Who is better, Duncan or Mickelson?
Phil Mickelson leads with a GOAT score of 85.8 against 85.6 for George Duncan — 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 Phil Mickelson above George Duncan: 85.8 vs 85.6. Phil Mickelson leads on Longevity, Dominance. George Duncan leads on Peak, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Mickelson wins: Dominance, Longevity
Duncan wins: Peak, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/george-duncan-vs-phil-mickelson
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Mickelson 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇬🇧 Duncan | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 30 |
| 🇺🇸 Mickelson | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 14 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | DuncanRetired | MickelsonActive |
|---|---|---|
| Open Championships | 1 | — |
| Ryder Cup wins as captain | 1 | — |
| Professional wins | 15 | — |
| Open top-five finishes | 8 | — |
| Career years | 30 | — |
| Major titles | — | 6 |
| PGA Tour wins | — | 45 |
| Masters titles | — | 3 |
| PGA Championships | — | 2 |
| Ryder Cup appearances | — | 12 |
| Weeks in top 10 | — | 700 |
| Dominance w25% | 80 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 86 |
| Longevity w20% | 86 | 92 |
| Honours w20% | 84 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 86 |
Phil Mickelson leads with a GOAT score of 85.8 against 85.6 for George Duncan — a gap of 0.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Duncan scores higher on peak, statistics. Mickelson leads on dominance, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Duncan: 85.6, Mickelson: 85.8.
Make your case for Duncan vs Mickelson. 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.