Who is better, Hall or Auchterlonie?
William Auchterlonie leads with a GOAT score of 80.6 against 80.5 for Georgia Hall — 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 William Auchterlonie above Georgia Hall: 80.6 vs 80.5. William Auchterlonie leads on Longevity. Georgia Hall leads on Statistics, Dominance.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Auchterlonie wins: Longevity
Hall wins: Dominance, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/georgia-hall-vs-william-auchterlonie
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Auchterlonie 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇬🇧 Hall | 0 | 0 | 0 | 120 | 217 | 312 |
| 🇬🇧 Auchterlonie | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 21 | 72 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | HallActive | AuchterlonieRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Major titles | 1 | — |
| LPGA Tour wins | 2 | — |
| Ladies European Tour wins | 3 | — |
| Solheim Cup appearances | 4 | — |
| Highest world ranking | 7 | — |
| Open Championships | — | 1 |
| Open top-ten finishes | — | 5 |
| Career years | — | 31 |
| R&A honorary professional years | — | 28 |
| Clubmaking business founded | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 74 | 72 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 84 |
| Honours w20% | 76 | 76 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 84 |
William Auchterlonie leads with a GOAT score of 80.6 against 80.5 for Georgia Hall — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Hall scores higher on dominance, statistics. Auchterlonie leads on longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Hall: 80.5, Auchterlonie: 80.6.
Make your case for Hall vs Auchterlonie. 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.