Who is better, Richards-Ross or Lebedeva?
Sanya Richards-Ross leads with a GOAT score of 87.5 against 87.5 for Tatyana Lebedeva — 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 Sanya Richards-Ross and Tatyana Lebedeva level at 87.5. Sanya Richards-Ross leads on Honours. Tatyana Lebedeva leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Richards-Ross wins: Honours
Lebedeva wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/sanya-richards-ross-vs-tatyana-lebedeva
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Richards-Ross leads in 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Richards-Ross | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 147.51 | 345.4 |
| 🇷🇺 Lebedeva | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 11 | 21 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | Richards-RossRetired | LebedevaRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic golds | 5 | — |
| World Championship golds | 5 | 3 |
| 400m best (sec) | 48.7 | — |
| Diamond League titles | 4 | — |
| World Championship medals | 8 | — |
| Olympic gold medals | — | 1 |
| World indoor titles | — | 4 |
| Best triple jump in metres | — | 15.34 |
| Best long jump in metres | — | 7.33 |
| Dominance w25% | 86 | 86 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 82 | 84 |
| Honours w20% | 90 | 88 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 88 |
Loading votes
Create a free account to vote and comment.
Sign in to voteSanya Richards-Ross leads with a GOAT score of 87.5 against 87.5 for Tatyana Lebedeva — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Lebedeva scores higher on longevity. Richards-Ross leads on honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Richards-Ross: 87.5, Lebedeva: 87.5.
Make your case for Richards-Ross vs Lebedeva. 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.