Who is better, Sedgman or Zvonareva?
Frank Sedgman leads with a GOAT score of 84.5 against 84.3 for Vera Zvonareva — a gap of 0.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Frank Sedgman above Vera Zvonareva: 84.5 vs 84.3. Frank Sedgman leads on Dominance, Honours, Peak. Vera Zvonareva leads on Longevity, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Sedgman wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Zvonareva wins: Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/frank-sedgman-vs-vera-zvonareva
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Sedgman 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇦🇺 Sedgman | 0 | 0 | 45 | 99 | 311 | 670 |
| 🇷🇺 Zvonareva | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 72 | 161 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | SedgmanRetired | ZvonarevaActive |
|---|---|---|
| Major singles titles | 5 | — |
| Major doubles titles | 9 | — |
| Wimbledon titles | 1 | — |
| Davis Cup titles | 4 | — |
| Major finals | 9 | — |
| Grand Slam finals | — | 2 |
| Grand Slam doubles titles | — | 3 |
| WTA singles titles | — | 12 |
| Career high ranking | — | 2 |
| Olympic medals | — | 2 |
| Dominance w25% | 84 | 78 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 88 |
| Honours w20% | 86 | 80 |
| Statistics w15% | 82 | 88 |
Frank Sedgman leads with a GOAT score of 84.5 against 84.3 for Vera Zvonareva — a gap of 0.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Zvonareva scores higher on statistics, longevity. Sedgman leads on peak, dominance, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Sedgman: 84.5, Zvonareva: 84.3.
Make your case for Sedgman vs Zvonareva. 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.