Who is better, Enqvist or Baddeley?
Wilfred Baddeley leads with a GOAT score of 82.8 against 82.7 for Thomas Enqvist — 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 Wilfred Baddeley above Thomas Enqvist: 82.8 vs 82.7. Wilfred Baddeley leads on Dominance, Honours, Peak. Thomas Enqvist leads on Longevity, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Baddeley wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Enqvist wins: Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/thomas-enqvist-vs-wilfred-baddeley
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Baddeley 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇸🇪 Enqvist | 0 | 0 | 0 | 120 | 192 | 238 |
| 🏴 Baddeley | 0 | 0 | 45 | 141 | 373 | 521 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | EnqvistRetired | BaddeleyRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Grand Slam finals | 1 | — |
| ATP titles | 19 | — |
| Career high ranking | 4 | — |
| Davis Cup titles | 1 | — |
| Seasons on tour | 15 | — |
| Wimbledon singles titles | — | 3 |
| Wimbledon doubles titles | — | 4 |
| Wimbledon finals | — | 6 |
| Age at first title | — | 19 |
| Seasons in competition | — | 8 |
| Dominance w25% | 78 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 82 | 70 |
| Honours w20% | 78 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 84 |
Wilfred Baddeley leads with a GOAT score of 82.8 against 82.7 for Thomas Enqvist — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Enqvist scores higher on statistics, longevity. Baddeley leads on peak, dominance, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Enqvist: 82.7, Baddeley: 82.8.
Make your case for Enqvist vs Baddeley. 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.