Who is better, Becker or Akimenko?
Mikhail Akimenko leads with a GOAT score of 79.7 against 79.6 for Gabriele Becker — 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 Mikhail Akimenko above Gabriele Becker: 79.7 vs 79.6. Mikhail Akimenko leads on Dominance, Peak, Honours. Gabriele Becker leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Akimenko wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Becker wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/gabriele-becker-vs-mikhail-akimenko
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Akimenko 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇩🇪 Becker | 0 | 0 | 45 | 98 | 304 | 630 |
| 🇷🇺 Akimenko | 0 | 0 | 50 | 111 | 363 | 478 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | BeckerRetired | AkimenkoRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World Championship medals | 2 | 1 |
| European medals | 2 | — |
| German titles | 4 | — |
| Personal best in the 100 metres | 1,122 | — |
| Olympic finals | 1 | — |
| Personal best in centimetres | — | 233 |
| European Indoor medals | — | 1 |
| National titles | — | 2 |
| Diamond League podiums | — | 3 |
| Dominance w25% | 74 | 78 |
| Peak w20% | 86 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 82 | 70 |
| Honours w20% | 76 | 78 |
| Statistics w15% | 82 | 84 |
Mikhail Akimenko leads with a GOAT score of 79.7 against 79.6 for Gabriele Becker — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Becker scores higher on longevity. Akimenko leads on peak, dominance, honours, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Becker: 79.6, Akimenko: 79.7.
Make your case for Becker vs Akimenko. 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.