AthletesTeams
Bucher vs Muster
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Cross-sport verdictgoatrank.world
MusterWinner
79.0Muster wins: Dominance, Peak, Longevity, Honours
Bucher
78.6Bucher wins: Statistics
Candidates
Locked to SwimmingShareable URL · /compare/simon-bucher-vs-thomas-muster
Time range
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Category radar
Verdict
Cross-sport GOAT score
🇦🇹 Simon Bucher
78.7
81.1 in-sport × 0.97 Global participation & competition depth
Bucher leads in 1 of 5 weighted categories.
1. Simon Bucherdepth ×0.97
2. Thomas Musterdepth ×0.93
Category breakdown
Season form · season output
Career timeline · season output
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
GOAT pace tracker
Career stage · GOAT pace
Through season 5 · season output1. 🇦🇹 Simon Bucher5 seasons played · career day 1,825323 output
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🇦🇹 Thomas Muster5 seasons played · career day 1,825277 output
-14.2% vs Bucher at the same stage
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇦🇹 Bucher | 0 | 0 | 50 | 107 | 323 | 683 |
| 🇦🇹 Muster | 0 | 0 | 45 | 95 | 277 | 592 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | BucherActive | MusterRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Dominance w25% | 78 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 74 | 76 |
| Honours w20% | 78 | 82 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 84 |
| European Championship medals | 2 | — |
| Austrian titles | 12 | — |
| National records set | 6 | — |
| Olympic appearances | 1 | — |
| World Championship finals | 2 | — |
| Major singles titles | — | 1 |
| Career singles titles | — | 44 |
| Clay-court titles | — | 40 |
| Weeks at world number one | — | 6 |
| Consecutive clay wins in 1995 | — | 40 |
Fan vote — data vs the people
GOAT Rank · the data
Muster79.0
Bucher78.6
What do you think?
0 commentsMake your case for Bucher vs Muster. 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.