Who is better, Johnson or Bartoletta?
Michael Johnson leads with a GOAT score of 88.5 against 88.4 for Tianna Bartoletta — 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 Michael Johnson above Tianna Bartoletta: 88.5 vs 88.4. Michael Johnson leads on Dominance. Tianna Bartoletta leads on Longevity, Statistics, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Johnson wins: Dominance
Bartoletta wins: Peak, Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/michael-johnson-vs-tianna-bartoletta
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Johnson leads in 2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Johnson | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 88.38 | 306.33 |
| 🇺🇸 Bartoletta | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6.89 | 20.39 | 54.17 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | JohnsonRetired | BartolettaRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic golds | 4 | 3 |
| World Championship golds | 8 | 3 |
| World records | 2 | — |
| 400 m personal best | 43.18 | — |
| 200 m personal best | 19.32 | — |
| Undefeated 400 m finals | 54 | — |
| Long jump best | — | 7.17 |
| 100 m best | — | 10.78 |
| Olympic Games | — | 3 |
| Dominance w25% | 88 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 93 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 82 | 84 |
| Honours w20% | 90 | 90 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 92 |
Michael Johnson leads with a GOAT score of 88.5 against 88.4 for Tianna Bartoletta — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Bartoletta scores higher on peak, statistics, longevity. Johnson leads on dominance.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Johnson: 88.5, Bartoletta: 88.4.
Make your case for Johnson vs Bartoletta. 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.