Who is better, Kirillova or Boyer?
Irina Kirillova leads with a GOAT score of 84.4 against 84.4 for Stéphen Boyer — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores Irina Kirillova and Stéphen Boyer level at 84.4. Irina Kirillova leads on Longevity. Stéphen Boyer leads on Statistics, Dominance, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Kirillova wins: Longevity
Boyer wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/irina-kirillova-vs-stephen-boyer
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Kirillova leads in 1 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇷🇺 Kirillova | 0 | 0 | 50 | 108 | 254 | 706 |
| 🇫🇷 Boyer | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 59 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | KirillovaRetired | BoyerActive |
|---|---|---|
| World Championship titles | 1 | — |
| Olympic medals | 1 | — |
| European titles | 3 | — |
| Olympic Games contested | 4 | — |
| Years at the top level | 19 | — |
| Olympic golds | — | 1 |
| Nations League titles | — | 1 |
| French league titles | — | 2 |
| Italian league medals | — | 1 |
| Best opposite awards | — | 2 |
| Dominance w25% | 80 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 74 |
| Honours w20% | 84 | 86 |
| Statistics w15% | 80 | 90 |
Irina Kirillova leads with a GOAT score of 84.4 against 84.4 for Stéphen Boyer — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Boyer scores higher on peak, dominance, honours, statistics. Kirillova leads on longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Kirillova: 84.4, Boyer: 84.4.
Make your case for Kirillova vs Boyer. 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.