig Beardsley leads with a GOAT score of 80.5 against 80.4 for Holly Barratt — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Barratt scores higher on longevity. Beardsley leads on peak, dominance, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Beardsley: 80.5, Barratt: 80.4.
Make your case for Beardsley vs Barratt. 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.