The statistics show that Pele was more influential than Maradona. These data disqualify the hypothesis of the followers of the Argentine, who maintain that Maradona was more influential. To understand it, we ask ourselves: What about Brazil with and without Pelé ?, and what happens with Argentina with and without Maradona? BRAZIL TOTAL WITH PELE (1957-1971) Matches – Won – Draw- Lost- For- Against- Difference - Points- Percentage 92 - 67 -14 – 11- 235- 87 -148 - 148 (80.43 %) BRAZIL TOTAL WITHOUD PELE (1957-1971) Matches – Won – Draw- Lost- For- Against- Difference - Points- Percentage 63 - 40 -10 – 13 - 134- 83 - 51 -90 (71.40 %) ARGENTINA TOTAL WITH MARADONA (1977-1994) Matches – Won – Draw- Lost- For- Against- Difference - Points- Percentage 91 - 42 - 29 – 20 - 137- 85 - 52 - 113 (62.9 %) Matches – Won – Draw- Lost- For- Against- Difference - Points- Percentage 94 - 42 -32 – 20 - 130- 87 - 43 - 116 (61.7 %) 1° CONCLUSION: Brazil was great without Pelé, but almost invincible with Pelé, his presence increased the success of Brazil by 9.03%. The presence of Maradona increased the success of Argentina by 1.20%, a score lower than the Brazilian one. Pele was more influential. Let's analyze the influence in official games WORLD CUP + QUALIFIERS WORLD CUP + COPA AMERICA: PLAYER - GAMES - GOALS - ASSISTS - GOALS PLUS ASSISTS PER GAME - BRAZIL'S GOALS - PERCENTAGE OF INFLUENCE PELE – 26 – 26 – 14 - 1.54 – 77 - 52% MARADONA – 41 -15 -13 -0.68 – 58 - 48% 2° CONCLUSION: Pelé was offensively more productive (1.54 against 0.68) and more important for Brazil than Maradona for Argentina (52% against 48%), although Pelé had great players at his side, was more influential than Maradona, the Argentine had less brilliant players at his side. These data make clear the false hypothesis that "Pelé played with the stars and Maradona with mediocre players", absolutely false!