Who is better, Baulch or Arzamasova?
Maryna Arzamasova leads with a GOAT score of 81.1 against 81.0 for Jamie Baulch — 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 Maryna Arzamasova above Jamie Baulch: 81.1 vs 81.0. Maryna Arzamasova leads on Dominance, Peak. Jamie Baulch leads on Longevity, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Arzamasova wins: Dominance, Peak
Baulch wins: Longevity, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/jamie-baulch-vs-maryna-arzamasova
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Arzamasova 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇬🇧 Baulch | 0 | 0 | 0 | 46.2 | 181.47 | 363.07 |
| 🇧🇾 Arzamasova | 0 | 0 | 0 | 122 | 362.3 | 954.04 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | BaulchRetired | ArzamasovaRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World indoor golds | 1 | — |
| Olympic medals | 1 | — |
| World Championship relay golds | 1 | — |
| 400 m best | 44.57 | — |
| Commonwealth medals | 2 | — |
| World Championship golds | — | 1 |
| European titles | — | 1 |
| European indoor medals | — | 2 |
| 800 m best | — | 117.54 |
| Olympic Games | — | 2 |
| Dominance w25% | 74 | 76 |
| Peak w20% | 88 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 76 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 80 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 86 |
Maryna Arzamasova leads with a GOAT score of 81.1 against 81.0 for Jamie Baulch — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Baulch scores higher on honours, longevity. Arzamasova leads on peak, dominance.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Baulch: 81.0, Arzamasova: 81.1.
Make your case for Baulch vs Arzamasova. 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.