|
|
 |
 |

« July 2008 |
| September 2008 »
August 30, 2008
Why captains should field first in day ODIs
Posted by David Barry at
in About

|

|

|

If it's a day game, captains are betting off chasing
© AFP
|
| S Rajesh talks about the bias towards the winner of the toss in day-night ODIs in this Numbers Game column. He says that this bias is less pronounced in day games. This masks a couple of underlying facts – there is a substantial bias towards the team batting second in day ODIs, and captains aren't as aware of it as they should be (though they may be learning). This bias is probably caused by the natural advantage the teams batting second have (in knowing precisely how many runs they need to win) and perhaps some help from early-morning moisture.
First of all, let's look at the overall results between top-eight sides since 2000. In day games, the side batting first has won 144 games and lost 204. In day-nighters, the corresponding figures are 202 and 167.
The probability that such imbalances would happen by chance are about 7% and 0.1% respectively – there's still some reasonable chance that day-nighters are fair, though I would agree with those who say that it depends on the ground. Clearly the night-time conditions are having a big effect (after all, the direction of the bias is reversed going from day to day-night), and it seems reasonable that the atmosphere in different cities would affect the white ball differently under lights.
It's interesting to break these results down further. Day-nighters, win the toss and bat: win 165, lose 123. Day-nighters, win the toss and field: win 44, lose 37. That latter result is not statistically significant, but it is at least suggestive that captains know what they're doing when they bowl first in a day-nighter.
Day games, win the toss and bat: win 55, lose 90. Day games, win the toss and field: win 114, lose 89. Clear message to captains: don't bat first in day ODIs.
Since 2000, captains batted first in about 42% of day ODIs, as opposed to 78% for day-nighters. Clearly they're aware that it's often better to bowl first in day games, but 42% is still far too high.
In 2008, though, there have been just four day ODIs where a captain has won the toss and batted, and seventeen instances of winning the toss and fielding. Are the captains learning or is it just a blip? We'll find out over the next couple of years.
I'd like to thank Pelham Barton for some discussions on this topic.
Comments (11)
August 26, 2008
Sir Donald Bradman - a fresh analytical look
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Trivia - batting

|

|

|

99.94 perhaps will remain as the most recalled figure in cricket
© Getty Images
|
|
1. Best ever batting performance in a test
During 2001, Wisden came out with a list of the 100 best Test innings of all time. Don Bradman's 270 played in Melbourne in 1937 was adjudged the best ever test innings. This was closely followed by Brian Lara's match-winning 153* and Graham Gooch's 154*.
Playing on a gluepot, Bradman declared at 200 for 9 and Gubby Allen countered by declaring at 76 for 9. The wicket was still very difficult and Bradman sent his tailenders in. Soon they were 97 for 5. Then Bradman and Jack Fingleton added 346 for the sixth wicket, . Bradman continued on and was ninth out at 270. England fought gamely but lost by a big margin. A tactical battle was won by Bradman, the captain and he led from the front. A potted summary of the match is given below.
Test # 257. Australia vs England.
Played on 1,2,4,5,6,7 January 1937
at Melbourne Cricket Ground.
Australia won by 365 runs.
Australia: 200 for 9 wkt(s)
England: 76 for 9 wkt(s)
Australia: 564 all out (Bradman 270, Fingleton 136)
England: 323 all out
2. The best 10-innings stretch
Bradman's best 10-innings stretch was during 1937-46, when he scored 1236 runs at an average of 154.50
The scores were 212, 169, 51, 144*, 18, 102*, 103, 16, 187 and 234.
Also relevant here is "Alex"'s comment, reproduced below.
Also, regarding the 'best 10-innings stretch'. Bradman scored 1370 runs in 10 innings during 1930 and 1931: 131, 254, 1, 334, 14, 232, 4, 25, 223, 152. There were no not-outs during this period however, so his average was 'only' 137.0.
3. The worst 10-innings stretch
Bradman's worst 10-innings stretch started during the second Bodyline test during 1932-33 and continued until 1934 when he scored 426 runs (in 11 innings) at an average of 38.72. He finished this streak with his monumental 304 at Headingley during 1934.
The scores were 8, 66, 76, 24, 48, 71, 29, 25, 36, 13 and 30.
4. Highest average reached (after 10 innings)
Bradman reached his highest career average of 112.29 after the Adelaide Test against South Africa, in which he scored 299*.
5. Lowest average reached (after 10 innings)
Bradman reached his lowest career average, after passing the initial period of 10 Tests, of 89.56 after the Old Trafford Test against England during 1934. Not surprisingly this was the end of his worst streak, referred to elsewhere in this article.
6. When the average of 100.00 was reached
Surprisingly Bradman did not have a great start to his career. He reached an average of 100.00 (agreed very few have ever touched this milestone) only after 15 innings.
7. Quality of opposition bowling
Surprisingly the bowling Bradman faced in his career was slightly below the all-time average, 29.62 against 29.50. However it must be noted that he faced this level of bowling almost all the time. The all-time average arrived consists of 40s and 20s scattered across the 1800-odd Test matches.
8. Runs scored in each batting position
Batting Position 3 4 5 6 7
Runs scored 5078 485 427 681 325
Batting Average 103.63 53.89 142.33 97.29 162.50
The No. 7 total is bolstered by that amazing innings of 270 referred to earlier in this article.
9. Analysis by batting position
Bradman's Batting Position Average is 3.65, indicating that he batted at No. 3 most of the time. For the record he batted at No. 3 a total of 56 times (70%).
10. Analysis of 100s
This is the one measure where he has yielded to a contemporary batsman. The average of the 29 hundreds Bradman has scored in Test cricket is a very high 185.97. Till a few weeks back, he was the No.1 batsman in this regard. Sehwag overtook this figure with his 319 in Chennai. However, Bradman's 100s frequency of 1.8 Tests per hundred is way ahead of any one else.
11. Home/Away runs scored
Not so surprisingly, considering his success in England, Bradman's away performance is superior to his Australian performances. He has scored 2674 runs away at an average of 102.85 while in Australia, he has scored 4322 runs at an average of 98.22.
12. How far ahead of the next
Just to show how far ahead Bradman is of the other batsmen, a relative scale table is shown below.
Measure Bradman % Next Best % Difference
Batting Avge 99.96 100.0 68.38 68.47 31.53 (Hussey)
Runs per test 134.53 100.0 99.54 74.00 26.00 (Headley)
Tests per 100 1.79 100.0 2.20 81.00 19.00 (Headley)
Inns per 100 2.76 100.0 4.00 69.00 31.00 (Headley)
13. Man of the Match awards
Hey what is this, no Man of the Match awards were given when Bradman played. True. So I have gone through the scorecards and using the Innings Rating points, determined which player could have got the MOM award, if these were given. Bradman would have got no less than 16 MOM awards in the 52 Tests he played, a frequency of 3.25 tests per award. Compare this with the current leaders. The best is a frequency of 6.00.
Kallis 123 20 6.15
Muralitharan 123 19 6.47
Wasim Akram 104 17 6.12
Shane Warne 145 17 8.52
Ambrose 84 14 6.00
14. Movement of averages

Finally a footnote. I am not sure whether I would jump with joy if someone, as reported recently, conclusively proved that Bradman scored those elusive four runs, by mistake credited to Jack Ryder, during 1929. The figure of 99.94 is etched into the memory of people and sounds far better than 100.00. It also confirms a nice human element to one perceived to be a super-human.
Comments (78)
August 23, 2008
Adjusting averages to account for bowling strengths
Posted by David Barry at
in Trivia - batting

|

|

|

Adjusting for the strength of bowlers he faced, Sachin Tendulkar's batting average drops to 47.4
© AFP
|
| Some of you may recall the quotient of BQI to bowling average discussed in this post. Roughly speaking, the idea is to reward bowlers who take the wickets of better batsmen. In this post, I'll flip the idea round, and reward batsmen who score against better bowling attacks.
***
Firstly, a digression on Ananth's post. The quotient was defined by summing up the batting averages of the batsmen dismissed by a particular bowler, and then dividing by the bowler's regular average. This is, to my mind, a very useful stat, perhaps the best of its kind for its simplicity (you can of course make it better by making it more complicated in appropriate ways). The only problem is that the numbers you get don't correspond to numbers we're used to in following cricket. How good is a 1.2 bowler? A 0.9 bowler?
Happily, there's an interpretation of this stat that puts the numbers on a scale we're familiar with. It's equivalent to the usual average (runs conceded divided by number of wickets taken), with each wicket weighted by the average of the batsman dismissed. You can set a 'benchmark' average (its value is arbitrary), and I'll set it at 31.5. Dismissing a batsman who averages 31.5 is worth 1 wicket. Dimissing a batsman who averages 47.25 is worth 1.5 wickets. A quotient Q is then equivalent to an average of 31.5 / Q. So, a bowler with a quotient of 1.2 has an 'adjusted average' of 31.5 / 1.2 = 26.25. This is the sort of number we're used to thinking about with bowlers' averages.
I don't know who first came up with the idea of weighting wickets in this way – it was first suggested to me by a friend of mine. Probably various people over the years have thought of it.
Working in the reverse direction (adjusting batsmen's averages) is more difficult, since apart from the last few years, we don't know which bowlers each batsman faced. But we can make a first attempt, by taking the average of the bowlers' averages for each innings, weighting each by the number of overs that they bowled.
To take an example, suppose that in one innings, four bowlers were used:
Bowler A, career average 28, bowls 30 overs.
Bowler B, career average 30, bowls 30 overs.
Bowler C, career average 35, bowls 25 overs.
Bowler D, career average 40, bowls 20 overs.
The "average average" is then (28*30 + 30*30 + 35*25 + 40*20) / (30 + 30 + 25 + 20) = 32.52.
Each batsman's runs for this innings would be multiplied by 31.5 / 32.52 – they'll all be slightly decreased, because the attack is slightly weaker than our benchmark average of 31.5.
(Note: if a bowler never took a wicket, or has an average above 100, then I set that bowler's average at 100. This seems reasonable to me.)
We do this for all innings, and we get adjusted averages for all batsmen.
One useful feature of this method (for both batsmen and bowlers) is that it adjusts across changes in the relative strength of bat and ball (as well as rewarding players who do well against strong opposition). In an era where averages are high (such as today), bowlers are rewarded more for wickets and batsmen less for runs. For players in the low-scoring years before 1900, the reverse is true. Of course, it's possible that in a given era, runs are low because there happen to be a lot of good bowlers and not many good batsmen, and in this case the bowlers are unfairly punished (and batsmen unfairly rewarded). But to my mind the results are better than raw averages.
So onto the results. Qualification: 20 Test innings. Here's the top 20.
name inns no runs avg adj avg
DG Bradman 80 10 6996 99.9 90.4
GA Headley 40 4 2190 60.8 62.8
MEK Hussey 42 8 2325 68.4 59.4
CL Walcott 74 7 3798 56.7 58.3
ED Weekes 81 5 4455 58.6 55.9
FS Jackson 33 4 1415 48.8 55.4
JB Hobbs 102 7 5410 56.9 55.0
GS Sobers 160 21 8032 57.8 54.6
L Hutton 138 15 6971 56.7 53.8
H Sutcliffe 84 9 4555 60.7 53.6
AD Nourse 62 7 2960 53.8 53.4
KF Barrington 131 15 6806 58.7 52.6
GS Chappell 151 19 7110 53.9 52.3
GE Tyldesley 20 2 990 55.0 52.2
RG Pollock 41 4 2256 61.0 52.0
KS Ranjitsinhji 26 4 989 45.0 50.8
BC Lara 230 6 11912 53.2 50.4
J Ryder 32 5 1394 51.6 50.4
RT Ponting 197 26 9999 58.5 50.3
FMM Worrell 87 9 3860 49.5 49.5
AG Steel 20 3 600 35.3 49.0
The modern-day greats are surprisingly low down. That their averages should be heavily reduced is not surprising, since the bat has been very dominant over the ball in the past few years. But they're still further down that I had expected. Perhaps there is some bias in the method, or perhaps we should pay more attention to Neil Harvey when he compares modern players to those of his day.
(There's another possibility worth thinking about, and that is a gradual increase in competitiveness of the sport, so that today there are fewer players on the high and low extremes and more players towards the middle. I don't know how big an effect this would be.)
Here is a list of players from recent years:
name inns no runs avg adj avg
MEK Hussey 42 8 2325 68.4 59.4
BC Lara 230 6 11912 53.2 50.4
RT Ponting 197 26 9999 58.5 50.3
KP Pietersen 80 3 3890 50.5 48.8
JH Kallis 207 32 9678 55.3 48.3
V Sehwag 100 4 5074 52.9 48.0
Moh'd Yousuf 134 12 6770 55.5 47.8
SR Tendulkar 244 25 11877 54.2 47.4
RS Dravid 214 26 10223 54.4 47.3
A Flower 112 19 4794 51.5 46.5
KC Sangakkara 125 9 6356 54.8 46.5
Tendulkar's low position is a bit of a surprise. It's an anomaly that jars with most people's impressions. But remember that averages are not perfect indicators of a batsman's 'true talent' – there's some inherent uncertainty with them.
A full list of batsmen (with an adjusted average of at least 25), click here.
Some further comments:
- Opening batsmen face the opening bowlers disproportionately often, and this isn't taken into account.
- The conditions or characteristics of the batsmen on a given day can change the effectiveness of the bowlers, and the captain would use his bowlers accordingly. So the simple weighting by career average is not a perfect reflection of the overall skill of the attack. But in the long run the above method should be pretty close.
- There's no allowance for ground or pitch conditions, etc.
- I've ignored not-outs. This is worthy of a post of its own, but not-outs don't affect averages much in Test cricket.
- I've used career averages of the bowlers, mainly because it's easy to do. Career-to-date averages can be unstable. It would be reasonable to add a correction factor for the experience of each bowler. But while I've done a small amount of work in this area, I don't have enough results for it to be usable.
Comments (113)
August 13, 2008
Richards the king, Tendulkar his heir
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Trivia - batting
In view of the huge number of comments I have to resort to providing a generic response to the comments. This has been shown at the end of the article.
Martin Crowe, who needs no introduction, had sent in a very valuable comment and Kartik had requested whether Martin could comment on the changes in ODI game over the years. Martin kindly responded to this request and his perceptive comments are shown below. Martin, thanks a ton.
The basic fundamental of the change has been change itself - in the rules. The skill level over all generations has always been constant and consistent. But the framework of each era is determined by the rules of the day. E.g in general there were no 15 over restrictions or powerplays in the 80s, and rules for boundary length was determined by size of ground (inside fence) - but now its a standard 65m. A few examples - We started the exploitation of rules with Greatbatch as pinch hitter opening the batting, Patel opening the bowling Sri Lanka took it a step further in 96'. Personally, I used to practice chipping the ball 45-50m over the inner ring and way short of the boundary rider standing at 80-90m, to score 2 runs. I only ever used to attempt hitting a six over a fielder if there was a short boundary like at Eden Pk, 50-60m square of the wicket otherwise I never tried to clear a fielder 80-90m away. i.e. hitting 6's is so much easier now with standard length boundaries of 65m in place. In this aspect alone, there is a major difference between scoring 250 and 300. And yes the bats are bigger and lighter, but not in my opinion necessarily better for Tests. In the 80's I used a bat weighing 2'4"-2'6" to combat the 4 prong pace attack of the Windies.
With each change or addition to the rules brings an evolution of playing strategy, mainly in batting but also captaincy. T20 will only further encourage the evolution. In 5 years ODIs will be 4 x 20 overs each. In summary the rules will continue to evolve to excite the fan. As it should be. Test cricket on the other hand will rightly be left alone.
Martin Crowe
The ODI bowling average is a fantastic measure since it incorporates the two key components needed to measure a bowler's performance, viz, strike-rate and economy-rate, as shown in the following equation. If either of the economy-rate or strike-rate goes up the bowling average goes up and vice versa.
Runs scored off
Bowling Average = ---------------- & can be rewritten as
Wickets captured
Runs scored off Balls bowled
Bowling Average = --------------- x ---------------
Balls bowled Wickets captured
Hence
Bowling Average = Economy Rate (R/B) x Bowling Strike Rate (B/W)
Unfortunately the batting average is a single-dimensional measure incorporating only one part of the total measure needed to measure a batsman, viz, runs scored. The batting strike-rate (runs per ball) is another independent measure and the two have to be considered together to determine the quality of a batsman. This article attempts to locate a single measure, somewhat equivalent to the bowling average.
Note the following players' figures.
M Runs Balls St Rt BatAvge
Turner G.M Nzl 41 1598 2291 69.75 47.00
Greenidge C.G Win 128 5134 7748 66.26 45.04
Javed Miandad Pak 233 7381 10979 67.23 41.70
Haynes D.L Win 238 8648 13566 63.75 41.38
Broad B.C Eng 34 1361 2425 56.12 40.03
These are a set of high-average, low-strike rate batsmen who once ruled the roost in ODIs. There was a time when an ODI opener had to fall into this mould of a patient 150-ball-century person. Scores of 250-plus were eminently defendable and these batsmen fitted into the scheme of things.
M Runs Balls St Rt BatAvge
Ganguly S Ind 300 11363 15416 73.71 41.02
Chanderpaul S Win 230 7407 10473 70.72 40.26
Today the situation has changed. It is uncommon to see such a figure among current players who are playing ODIs. Even the opening batsmen have to have a higher strike-rate. If, in the bargain, their batting average drops, it is acceptable. The current batsmen who fit into the above group are, say, Ganguly and Chanderpaul. Both have reasonably high batting averages and not-too-high strike rates.
Now note the figures for the following batsmen.
M Runs Balls St Rt BatAvge
Shahid Afridi 248 5469 4911 111.36 23.47
Sehwag V 186 5867 5884 99.71 32.78
Powell R.L 100 2085 2157 96.66 24.82
Kapil Dev N 198 3783 4146 91.24 23.79
Jayasuriya S.T 404 12688 13931 91.08 32.87
McCullum B.B 111 2602 2874 90.54 29.24
These batsmen have very high-strike rates, above 90, but sub-35 batting averages. These are acceptable today, whether for opening batsmen or middle-order finishers. While everyone would like a Shahid Afridi or Sehwag to have higher batting averages, their very method of playing, attacking from the first ball, prevents them from having higher batting averages. Their role in today's ODI matches, however, cannot be denied.
However there is a need to look at things in perspective. Batsmen such as Chanderpaul and Ganguly, with averages of 40+ and strike rates of 70+ are still valuable in ODIs. How do they compare with, say, Andrew Flintoff, who only averages 31+ but has a strike rate of 87+. Similarly how do two middle-order batsmen of contrasting styles such as Yuvraj Singh and Mohammad Yousuf compare.
To compare ODI batsmen, I have thought of a simple index, hereinafter called ODI Batting Index (OBI). Since there are two measures both of which have the characteristic of, the higher the better, we multiply the batting average by the strike-rate and arrive at the OBI. Because it is a product, both values have equal weightage. This OBI Index is used to compare the ODI batsmen.
Now let us look at a table of the top 20 ODI batsmen ever based on the OBI. The minimum criteria is 2000 ODI runs which represents between 50 and 60 ODI matches, a fair measure of a settled batsman. A total of 143 batsmen qualify under this criteria. The analysis is correct until match # 2739, Ireland vs Scotland, one of the many inconsequential matches.
SNo LH Batsman Ctry Inns NO Runs Avge StRt Idx1
1 ~ Hussey M.E.K Aus 68 26 2307 54.93 85.6 47.04
2 Dhoni M.S Ind 101 27 3536 47.78 91.9 43.93
3 Richards I.V.A Win 167 24 6721 47.00 88.7 41.67
4 Pietersen K.P Eng 70 13 2687 47.14 86.6 40.85
5 ~ Bevan M.G Aus 196 67 6914 53.60 74.4 39.85
6 Tendulkar S.R Ind 407 38 16361 44.34 85.5 37.90
7 Symonds A Aus 157 33 5006 40.37 92.8 37.46
8 Zaheer Abbas Pak 60 6 2572 47.63 78.6 37.44
9 ~ Klusener L Saf 137 50 3576 41.10 89.9 36.95
10 Clarke M.J Aus 121 28 4037 43.41 80.5 34.93
11 ~ Gilchrist A.C Aus 279 11 9619 35.89 96.9 34.79
12 Ponting R.T Aus 292 35 11112 43.24 80.3 34.72
13 ~ Hayden M.L Aus 155 15 6132 43.80 78.9 34.58
14 ~ Gambhir G Ind 56 7 2018 41.18 82.7 34.06
15 ~ Smith G.C Saf 131 9 5016 41.11 81.8 33.63
16 Sarwan R.R Win 123 25 4251 43.38 76.5 33.17
17 Sehwag V Ind 186 7 5867 32.78 99.7 32.68
18 Jones D.M Aus 161 25 6068 44.62 73.2 32.65
19 Mohammad Yousuf Pak 254 40 9243 43.19 75.4 32.55
20 ~ Lara B.C Win 289 32 10406 40.49 79.7 32.27
To view the full list, please click here.
This is a true measure of the greatness of an ODI batsman. The batsmen with very high batting averages such as Michael Hussey, Mahendra Singh Dhoni, Viv Richards and Kevin Pietersen are at the top because they also possess very good strike-rates, in excess of 85. Bevan drops off a little, because he does not have a very high strike-rate. Then come Sachin Tendulkar and Andrew Symonds, both with very good averages and eminently acceptable strike-rates. Zaheer Abbas has a very high batting average and an acceptable strike-rate. Lance Klusener is a surprise presence in the Top 10, mainly because people tend to think only of his explosive striking ability, forgetting that he has a batting average better than Adam Gilchrist or Brian Lara. There is no doubt his spat with Graeme Smith has deprived South Africa of an outstanding player. No one can deny Michael Clarke a place in the Top 10.
The batsman with the lowest batting average to make it the list of Top 20 is Sehwag and he has made to the Top 20 because of his near-100 strike-rate. Gilchrist is in with similar credentials. Similarly the batsman with the lowest strike-rate in this Top 20 is Dean Jones, again another deserving candidate with a very high average. It's a similar case with Mohammad Yousuf.
One can conclude that an OBI value of above 30 signifies a very good ODI batsman.
Alternative 1
Some people might question that the product is not a true measure to define the combined value of two diverse factors because of skews. A 10% increase in either of the measures, will increase the Index value by 10%. A 10% increase in both the measures will increase the Index value by 21%. This may not be acceptable and readers may be justified in suggesting that a sum, rather than a product, should be done. It can easily be achieved with the following, slightly more complex, method.
OBIdx2 = Batting Average + (50.0 * Strike-Rate).
This is an excellent way of measuring the batting qualities since a batting Average of 50.0 is almost the pinnacle and a strike-rate is 1.00 is almost the same lofty level. I personally prefer this index as the better balanced of the two.
SNo LH Batsman Ctry Inns NO Runs Avge StRt Idx2
1 ~ Hussey M.E.K Aus 68 26 2307 54.93 85.6 97.75
2 Dhoni M.S Ind 101 27 3536 47.78 91.9 93.75
3 Richards I.V.A Win 167 24 6721 47.00 88.7 91.33
4 ~ Bevan M.G Aus 196 67 6914 53.60 74.4 90.77
5 Pietersen K.P Eng 70 13 2687 47.14 86.6 90.47
6 Tendulkar S.R Ind 407 38 16361 44.34 85.5 87.08
7 Zaheer Abbas Pak 60 6 2572 47.63 78.6 86.93
8 Symonds A Aus 157 33 5006 40.37 92.8 86.77
9 ~ Klusener L Saf 137 50 3576 41.10 89.9 86.05
10 ~ Gilchrist A.C Aus 279 11 9619 35.89 96.9 84.36
11 Clarke M.J Aus 121 28 4037 43.41 80.5 83.64
12 Ponting R.T Aus 292 35 11112 43.24 80.3 83.39
13 ~ Hayden M.L Aus 155 15 6132 43.80 78.9 83.27
14 Sehwag V Ind 186 7 5867 32.78 99.7 82.63
15 ~ Gambhir G Ind 56 7 2018 41.18 82.7 82.54
16 ~ Smith G.C Saf 131 9 5016 41.11 81.8 82.01
17 Sarwan R.R Win 123 25 4251 43.38 76.5 81.61
18 Jones D.M Aus 161 25 6068 44.62 73.2 81.21
19 Kallis J.H Saf 260 49 9542 45.22 71.4 80.90
20 Mohammad Yousuf Pak 254 40 9243 43.19 75.4 80.87
To view the full list, please click here .
The reconstituted table is almost the same, barring minor moves indicating either of the measures can be used. An index value of or around 100.0 is the indication of a truly great ODI batsman.
Michael Bevan and Pietersen swap places, Clarke and Gilchrist also swap places. Gilchrist moves into the Top 10 at the expense of Clarke. The batsman who has benefited most is Sehwag, who moves up three places. Jacques Kallis comes into the Top 20 at the expense of Lara. This computation method, in general, will benefit the low average - high strike-rate batsmen since the multiplication method will not help them greatly.
Alternative 2
There is no denying that the impact of not-outs is too pronounced in the first two cases. While not denying Hussey's place in the top echelons of ODI batsmen, he is placed too high with a batting average of 54.93. He has 28 not-outs out of 68, a very high 41%. Similar cases exist with Dhoni, Bevan, Klusener et al.
Hence a third alternative is tried out. This time I have computed the OB Idx as follows.
OBIdx2 = (Runs/Innings) + (40.0 * Strike Rate).
The multiplying factor is 40.0 (as against 50.0) since the highest runs per innings value is 42.87 and only four batsmen exceed a RPI value of 40.0. Similarly only one batsman exceeds a Strike Rate of 100.0.
This takes care of all anomalies. Only the middle-order batsmen might complain. But it is now fair across the board. Now let us look at the table.
SNo LH Batsman Ctry Mat Inns Runs Avge StRt Idx3
1 Richards I.V.A Win 187 167 6721 40.25 88.7 75.71
2 Tendulkar S.R Ind 417 407 16361 40.20 85.5 74.39
3 Zaheer Abbas Pak 62 60 2572 42.87 78.6 74.31
4 ~ Gilchrist A.C Aus 287 279 9619 34.48 96.9 73.25
5 Pietersen K.P Eng 76 70 2687 38.39 86.6 73.05
6 Dhoni M.S Ind 115 101 3536 35.01 91.9 71.79
7 Sehwag V Ind 191 186 5867 31.54 99.7 71.43
8 ~ Hayden M.L Aus 161 155 6132 39.56 78.9 71.14
9 ~ Smith G.C Saf 133 131 5016 38.29 81.8 71.00
10 Ponting R.T Aus 301 292 11112 38.05 80.3 70.18
11 ~ Trescothick M.E Eng 123 122 4335 35.53 85.2 69.63
12 ~ Gambhir G Ind 56 56 2018 36.04 82.7 69.12
13 Symonds A Aus 193 157 5006 31.89 92.8 69.00
14 ~ Saeed Anwar Pak 247 244 8823 36.16 80.7 68.45
15 ~ Gayle C.H Win 183 179 6488 36.25 80.3 68.35
16 ~ Hussey M.E.K Aus 90 68 2307 33.93 85.6 68.18
17 ~ Lara B.C Win 298 289 10406 36.01 79.7 67.89
18 ~ Jayasuriya S.T Slk 415 404 12688 31.41 91.1 67.84
19 de Villiers A.B Saf 67 64 2147 33.55 85.3 67.65
20 ~ Ganguly S.C Ind 311 300 11363 37.88 73.7 67.36
Ah, now we see the real quality. Richards at the top, followed by Tendulkar, two ODI masters nonpareil. The only surprise in the top 10 is Zaheer Abbas in third position. The other nine will be in anybody's list of top ODI batsmen of all time. Richards, Tendulkar and Gilchrist gain at the expense of Dhoni, Hussey and Bevan, the later two move way down the field. Now about Zaheer Abbas. One of only four batsmen to average over 40 runs per innings (Richards, Tendulkar and Greenidge the other three) and a strike-rate of nearly 80. His RPI value is 42+, two above Richards and Tendulkar. He was and is one of the most under-rated players of all time.
An Idx3 value of 80 is the pinnacle, 70+ signifies greatness, 60+ signifies an outstanding batsman and 55+, a very good batsman. Shahid Afridi, despite his low average, gets an excellent value of 66.60 and is at no. 26.
To view the full list, please click here
I can anticipate a common reader observation. "How did you determine the career balls played for older players such as Richards, Greenidge, Zaheer Abbas et al". The following method is used.
- Even for some early matches the balls played is available straight off in the Cricinfo archive scorecards.
- Non-Cricinfo archives have been searched for some important innings.
- Bill Frindall's excellent ODI scorecards book contains the balls played for a number of key innings.
- Where nothing is available, the individual batsman strike-rate is extrapolated from the team rate. This method is not complete but gives us a fair idea of the balls faced. It might also be unfair to the more attacking players such as Richards, Kapil Dev et al and would benefit players such as Desmond Haynes, Sunil Gavaskar et al. I can assure readers that this method has only been resorted to when all other avenues have been investigated.
The most acceptable index value is the third one (Idx3) since it negates the impact of not-outs very effectively.
This method treats batsman Nos 1-5 in a fair manner and is possibly slightly unfair to positions 6-7, which is quite acceptable. The addition method is also devoid of statistical imperfections. Hence the third index method is the one I would recommend for consideration.
Based on this index, Viv Richards is at the top, closely followed by Tendulkar and Zaheer Abbas.
Unlike the Extended Batting Average [for Test batsmen], which was a substitute for batting average, this is a new measure which encompasses two of the existing measures. It would be a very useful tool for ranking batsmen and determining the strength of the team. I will be using this measure in the ODI Team Strength Analysis, which will be done sometime in the future.
This concept was first used and explained by me during the Wisden 20-20 Television shows broadcast on Doordarshan during 2001-02. These ideas have since been refined considerably.
Response to user comments
1. This is not an overall "Who is the greatest ODI Batsman" analysis. That has been done by me for Wisden a couple of years back and I will do it again in this column later. In that analysis I will take ino account factors such as Runs scored, Wins, % of Team runs, MOM awards, Quality of opposition et al.
This is a list of top ODI batsmen using only the two relevant factors, viz., Runs scored (Avge or RPI) and Scoring Rate. This should only be compared to "Listing the best ODI bowler by Bowling Average".
2. David Barry has correctly mentioned the Cricinfo Statsguru figures. However let me mention that my need is not an overall "Richards scored xxx runs in yyy balls" information. That will only help a Career analysis. I need information by match and I have resorted to the method shown. May not be perfect. But in this particular case, nothing will be perfect. My Database methodology does not permit (correctly) a career sum, different to the sum of individual innings values.
3. Unlike what some people have implied, I have no intention or desire to push one batsman or other up or down. I do the analysis and leave the readers to judge for themselves. If in the bargain the readers' favourite batsman is not shown where he should be (in their perception), my apologies. Only thing is, don't be rude to me or other readers (your comment will go the trash then, even if it is a good one) nor ascribe the variation to deliberate intention. After all these are only analyses.
4. If the limit of 2000 runs is too low, one could increase it to, say 2500. Maybe then Gambhir would not get in. Then people should accept that Hussey, Botham, Greg Chappell et al would also not get in.
5. David (Barry) has since pointed out that the revised Cricinfo scorecards have complete balls faced data. It is possible that I have used the older version with incomplete scorecards and had to resort to extrapolation. It will take me some time to convert to the newer version since it involves downloading, parsing and updating the database. I will immediately start work on this. Many thanks to David.
6. There has been an excellent suggestion to do some equalizing of Strike Rates between the early years and recent years. Let me look into that. That will at least enable olden greats such as Greenidge, who certainly is not a career strike rate of 66.3 into something more acceptable, say 75.0. In this case a case should be made for equalizing averages or RPI also.
7. Abhijeet Dongre has made a good suggestion. To consider the not out innings as not an innings if the runs scored falls below the average is a novel idea and is worth considering. Let me work on it.
8. Jayasuriya's somewhat low position seems to have offended quite a few people, especially from the lovely little emarald isle. My own take on this is that he would certainly in the Top 10 when I do a comprehensive analysis of ODI Batsmen considering all facts mentioned in point 1 above. Until then my Sri Lankan brethren, please bear with me. At least you don't abuse me. You even make your protests in a gentle manner.
9. Jeff Grimshaw's Balls per dismissal suggestion has a very authentic and solid feel about it and I am seriously looking at incorporating the same. Same as with Abhijeet's suggestion.
Comments (110)
August 7, 2008
The new unbowlable
Posted by Charles Davis at
in Trivia - batting

|

|

|

Difficult to dislodge: Shivnarine Chanderpaul
© Getty Images
|
|
Although he is not the most dynamic batsman going around, Shivnarine Chanderpaul has been carving himself a most unusual statistical place in recent years. His career has been studded with extraordinary spells where he becomes near-impossible to dismiss. Since overcoming a foot problem and undergoing surgery in 2000, he has made a habit of stringing unbeaten innings together, so much so that he has batted for more than 1000 minutes between dismissals on four separate occasions, twice in the past year. His last four Test innings, in the series against Australia, spanned 1115 minutes before until at last he fell lbw to Stuart Clark.
For comparison, consider that only five other batsmen have ever gone unbeaten for over 1000 minutes, none of them more than once.
Longest batting between dismissals
| Player |
Minutes |
Balls |
Runs |
Scores |
| S Chanderpaul (2001/02) |
1513 |
1051 |
362 |
67*, 101*, 136*, 58 |
| JH Kallis (2001/02) |
1241 |
908 |
456 |
157*, 42*, 189*, 68 |
| SR Tendulkar (2003/04) |
1224 |
879 |
497 |
241*, 60*, 194*, 2 |
| R Dravid (2000/01) |
1145 |
791 |
473 |
41*, 200*, 70*, 162 |
| S Chanderpaul (2007/08) |
1115 |
689 |
313 |
107*, 77*, 79*, 50 |
| S Chanderpaul (2007) |
1074 |
677 |
322 |
116*, 136*, 70 |
| S Chanderpaul (2004) |
1031 |
698 |
371 |
101*, 128*, 97*, 45 |
| N Hussain (1999/2000) |
1023 |
744 |
231 |
70*, 146*, 15 |
| Shoaib Mohammad (1990/91) |
1007 |
634 |
308 |
203*, 105 |
These are all relatively recent events, thanks partly to the fact that over-rates are much slower than in olden days. But if we turn to balls faced, Chanderpaul still leads. He is the only batsman to ever face 1000 balls without getting out.
Most balls faced between dismissals
| Player |
Balls |
Minutes |
Runs |
Scores |
| S Chanderpaul (2001/02) |
1051 |
1513 |
362 |
67*, 101*, 136*, 58 |
| WR Hammond (1928/29) |
980 |
703 |
296 |
119*, 177 |
| Hanif Mohammad* (1957/58) |
930 |
973 |
337 |
337 |
| JH Kallis (2001/02) |
908 |
1241 |
456 |
157*, 42*, 189*, 68 |
| SR Tendulkar (2003/04) |
879 |
1224 |
497 |
241*, 60*, 194*, 2 |
| L Hutton (1938) |
847 |
797 |
364 |
364 |
| GS Sobers (1957/58) |
800 |
876 |
490 |
365*, 125 |
| R Dravid (2000/01) |
791 |
1145 |
473 |
41*, 200*, 70*, 162 |
| KF Barrington (1964/65) |
780 |
913 |
323 |
54*, 148*, 121 |
*Balls faced for Hanif is an estimate.
A striking feature is Chanderpaul’s highest score in these purple patches is only 136 not out. It is a sign of the general weakness of his team’s batting, as well as his defensive nature, that he so often is left unbeaten without making huge scores. It could certainly be argued West Indies are losing out on potential runs because of this; perhaps he should bat higher in the order.
Curiously, the 362 runs he scored in that 1000-ball sequence is not even in the Top 20 for most runs between dismissals, which is led by Tendulkar (497) and Sobers (490) in the tables above. Chanderpaul is in the Top 20 thanks to his 371 runs in 2004/05, but well down the list.
One reason for his success is that Chanderpaul has become the nearest thing to an unbowlable batsman seen in Test cricket. This has developed in recent years as his technique has changed. Even though he has been out bowled in 11% of his dismissals, not an especially low figure, many of these dismissals came earlier in his career. From 2004 to 2007, Chanderpaul played a sequence of 57 innings without being out bowled. He scored 2629 runs, faced 5693 balls, and batted over 138 hours without anyone hitting his wicket! Javed Miandad (2055) is the only other batsman to score over 2000 runs without being bowled, although Kumar Sangakkara is now right in the hunt for this record, having scored 1983 runs since he last heard the death rattle. Adam Parore of New Zealand batted 77 times before he was out bowled for the first time in a Test match, scoring 1937 runs.
One other curiosity: Chanderpaul is known for his caution, yet has made one of the fastest Test centuries of all time. His normal scoring rate is just over 43 runs/100 balls: among current batsmen, only Rahul Dravid has scored more runs at a slower rate. Yet Chanderpaul has to his credit the fastest century ever scored against Australia, and the fourth-fastest in all Tests, 69 balls in Georgetown (his home ground) in 2003. Has anyone ever batted quite so “out of character”? Perhaps not. The next fastest century by Chanderpaul, 140 balls (in the same series) is less than half as fast as his best, and the average of his other centuries is 212 balls. No other major batsman has a fastest century so unlike all his others.
Comments (57)
August 1, 2008
The highest peaks and lowest troughs for batsmen
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Trivia - batting

|

|

|

Brian Lara had a remarkably consistent Test career, with hardly any peaks or troughs
© AFP
|
|
Brian Lara finished his career with a batting average of more than 50. It is certain that during his illustrious career he would have gone through a few peaks and troughs. Not necessarily a sine-wave pattern but certainly up and down. It is also certain that a few of these would have been way outside his career average of 52.89. This article looks at such peaks and troughs occurring in the careers of Test batsmen.
This analysis will be in two parts. The first looks at the batsman's career in fixed segments. The second is to look at batting sequences, both outstanding and abysmal.
As usual, we have to set some criteria and parameters. As also is normally done, these are common-sense based and will meet expectations of most discerning readers.
1. The number of innings played should be 50 or more. This is a fair requirement since otherwise we will not have sufficient data to analyse. The limit of 50 innings means that an average of 30 Tests would have been played by the batsman. Also the batting average should be greater than 25.0. We are certainly not interested in analysing the batting exploits of Curtly Ambrose, Shane Warne, Harbhajan Singh et al who have played well over 50 innings. I know this will exclude players such as JM Parker (NZl), Nick Knight (Eng), Asif Mujtaba (Pak), Mohammad Ashraful (Bng) et al, all with sub-25.0 averages. In order to complete the analysis properly I have included batsmen whose batting average is less than 25.0 but whose BPA (Batting Position Average) is less than 6.0. Twelve batsmen, including all four mentioned above, have now been included. With this criteria, a total of 299 batsmen get selected for analysis.
2. I will consider a unit of 10 innings [or more], hereinafter called a stretch, as a unit for measuring the average and variation from average. This represents between five and eight Tests, normally spanning across two or more series and is a good measure. We will consider the batting average during this period as that is the most accepted unit of batting measure. Runs per inns and Run aggregate both suffer from significant shortcomings.
3. In the first part, each batsman's peak and trough will be measured against his own career batting average. The need for this method of measuring is best proved by considering the batting averages of two opening batsmen of different eras, of totally diverse temperament, skills and application levels. Herbert Sutcliffe had an average of 60.73 and Kris Srikkanth weighed in with 29.88. If Sutcliffe had a stretch average of 20, he would consider it as a very low period while Srikkanth would find it quite acceptable. Sutcliffe would have to have a stretch average of 75+ to think that he had a very good run, while Srikkanth would be over the moon with a stretch average of 45.0.
4. What is a peak? What is a trough? I have defined a peak or a trough to be 50% on either side of the career batting average. In other words, if a batsman has got a batting average which is above 150% of his batting average, it is considered a peak. If a batsman has got a batting average which is below 50% of his batting average, it is considered a trough. Looks subjective, but has been done based on lot of research.
5. The analysis will be done in two distinct parts. The first is an easier and more understandable method where the batsman's career is split into as many fixed stretches as required (1-10, 11-20, 21-30 et al until career-end) and then the peaks and troughs are determined. The last stretch, if below 10 innings, will be ignored. Because of the fixed interval, it is possible that a run such as Mohinder Amarnath's sequence of 4, 7, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0 might be split into two different stretches. It so happens that Amarnath bookended this horrible run with scores of 91, 81, 54, 116 and 36, 101*, 37, 49 on either side. This is a simple exercise.
6. This is a simple (okay, not so simple) analysis of a player's career performance. No allowance has been made for the quality of opposition, bowling quality, home or away Tests, match results et al. The purpose is not to determine the quality of innings but just to determine deviations away from the mean values. I also personally think that failures against stronger teams cannot be justified nor can successes against weaker teams be derided.
Now let us take a look at the tables for Part 1. The analysis is current upto and including the Colombo match in which the vaunted Indian batsmen were found wanting.
1. Table of Peaks, by % of Batting Average
No Cty Batsman Stretch Ins No Runs Avge CarAvge %
St End
1. Slk Tillakaratne H.P 91 100 10 6 641 160.25 42.88 373.74
2. Saf Kallis J.H 81 90 10 6 711 177.75 56.28 315.80
3. Slk Sangakkara K.C 101 110 10 4 1036 172.67 54.81 315.01
4. Ind Vengsarkar D.B 141 150 10 4 788 131.33 42.13 311.70
5. Saf Pollock S.M 91 100 10 6 398 99.50 32.32 307.89
6. Slk de Silva P.A 101 110 10 2 961 120.12 42.98 279.49
7. Eng Gatting M.W 61 70 10 4 568 94.67 35.56 266.24
8. Saf Pollock S.M 71 80 10 5 421 84.20 32.32 260.55
9. Aus Trumper V.T 71 80 10 2 774 96.75 39.05 247.76
10. Pak Mudassar Nazar 51 60 10 2 716 89.50 38.09 234.95
There is no doubt that the high averages for most of the stretches in the top 10 have been because of the high number of not-outs. That is a parameter we have laid down and there is nothing fundamentally wrong with that. One has to admire Hashan Tillakaratne for his stretch of 55*, 11, 10, 16, 136*, 10*, 105*, 87, 7* and 204* and Kumar Sangakkara for his stretch of 287, 14, 39, 4, 100*, 156*, 8, 6, 200* and 222*.especially for their determination in scoring big centuries and remaining unbeaten. Also Sangakkara exceeded 1000 runs. Jacques Kallis, the unsung South African batsman, has a few impressive runs such as this stretch consisting of 51, 157*, 42*, 189*, 68, 21*, 24, 89*, 5 and 65*.
To view the complete list, please click here
2. Runs scored by batsman in a stretch
Mohammad Yousuf (1070), Sangakkara (1037) and Viv Richards (1036) are the only batsmen to exceed 1000 runs during any stretch. The year 2006 was a golden year for both Mohammad Yousuf and Sangakkara as was 1976 for the great Richards. As with Lara, Richards has few not-outs, as showed in this sequence. Surprisingly, Mohammad Yousuf also had no not-outs, probably explaining why they dropped down in the previous tables.
At the other end Ian Healy (59), AC Bannerman (72) and Marvan Atapattu (73) have scored the least number of runs during a stretch.
To view the complete list, please click here
3. Table of Troughs, by % of Batting Average
No Cty Batsman Stretch Ins No Runs Avge CarAvge %
St End
1. Aus Ponting R.T 61 70 10 1 74 8.22 58.35 14.09
2. Slk Atapattu M.S 1 10 10 0 73 7.30 39.02 18.71
3. Aus Healy I.A 171 180 10 0 59 5.90 27.40 21.54
4. Eng Edrich W.J 1 10 10 0 87 8.70 40.00 21.75
5. Eng Compton D.C.S 61 70 10 1 108 12.00 50.06 23.97
6. Eng Flintoff A 11 20 10 0 86 8.60 32.42 26.53
7. Ind Jaisimha M.L 61 70 10 1 75 8.33 30.69 27.16
8. Aus Waugh S.R 1 10 10 1 125 13.89 51.06 27.20
9. Zim Flower G.W 71 80 10 0 84 8.40 29.55 28.43
10. Nzl Rutherford K.R 1 10 10 0 77 7.70 27.09 28.43
During the subject stretch Ponting averaged only 14.09% of his high career average. His miserable run consisting of 14*, 0, 6, 0, 0, 11, 11, 14, 4 and 14 was caused by the Indian spinners in India during 2001 and Darren Gough in England during the unforgettable Ashes tour. Atapattu's "bit pattern" run of 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 25, 22, 0 and 25 was at the start of his career. Who would have imagined that he would finish with a career average of nearly 40 and score six double-hundreds. Ian Healy's run of 0, 6, 10, 0, 3, 6, 16, 11, 3 and 4 was at the end of his career and hastened his departure. He needed to make this average ten-fold to keep Gilchrist out.
4. Summary of selected players' peaks and troughs
Cty Batsman Mats Ins Stretches
Tot P T A B
Aus Border A.R 156 265 26 2 0 11 13
Aus Waugh S.R 168 260 26 5 3 8 10
Ind Tendulkar S.R 148 240 24 2 2 10 10
Win Lara B.C 131 232 23 1 0 10 12
Ind Gavaskar S.M 125 214 21 2 2 8 9
Eng Atherton M.A 115 212 21 1 1 11 8
Saf Kallis J.H 121 205 20 4 3 7 6
Pak Inzamam-ul-Haq 120 200 20 0 3 11 6
Nzl Fleming S.P 111 189 19 1 0 7 10
Win Richards I.V.A 121 182 18 2 1 5 10
Slk Jayawardene D.P.M.D 96 156 15 0 0 8 7
Aus Bradman D.G 52 80 8 0 0 4 4
Legend: P-Peaks (above 150%), T-Troughs(below 50%),
A-Above Batting avg (100-150%), B-Below Batting avg (50-100%).
Border was consistency personified with two peaks and no troughs. Steve Waugh was just the opposite. Quite a few peaks and troughs. Sachin Tendulkar was somewhat more predictable than Steve Waugh. The surprise is Lara - only one peak and no trough. It shows a facet of his batting which has not been appreciated. Surprisingly Gavaskar's and Tendulkar's distributions are identical. Michael Atherton is somewhat like Lara, with no great variations.
Kallis is similar to Steve Waugh, lots of variations. Surprisingly Inzamam is prone to more losses of form. However this is made up by a very high number of stretches which are above average. Richards has twice as many below-average stretches as above average. Possibly a reflection of the carefree batting he practised.
Finally note Mahela Jayawardene's distribution. He has no peak and no trough. He and Don Bradman are the only batsmen in this list with such consistent batting records.
To view the complete list, please click here
Part 2: Analysis of high stretch averages and low stretch averages
This analysis is totally different to the first one. The methodology is briefly explained below.
1. The batsmen are selected on the same basis. This time also 299 batsmen are selected.
2. Each innings played by the qualifying batsman is taken as the base and the rest of the career analysed. For each of these innings, the best stretch average is determined. With a minimum of ten innings as a valid stretch, the running averages are computed and the selection is done. Averages above 100.00 and below 10.00 are tabulated.
3. These tables are studied and because of overlapping stretches, appropriate
non-overlapping stretches selected and sequenced.
5. Table of high average run scoring stretches
1.Sangakkara K.C 105 114 10 4 1185 197.50
{100*,156*,8,6, 200*,222*,57,192,92,152}
2.Sobers G.St.A 29 38 10 4 1115 185.83
{365*,125,109*,14, 27,25,142*,4,198,106*}
3.Tillakaratne H.P 95 105 11 7 721 180.25
{136*,10*,105*,87, 7*,204*,96,37,3,19*,17*}
4.Kallis J.H 81 90 10 6 711 177.75
{51,157*,42*,189*, 68,21*,24,89*,5,65*}
5.Bradman D.G 50 59 10 2 1236 154.50
{212,169,51,144*, 18,102*,103,16,187,234}
6.Kallis J.H 118 127 10 3 1065 152.14
{158,44,177,73, 130*,130*,92,150*,40,71}
7.Hammond W.R 88 97 10 4 889 148.17
{87*,29,63*,65, 167,217,5*,0,25,231*}
8.Bradman D.G 18 28 11 2 1327 147.44
{223,152,43,0, 226,112,2,167,299*,0,103*}
9.Vengsarkar D.B 133 142 10 6 584 146.00
{1*,37*,126*,33,61, 102*,38,0,22*,164*}
10.Bradman D.G 63 72 10 3 984 140.57
{56*,12,63,185, 13,132,127*,201,57*,138}
Sangakkara's phenomenal run is the best ever and is of recent vintage. Sobers blossomed once he scored his first Test century, which turned to be the world-record breaking one. Tillakaratne had the benefit of quite a few not-outs. But his run was wonderful for a journeyman batsman. Bradman has three distinct stretches. With a career average of 99.96 it is not surprising to see him exceeding 140 three times in his career. There are many overlapping stretches during which Bradman has exceeded averages of 120. Kallis is the only other batsman who has had two separate 140-plus stretch averages. Dilip Vengsarkar is the only Indian batsman in this elite list.
6. The career-best best stretch averages for a few other famous batsmen is given below.
Lara B.C 164 173 10 1 851 94.56
{68,60,209,10, 80*,29,1,191,1,202}
Tendulkar S.R 105 114 10 3 736 105.14
{124*,18,126*,15, 44*,217,15,61,0,116}
Ponting R.T 10 119 10 2 928 116.00
{169,53*,54,50, 242,0,257,31*,25,47}
Dravid R 65 74 10 3 835 119.29
{28,41*,200*,70*, 162,9,39,25,180,81}
Gavaskar S.M 1 10 10 3 831 118.71
{65,67*,116,64*, 1,117*,124,220,4,53}
Richards I.V.A 27 36 10 0 1093 109.30
{177,23,64,232, 63,4,135,66,38,291}
Javed Miandad 23 32 10 5 654 130.80
{154*,6*,35,100, 62*,81,160*,26,30,0*}
Gilchrist A.C 35 45 11 5 715 119.17
{83*,7,22,30*, 34,204*,138*,24,91,16,66*}
Flower A 82 94 13 4 1243 138.11
{183*,70,55,232*, 79,73,23,51,83,45,8*,142,199*}
Lara is the only one who has not exceeded 100. Primarily because he remains not out very few times. Gavaskar's is his debut stretch. Andy Flower has a 13-innings stretch in which he averages 138+. Playing in a weak team, this is a remarkable achievement. Richards has exceeded 100 even though he was dismissed in all 10 of the innings.
7. Table of low average run scoring stretches
1.Reid J.R 8 17 10 0 36 3.60
{0,3,6,1,9,7,6,0,3,1}
2.Bannerman A.C 27 39 13 1 57 4.75
{8,5,2,15*,4,2,2,0,0,13,5,1,0}
3.Wishart C.B 6 15 10 0 52 5.20
{3,2,25,0,10,0,7,3,0,2}
4.Healy I.A 167 176 10 0 56 5.60
{0,14,5,12,0,6,10,0,3,6}
5.Vettori D.L 13 23 11 1 57 5.70
{0,14*,1,3,16,0,20,0,0,0,3}
6.Kapil Dev N 38 47 10 0 60 6.00
{19,2,7,5,0,0,9,0,4,14}
7.Fletcher K.W.R 19 29 11 1 64 6.40
{4,2,1,28*,1,0,5,2,0,16,5}
8.Knott A.P.E 69 78 10 1 65 7.22
{2,0,0,21,4*,5,0,21,5,7}
9.Atapattu M.S 1 10 10 0 73 7.30
{0,0,0,1,0,0,25,22,0,25}
10.Nadkarni R.G 52 62 11 1 73 7.30
{0,7,14*,9,0,3,15,17,2,0,6}
John Reid's stretch is the worst by any batsman in Test history. Ten consecutive single-digit scores is something, a record no recognised batsman has achieved. Ian Healy's poor scoring stretch is towards the end of his career. He has averaged 8.12 in a 17-innings stretch. Atapattu's stretch is on his debut. Fletcher, with an average of 6.40 early in his career, is one of the three recognised Test batsman to have had very low stretches.
I have implemented Daniel Cotton's suggestion of 10 dismissals instead of 10 innings and the results are tabulated below.
Table of Peaks, based on 10 consecutive dismissals, by % of Batting Average
Batsman Stretch Ins No Runs StrAvge
St End
Based on running average
Sobers G.St.A 29 42 14 4 1774 177.40
{365*,125,109*,14,27,25,142*,4,198,106*,29,9,44,0}
Flower A 85 99 15 5 1561 156.10
{232*,79,73,23,51,83,45,8*,142,199*,67,14*,28,114*,42}
Bradman D.G 18 29 12 2 1523 152.30
{223,152,43,0,226,112,2,167,299*,0,103*,8}
Kallis J.H 81 96 16 6 1481 148.10
{51,157*,42*,189*,68,21*,24,89*,5,65*,38,99,4,34,3,8}
Sangakkara K.C 109 120 12 2 1433 143.30
{200*,222*,57,192,92,152,1,46,50,21,10,14}
Based on innings played
Tillakaratne H.P 95 113 19 9 1186 118.60
{136*,10*,105*,87,7*,204*,96,37,3,19*,17*,20,
39,20,32*,18,5*,24,27}
Chanderpaul S 176 193 18 8 1044 104.40
{116*,136*,70,104,8,65*,70*,0,23,3,18,86*,118,
11,107*,77*,79*,50}
Kallis J.H 79 95 17 7 1259 125.90
{30*,17,51,157*,42*,189*,68,21*,24,89*,5,
65*,38,99,4,34,3}
Javed Miandad 23 39 17 7 1204 120.40
{154*,6*,35,100,62*,81,160*,26,30,0*,19,16,
129*,19,76,30*,34}
Chappell G.S 59 74 16 6 1031 103.10
{4*,123,109*,13,43,52,182*,6*,4,48*,68,54*,
52,70,121,67}
In response to the requests of the readers to do an analysis, not limiting to 10 innings and having a stretch anywhere, not just at 1, 11, 21 etc., I have given below the top 10 entries in this table.
Table of Peaks, with stretches > 10 innings, by % of Batting Average
Cty Batsman Stretch Ins No Runs Avge CarAvge %
St End
1. Pak Mudassar Nazar 42 54 13 4 959 106.56 38.09 279.73
2. Ind Vengsarkar D.B 136 145 10 3 796 113.71 42.13 269.88
3. Slk Tillakaratne H.P 89 100 12 6 665 110.83 42.88 258.49
4. Nzl Greatbatch M.J 1 13 13 4 693 77.00 30.62 251.46
5. Ind Nadkarni R.G 35 45 11 5 378 63.00 25.71 245.05
6. Win Adams J.C 11 21 11 3 781 97.62 41.23 236.76
7. Eng Boycott G 71 82 12 4 890 111.25 47.73 233.08
8. Ind Gavaskar S.M 1 10 10 3 831 118.71 51.12 232.22
9. Aus Taylor M.A 164 173 10 3 701 100.14 43.50 230.23
10. Eng Hick G.A 56 67 12 3 642 71.33 31.32 227.73
To view the complete list, please click here
Response to comments
1. Apologise for mixing up Kallis and Sangakkara sequences. Has been corrected.
2. Very good suggestion on taking 10 consecutive dismissals rather than 10 consecutive innings. Will take it up.
3. A few people have questioned the need for fixed 10-innings stretches (1-10, 11-20, ...) and have suggested variable duration stretches. Let me say that I did all the work in completing the analysis for variable lenth of stretches and my first cut of the article was with 6 tables with these two variations. Then I found that there was not much variation between the two, the article was too long and I was missing an analysis completely excluding the Batting average. Hence I re-did the second part as it stands today. The tables are displayed in the main part of the article.
4. David (Barry) has raised a valid comment on the fact that the number of Peaks outnumber number of Troughs by 2 to 1. My response is set out below.
a. This is not an analysis either side of a a single mean measure (Batting Average), It is based on 10-innings stretches and hence the normal statistical conclusions may not be applicable.
b. Only the Peaks outnumber the Troughs (330 vs 171). However the number of Above-average stretches actually trail the Below-average stretches (1043 to 1334).
c. So the conclusion is that the 50% on either side is probably not equitable. It is possible that a more correct cut-off pair might be 140% and 40%.
5. Every article of mine gets converted into a Lara vs Tendulkar one so much that I will probably do an article analyzing Lara and Tendulkar WITHOUT COMING TO ANY SPECIFIC CONCLUSION. Let readers draw their own conclusions.
6. A valid question has been raised on the methodology in determining the variable stretches. One method is to keep on going until the cumulative average falls below the limit of 150%. In this case the emphasis is on the length of the stretch. The other method is to keep on going until the highest % value is reached. In other words, close the stretch once the % figure drops off. In this case the emphasis is on the % value rather than length.
Both tables were craeted. However what has been presented is the value based one, in other wirds, the highest %.
7. Shishir and Peter have made valid points on the 'point' nature of the stretches. I accept this comment. However it must be remembered that this was only the starting point of the exercise. Please look at the other analytical tables. This problem will disappear since there is no artificial limit of 10 innings in these analysis.
Comments (51)
|
 |
|
 |
 |
| The Contributors |
 |
 |
 |
|
Y Anantha Narayanan has over 35 years of IT background. Over the past 15 years, he has been concentrating on Cricket analysis and software development. He has been involved with StumpVision, Wisden, Hallmark Software and his own site www.thirdslip.com during this period. |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
David Barry was cricket-starved when teaching English in France, and
study of cricket stats was his only way to stay sane. He is now back
in Brisbane, Australia, and working towards a PhD in Physics. He once
played for the worst team in the G-division of Muscat's cricket
league.
|
|
 |
 |
|
After doing an MBA in marketing and working in an advertising agency, S Rajesh decided that his skills might be put to better use by number-crunching on cricket. He hasn’t regretted that decision in the last six years, and edits the Numbers Game column on cricinfo.com every Friday. |
 |
 |
 |
|
Andrew Samson had his moments with bat and ball, once scoring 43 and taking 3 for 14 with his legbreaks, but he was much better at arithmetic, which explains why he is where he is today. Andrew has been keeping cricket stats since the days when it used to be done with pen and paper, and has been involved in scoring/stats for Radio and TV since 1987. He has been Cricket South Africa's official statistician since1994. |
|
 |
|
|
A former scientist and occasional TV quiz champion, Charles Davis now works full time at sports statistics in Melbourne.
His only real contribution to the Test record books came at age 4, when he formed part of the record 90,800 crowd
who saw West Indies at the MCG in 1961. He has two books to his credit, and claims to be the only cricket statistician
ever who has been quoted in the New York Times and in Australian Federal Parliament on the same day. Not to be
confused with the West Indian batsman Charlie Davis, especially in terms of ability. |
|
 |
|
|
Having just taken early retirement as a Mathematics teacher in Hobart, Ric
Finlay now fully devotes his time to recording cricket, both past and
present, for the popular CSW cricket database, along with his colleague
David Fitzgerald (www.tastats.com.au). His interest in the game is
inversely proportional to his ability as a player, but he did once score a
century after being dropped at 3 and running out three of his team-mates.
His first memory of international cricket is the 1962-63 MCC tour of
Australia, described as one of the most boring ever. Totally fascinated, he
was instantly hooked, and has never looked back. Author of three books on
cricket of a historical nature, he has provided statistics and scored for
radio and television cricket coverage since 1983. |
|
 |
 |
| Categories |
 |
 |
 |
|
About
(2)
Allrounders
(3)
Batsmen v bowlers
(1)
Captaincy
(2)
Grounds
(1)
ODIs
(3)
Test cricket
(4)
Batting
(10)
Teams
(1)
Tests - bowling
(6)
Trivia
(1)
Trivia - batting
(33)
Trivia - bowling
(9)
Twenty20
(4)
Wicketkeepers
(2)
|
 |
| Recent Posts |
 |
 |
 |
| What's a reasonable winning score in ODIs? Analysing bowlers in Test wins How far ahead is the top one - part II In a winning cause How far ahead is the top one ... Follow-up on comparing halves of players' careers Comparing the two halves of players' careers Following up on the Test batsmen peer analysis Comparing Test batsmen with their peers Test bowlers analysis: a follow-up
|
 |
 |
 |
| Archives |
 |
 |
 |
| November 2009October 2009September 2009August 2009July 2009June 2009May 2009April 2009March 2009February 2009January 2009December 2008November 2008October 2008September 2008August 2008July 2008June 2008May 2008April 2008March 2008February 2008January 2008December 2007November 2007
|
 |
 |
 |
RSS Feed |
 |
 |
|
|