GGOATRANK
AthletesTeams

Zhang Jike vs Appelgren

Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.

GOAT verdictgoatrank.world
Zhang JikeWinner
77.0

Zhang Jike wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics

Appelgren
74.2

Appelgren wins: Longevity

Candidates
Locked to Table Tennis

Shareable URL · /compare/zhang-jike-vs-mikael-appelgren

Time range

Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.

Category radar

Verdict

Weighted GOAT score
🇨🇳 Zhang Jike
77.0

Zhang Jike leads in 4 of 5 weighted categories. Completed the Grand Slam in 445 days — the fastest ever.

1. Zhang Jike
77.0
2. Mikael Appelgren
74.2

Category breakdown

Season form · Titles per season

Career timeline · Titles per season

Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.

GOAT pace tracker

Career stage · GOAT pace

Through season 5 · Titles per season
1. 🇨🇳 Zhang Jike5 seasons played · career day 4,38234 titles
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🇸🇪 Mikael Appelgren5 seasons played · career day 2,92126 titles
-23.5% vs Zhang Jike at the same stage
Ghost race · career day30100365100018253650
🇨🇳 Zhang Jike0000010
🇸🇪 Appelgren0000931

Careers are aligned at debut, so a rookie's first 5 seasons are measured against the same window in a legend's career — Yamal against Messi at the same age-stage, a tour rookie against Tiger Woods in 1996.

MetricZhang JikeRetiredAppelgrenRetired
Olympic golds2
World Championship singles titles2
World Cup titles21
World team titles42
Grand Slams completed1
ITTF Tour titles9
European Championship singles titles3
European team titles6
World Championship medals8
Years at top level19
Dominance w25%7668
Peak w20%8478
Longevity w20%7082
Honours w20%7972
Statistics w15%7672

Fan vote — data vs the people

GOAT Rank · the data
Zhang Jike77.0
Appelgren74.2
The people
Zhang Jike
Appelgren

Loading votes

Create a free account to vote and comment.

Sign in to vote

What do you think?

0 comments

Make your case for Zhang Jike vs Appelgren. 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.

More debates

Browse the rivalry hub →