Who is better, Abe or Monteiro?
Tazuko Abe leads with a GOAT score of 77.6 against 77.6 for Thiago Monteiro — 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 Tazuko Abe and Thiago Monteiro level at 77.6. Tazuko Abe leads on Peak, Dominance, Honours. Thiago Monteiro leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Abe wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Monteiro wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/tazuko-abe-vs-thiago-monteiro-tt
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Abe 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇯🇵 Abe | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 22 | 44 |
| 🇧🇷 Monteiro | 0 | 0 | 44 | 91 | 253 | 516 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | AbeRetired | MonteiroRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World Championship golds | 1 | — |
| World Championship medals | 3 | — |
| Team world titles | 1 | — |
| National titles | 2 | — |
| Seasons at international level | 8 | — |
| Pan American Games golds | — | 2 |
| Latin American titles | — | 5 |
| Olympic appearances | — | 4 |
| Career world ranking best | — | 32 |
| Brazilian titles | — | 8 |
| Dominance w25% | 74 | 70 |
| Peak w20% | 86 | 80 |
| Longevity w20% | 68 | 86 |
| Honours w20% | 80 | 76 |
| Statistics w15% | 82 | 78 |
Tazuko Abe leads with a GOAT score of 77.6 against 77.6 for Thiago Monteiro — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Monteiro scores higher on longevity. Abe leads on peak, dominance, honours, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Abe: 77.6, Monteiro: 77.6.
Make your case for Abe vs Monteiro. 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.