Who is better, Bradman or Alleyne?
Don Bradman leads with a GOAT score of 96.8 against 81.6 for Mark Alleyne — a gap of 15.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Don Bradman above Mark Alleyne: 96.8 vs 81.6. Don Bradman leads on Dominance, Honours, Peak. Mark Alleyne leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Bradman wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Alleyne wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/don-bradman-vs-mark-alleyne
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Bradman 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇦🇺 Bradman | 0 | 0 | 0 | 66 | 395 | 803 |
| 🇬🇧 Alleyne | 0 | 0 | 200 | 650 | 2,950 | 6,870 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | BradmanRetired | AlleyneRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Test batting average | 99.94 | — |
| Test centuries | 29 | — |
| Test runs | 6,996 | — |
| Test double centuries | 12 | — |
| Ashes series won as captain | 4 | — |
| First-class runs | — | 14,498 |
| First-class wickets | — | 431 |
| One-day trophies as captain | — | 6 |
| First-class centuries | — | 22 |
| Career years | — | 20 |
| Dominance w25% | 100 | 72 |
| Peak w20% | 100 | 86 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 90 |
| Honours w20% | 96 | 76 |
| Statistics w15% | 100 | 88 |
Don Bradman leads with a GOAT score of 96.8 against 81.6 for Mark Alleyne — a gap of 15.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Alleyne scores higher on longevity. Bradman leads on peak, dominance, honours, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Bradman: 96.8, Alleyne: 81.6.
Make your case for Bradman vs Alleyne. 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.