Who is better, Fraser-Pryce or Szewińska?
Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce leads with a GOAT score of 91.2 against 91.1 for Irena Szewińska — 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 Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce above Irena Szewińska: 91.2 vs 91.1. Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce leads on Longevity. Irena Szewińska leads on Peak, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Fraser-Pryce wins: Longevity
Szewińska wins: Peak, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/fraser-pryce-vs-irena-szewinska
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Fraser-Pryce 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇯🇲 Fraser-Pryce | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10.78 | 43.03 | 85.94 |
| 🇵🇱 Szewińska | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | Fraser-PryceActive | SzewińskaRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic golds | 3 | 3 |
| World Championship golds | 10 | — |
| Olympic medals | 8 | 7 |
| 100 m personal best | 10.6 | — |
| World 100 m titles | 5 | — |
| Sub-10.8 races | 40 | — |
| World records | — | 10 |
| European titles | — | 5 |
| 400m best (sec) | — | 49.28 |
| Dominance w25% | 90 | 90 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 92 | 88 |
| Honours w20% | 92 | 92 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 92 |
Loading votes
Create a free account to vote and comment.
Sign in to voteShelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce leads with a GOAT score of 91.2 against 91.1 for Irena Szewińska — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Szewińska scores higher on peak, statistics. Fraser-Pryce leads on longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Fraser-Pryce: 91.2, Szewińska: 91.1.
Make your case for Fraser-Pryce vs Szewińska. 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.