Who is better, Muserskiy or Dalhausser?
Dmitriy Muserskiy leads with a GOAT score of 85.1 against 85.0 for Phil Dalhausser — 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 Dmitriy Muserskiy above Phil Dalhausser: 85.1 vs 85.0. Dmitriy Muserskiy leads on Peak, Dominance. Phil Dalhausser leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Muserskiy wins: Dominance, Peak
Dalhausser wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/dmitriy-muserskiy-vs-phil-dalhausser
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Muserskiy 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇷🇺 Muserskiy | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 17 |
| 🇺🇸 Dalhausser | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 28 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | MuserskiyActive | DalhausserRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic gold medals | 1 | — |
| World League titles | 2 | — |
| European titles | 1 | — |
| Points in the 2012 Olympic final | 31 | — |
| Champions League titles | 1 | — |
| Olympic golds | — | 1 |
| World Championship titles | — | 1 |
| FIVB tour wins | — | 34 |
| AVP tour wins | — | 63 |
| Olympic appearances | — | 4 |
| Dominance w25% | 84 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 94 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 84 |
| Honours w20% | 84 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 86 |
Dmitriy Muserskiy leads with a GOAT score of 85.1 against 85.0 for Phil Dalhausser — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Dalhausser scores higher on longevity. Muserskiy leads on peak, dominance.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Muserskiy: 85.1, Dalhausser: 85.0.
Make your case for Muserskiy vs Dalhausser. 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.