October 1, 2009
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Batting
In a winning cause
|
|
|
Len Hutton scored more than 22% of England's runs in the games they won
© Getty Images
|
| I was influenced by a recent comment by a reader on runs scored in winning causes. Everyone and their neighbour's Labrador talk about centuries scored during the wins of teams completely forgetting that more than "centuries", the emphasis should be on "runs" scored. Why ignore a winning 98 or for that matter a winning 48.
Let me take two players not often discussed. The first is Ganguly. He, and most of the knowledgeable Indian supporters, would agree that his majestic unbeaten 98 while orchestrating a great chasing win over Sri Lanka during 2001 was a far greater innings, arguably his best, than many a big 100. Ganguly might have missed a personal landmark but he did not miss the bigger objective. Would anyone, including Ganguly, have been satisfied if Ganguly had scored 5 more runs but India 5 less.
Now for Jimmy Adams. Would anyone rate his 208 against New Zealand higher than his outstanding unbeaten 48 against Wasim/Waqar/Razzak/Saqlain taking his team to an improbable one-wicket win leading to a rare series win. Even though Adams' innings was less than half of Mark Waugh's match-winning of 116 against South Africa, it was no less important.
Hence I have done an analysis of the runs scored by a batsman during his team's wins. It does not matter whether the batsman scored 12(Ambrose), 49(Paranavitana), 96(Shakib Al Hasan) or 309(Sehwag). The runs are considered and added. Not the 400, nor the 241.
Also I have not done an average of these scores. It will be certain that this average would be higher than his career batting average. I have rather looked at the % of share of the runs scored by his team. This will give a clear indication of his contributions. There is no comparison done across eras, across teams, across bowlers et al. It is almost like the peer comparison. In truth it is a peer comparison, but the comparison is only within the team, that too only in selected subset of matches. I have also not prepared tables across teams. Each table is for the concerned team.
The criteria is simple. The batsman should have been involved in 10 wins and scored over 2000 Test runs (exception for Bangladesh and Zimbabwe). The team runs are computed, sans extras.
Cty Batsman L Mat Runs Wins Runs TmRuns RpT % TS
Eng Hutton L 79 6971 27 2678 11891 99.2 22.52
Eng Hobbs J.B 61 5410 28 2720 13715 97.1 19.83
Eng Gooch G.A 118 8900 32 2950 15504 92.2 19.03
Eng Boycott G 108 8114 35 2950 16366 84.3 18.03
Eng Hammond W.R 85 7249 29 2584 14614 89.1 17.68
Eng Pietersen K.P 54 4647 18 1608 9370 89.3 17.16
Eng Cowdrey M.C 114 7624 43 3087 18416 71.8 16.76
Eng Sutcliffe H 54 4555 25 2141 12840 85.6 16.67
Eng Edrich J.H ~ 77 5138 22 1771 10730 80.5 16.51
Eng Barrington K.F 82 6806 31 2319 14188 74.8 16.34
Eng Thorpe G.P ~ 100 6744 38 3006 18917 79.1 15.89
Eng Strauss A.J ~ 67 5266 30 2596 16344 86.5 15.88
Eng Compton D.C.S 78 5807 25 1801 11420 72.0 15.77
Eng Richardson P.E ~ 34 2061 13 808 5195 62.2 15.55
Eng Trescothick M.E ~ 76 5820 37 2847 18757 76.9 15.18
Hutton is amongst the best across teams, averaging nearly 100 runs per Test and scoring over 22% of the team runs in winning matches. Hobbs is also quite high. Then comes the unheralded Gooch who scored above 19% of his team's winning runs.
Ind Viswanath G.R 91 6080 20 1637 9029 81.8 18.13
Ind Sidhu N.S 51 3202 13 1179 6680 90.7 17.65
Ind Dravid R 134 10823 44 4005 23227 91.0 17.24
Ind Tendulkar S.R 159 12773 51 4416 26993 86.6 16.36
Ind Gavaskar S.M 125 10122 23 1671 10417 72.7 16.04
Ind Vengsarkar D.B 116 6868 18 1187 7823 65.9 15.17
Ind Azharuddin M 99 6215 22 1609 10693 73.1 15.05
Ind Mansur Ali Khan 46 2793 12 846 5712 70.5 14.81
Ind Sehwag V 69 5757 25 1958 13228 78.3 14.80
Ind Amarnath M 69 4378 12 771 5772 64.2 13.36
Ind Engineer F.M 46 2611 13 774 5930 59.5 13.05
Ind Gambhir G ~ 25 2271 13 924 7203 71.1 12.83
Ind Laxman V.V.S 105 6741 36 2428 19479 67.4 12.46
Ind Chauhan C.P.S 40 2084 10 511 4425 51.1 11.55
Ind Shastri R.J 80 3830 10 492 4274 49.2 11.51
The stylish Viswanath leads the Indian table, followed surprisingly by the irrepressible sardar, Sidhu. Then come the three greatest Indian batsmen ever, not necessarily in that order, Dravid, Tendulkar and Gavaskar. Note the somewhat low share of Ganguly (11.23%), possibly because of batting at no.6 position many a time.
Nzl Crowe M.D 77 5444 16 1219 7085 76.2 17.21
Nzl Richardson M.H ~ 38 2776 12 763 5019 63.6 15.20
Nzl McMillan C.D 55 3116 18 1186 7838 65.9 15.13
Nzl Wright J.G ~ 82 5334 21 1253 8430 59.7 14.86
Nzl Fleming S.P ~ 111 7172 33 2145 14637 65.0 14.65
Nzl Cairns C.L 62 3320 16 936 7393 58.5 12.66
Nzl Howarth G.P 47 2531 12 558 4655 46.5 11.99
Nzl Coney J.V 52 2668 17 814 6900 47.9 11.80
Nzl Astle N.J 81 4702 27 1239 11747 45.9 10.55
Nzl McCullum B.B 46 2283 13 563 5885 43.3 9.57
Nzl Hadlee R.J ~ 86 3124 22 790 8792 35.9 8.99
Nzl Vettori D.L ~ 94 3492 29 1101 12696 38.0 8.67
Nzl Parore A.C 78 2865 19 497 8744 26.2 5.68
The number of wins are somewhat lower indicating New Zealand's rough ride over the years. However out of these, the greatest New Zealand batsman ever, Martin Crowe lives up to his reputation and is on top with a high value of 17+%.
Win Lara B.C ~ 131 11953 32 2929 14611 91.5 20.05
Win Sarwan R.R 81 5671 13 1210 6505 93.1 18.60
Win Sobers G.St.A ~ 93 8032 31 3097 16926 99.9 18.30
Win Adams J.C ~ 54 3010 21 1534 9045 73.0 16.96
Win EdeC Weekes 48 4455 16 1403 8324 87.7 16.85
Win Greenidge C.G 108 7558 57 4653 27970 81.6 16.64
Win Campbell S.L 52 2882 16 1068 6645 66.8 16.07
Win Walcott C.L 44 3798 12 1113 6955 92.8 16.00
Win Richardson R.B 86 5949 43 3059 19251 71.1 15.89
Win Worrell F.M.M 51 3860 18 1483 9359 82.4 15.85
Win Kanhai R.B 79 6227 27 2404 15248 89.0 15.77
Win Nurse S.M 29 2523 10 873 5569 87.3 15.68
Win Chanderpaul S ~ 121 8576 27 1933 12839 71.6 15.06
Win Lloyd C.H ~ 110 7515 43 3337 22217 77.6 15.02
Win Haynes D.L 116 7487 60 4041 27824 67.3 14.52
Lara has contributed quite significantly, above 20%, to the (somewhat lower) proportion of wins during his career. From the strong West Indian teams of the 1980s, only Greenidge is present in the top-10. In fact Richards has a somewhat lower % of runs value of 13.9 although one must admit that he had a win ratio of greater than 50%.
What does this indicate. Possibly that the other batsmen were quite strong. However this is negated by the presence of all the top West Indian batsmen of the 1950s in the top-10. I am happy to see Jimmy Adams in the top-10.
Slk Sangakkara K.C ~ 85 7308 41 4179 22486 101.9 18.58
Slk de Silva P.A 93 6361 19 1467 8736 77.2 16.79
Slk Jayawardene D.P.M.D 107 8750 48 4155 25575 86.6 16.25
Slk Atapattu M.S 90 5502 31 2138 15653 69.0 13.66
Slk Jayasuriya S.T ~ 110 6973 40 2801 20634 70.0 13.57
Slk Samaraweera T.T 54 3787 30 2222 16748 74.1 13.27
Slk Ranatunga A ~ 93 5105 17 985 7801 57.9 12.63
Slk Tillakaratne H.P ~ 83 4545 24 1534 12221 63.9 12.55
Slk Dilshan T.M 57 3443 28 1843 15126 65.8 12.18
Slk Vaas WPUJC ~ 111 3087 43 1388 22578 32.3 6.15
Not much to choose amongst the top Sri Lankan batsmen, Sangakkara leading the others quite comfortably. He has also averaged over 100 wickets per won Test.
Saf McGlew D.J 34 2440 11 1156 5285 105.1 21.87
Saf Smith G.C ~ 77 6343 40 3783 20252 94.6 18.68
Saf Wessels K.C ~ 40 2788 12 1044 5800 87.0 18.00
Saf Kallis J.H 131 10277 64 5099 31306 79.7 16.29
Saf Kirsten G ~ 101 7289 48 3800 23961 79.2 15.86
Saf Barlow E.J 30 2516 11 941 6324 85.5 14.88
Saf Cullinan D.J 70 4554 34 2325 16048 68.4 14.49
Saf Cronje W.J 68 3714 32 2156 15214 67.4 14.17
Saf de Villiers A.B 52 3558 26 1793 13056 69.0 13.73
Saf Hudson A.C 35 2007 13 876 6544 67.4 13.39
Saf McLean R.A 40 2120 12 768 5749 64.0 13.36
Saf Amla H.M 37 2460 21 1389 10713 66.1 12.97
Saf Gibbs H.H 90 6167 44 2877 22607 65.4 12.73
Saf Prince A.G ~ 48 3074 28 1719 13546 61.4 12.69
Saf Rudolph J.A ~ 35 2028 12 721 6371 60.1 11.32
McGlew, the great South African batsmen of the 1960s has an excellent 21+% of run share in won matches and has scored over 100 runs per Test. Then come Smith, Wessels and Kallis. Note also Smith's high win %.
Aus Bradman D.G 52 6996 30 4813 17036 160.4 28.25
Aus Chappell G.S 87 7110 38 3595 19209 94.6 18.72
Aus Simpson R.B 62 4869 22 2015 11264 91.6 17.89
Aus Lawry W.M ~ 67 5234 20 1853 10714 92.7 17.30
Aus Harvey R.N ~ 79 6149 41 3253 19174 79.3 16.97
Aus Hill C ~ 49 3412 25 2223 13200 88.9 16.84
Aus Walters K.D 74 5357 28 2303 14211 82.2 16.21
Aus McDonald C.C 47 3107 23 1557 9994 67.7 15.58
Aus Ponting R.T 136 11341 90 7754 50453 86.2 15.37
Aus Slater M.J 74 5312 44 3508 22833 79.7 15.36
Aus Ponsford W.H 29 2122 16 1508 9884 94.2 15.26
Aus Hayden M.L ~ 103 8626 71 6038 39634 85.0 15.23
Aus Trumper V.T 48 3163 22 1717 11427 78.0 15.03
Aus Hassett A.L 43 3073 26 1947 13123 74.9 14.84
Aus Hussey M.E.K ~ 42 3317 27 2359 15899 87.4 14.84
Bradman has scored over 28% of the team runs in won games. One more insurmountable number for the other batsmen to contend with. Then come a number of middle era Australians, led by Chappell. Ponting barely makes to the top-10. Hayden and Hussey find their places in the top-15. I am happy to see Victor Trumper in the top-15.
Pak Shoaib Mohammad 45 2705 12 1055 4927 87.9 21.41
Pak Saeed Anwar ~ 55 4052 23 2254 11079 98.0 20.34
Pak Inzamam-ul-Haq 120 8830 49 4690 25012 95.7 18.75
Pak Younis Khan 63 5260 22 2241 12570 101.9 17.83
Pak Javed Miandad 124 8832 39 2923 17298 74.9 16.90
Pak Asif Iqbal 58 3575 10 759 4934 75.9 15.38
Pak Mohammad Yousuf 82 7023 32 2617 17627 81.8 14.85
Pak Mudassar Nazar 76 4114 23 1511 10311 65.7 14.65
Pak Zaheer Abbas 78 5062 22 1530 10483 69.5 14.60
Pak Ijaz Ahmed 60 3315 23 1487 10385 64.7 14.32
Pak Mohsin Khan 48 2709 18 1134 8060 63.0 14.07
Pak Aamer Sohail ~ 47 2823 22 1365 9970 62.0 13.69
Pak Majid Khan 63 3931 13 849 6230 65.3 13.63
Pak Saleem Malik 103 5768 39 1880 17010 48.2 11.05
Pak Kamran Akmal 43 2226 13 776 7443 59.7 10.43
Shoaib Mohammad leads with a 21+%. Saeed Anwar is also high up there. Then come the three modern greats, led by Inzamam. Note Younis Khan's 100+ runs per test in won games.
Cty Batsman Mat Runs Wins Runs TmRuns RpT % TS
Bng Habibul Bashar 50 3026 1 149 692 149.0 21.53
Bng Mohammad Ashraful 50 2149 3 65 1724 21.7 3.77
Bangladesh has won only 3 Tests. Ashraful was part of all the three tests although he contributed next to nothing. Habibul Basher contributed a lot in their win over Zimbabwe. Shakib Al Hasan, that mercurial world class cricketer, contributed a lot during their brace of wins over West Indies.
Cty Batsman Mat Runs Wins Runs TmRuns RpT % TS
Zim Whittall G.J 46 2207 4 361 1994 90.2 18.10
Zim Flower A ~ 63 4794 7 507 3461 72.4 14.65
Zim Flower G.W 67 3457 7 529 3630 75.6 14.57
Zim Campbell A.D.R ~ 60 2857 6 167 2908 27.8 5.74
Not many wins here. However note the somewhat higher contribution of Gary Whittall to the Zimbabwe wins ahead of the more fancied Flower brothers.
To view the complete list, please click here.
I will come out with the second part of the "How far ahead is the top one ..." article next week. Later I will do a "In a winning cause" article on bowlers.
Comments (32)
September 21, 2009
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Batting
How far ahead is the top one ...
|
|
|
Sachin Tendulkar leads the list of run-scorers and century-makers in Tests, but Ricky Ponting has a chance to catch up
© AFP
|
| How far ahead is the top player in any list is a key to answering the question of whether a high mark set by a player will be reached. I have taken a few Test batting measures and created a table of the Top-100, subject to qualifying criteria, and assigned each position a percentage relative to the top position. A perusal of these tables will give an idea of the degree of permanence of the top places.
Since I normally can only show 5/6 tables in any article to make the same readable, I will do the Test Batting now and follow with one on Test Bowling.
If an active player is at the top of an all-time list, he/she keeps on widening the gap on the second placed player, unless the top two or three are also active. This is true of the aggregate type of measures. On the other hand in performance related measures, it does not matter since it is possible for later players to catch up with the particular measure.
The tables are shown in a standardised format. The first five entries are shown to get an idea, not just of the top entry, but also the ones immediately following the top. Then the 50th entry, exactly at mid-point, is shown to get an idea of the % drop. Finally the 100th entry is shown to get a further idea of the table's distribution of the key measure.
1. Table of Batting averages (minimum 200 runs)
SNo.Batsman Cty Mat Inns No Runs Avge %
1.Bradman D.G Aus 52 80 10 6996 99.94 100.0
2.Pollock R.G ~ Saf 23 41 4 2256 60.97 61.0
3.Headley G.A Win 22 40 4 2190 60.83 60.9
4.Sutcliffe H Eng 54 84 9 4555 60.73 60.8
5.Barrington K.F Eng 82 131 15 6806 58.67 58.7
...
50.Gilchrist A.C ~ Aus 96 137 20 5570 47.61 47.6
...
100.Butcher B.F Win 44 78 6 3104 43.11 43.1
This is the mother of all tables. The second placed player is nearly 40% off, making this, with almost exception, the most difficult performance measure to be breached. Over 10 Tests, yes, but over a career, positively no. Readers might recollect that Kallis is the one with the second highest 80-innings streak in history with an average of 76.41 which itself is 24% off Bradman's figure. Gilchrist at no.50 is at 47.6%, below the 50% mark. Butcher, at no.100 has a 43.6% value, indicating the bunching of players after the 50th position.
To view the complete list, please click here.
2. Table of Runs per Test (minimum 2000 runs)
SNo.Batsman Cty Mat RpT %
1.Bradman D.G Aus 52 134.5 100.0
2.Headley G.A Win 22 99.5 74.0
3.Pollock R.G ~ Saf 23 98.1 72.9
4.EdeC Weekes Win 48 92.8 69.0
5.Lara B.C ~ Win 131 91.2 67.8
...
50.Fredericks R.C ~ Win 59 73.5 54.6
...
100.Thorpe G.P ~ Eng 100 67.4 50.1
As compared to Batting average, this table is a more even one. The difference between Bradman and the second player is only 26%. Also the 50th batsman is well above 50%. In fact, the 100th player, Thorpe, himself is above 50%.
To view the complete list, please click here
3. Table of Career runs scored
SNo.Batsman Cty Mat Runs %
1.Tendulkar S.R Ind* 159 12773 100.0
2.Lara B.C ~ Win 131 11953 93.6
3.Ponting R.T Aus* 136 11341 88.8
4.Border A.R ~ Aus 156 11174 87.5
5.Waugh S.R Aus 168 10927 85.5
...
50.Richardson R.B Win 86 5949 46.6
...
100.Mudassar Nazar Pak 76 4114 32.2
An '*' next to the team indicates that the player is still active.
This table is the most intriguing of all. Tendulkar is ahead of the retired-Lara by over 6%, a comfortable margin. However the next player, Ponting is still active and he is about 11% behind. The key questions are whether Tendulkar would score enough runs to make the aggregate beyond Ponting's reach or Ponting would succeed in chipping away at the difference. BCCI's generally lukewarm scheduling of Tests is another factor. From now to retirement, Ponting would have to play around 16-18 Tests more than Tendulkar to overtake the master. No crystal-gazing is possible. Probably the odds are against it.
Richardson, like Gilchrist in Batting average table, is at 50th position with 46.6%. Then note how the % drops off basically because this is a longevity measure. Mudassar, in the 100th position, has an aggregate below a third of Tendulkar's.
To view the complete list, please click here
4. Table of Centuries (minimum 10)
SNo.Batsman Cty 100s %
1.Tendulkar S.R Ind* 42 100.0
2.Ponting R.T Aus* 38 90.5
3.Lara B.C ~ Win 34 81.0
4.Gavaskar S.M Ind 34 81.0
5.Waugh S.R Aus 32 76.2
...
50.Sutcliffe H Eng 16 38.1
...
100.Hussey M.E.K ~ Win* 10 23.8
I normally do not do any analysis of centuries since I feel it is an over-rated measure. However it is one measure which many people talk about and I have done this table for those interested.
As compared to the Runs scored table, Ponting and Lara have interchanged places, indicating Ponting's penchant for reaching three figures. He is only 4 centuries behind Tendulkar. Ponting's century frequency is once in 3.6 Tests and Tendulkar's is 3.8 Tests. This slight difference, and the fact that there is a difference of below 10%, generates a gut-feeling within me that Ponting might at least equal whatever Tendulkar finishes with, in 100s, if not runs.
To view the complete list, please click here
5. Table of Zeroes scored (Min 20)
No.Batsman Cty Inns Zeroes % Freq
1.Walsh C.A Win 185 43 100.0 4.30
2.McGrath G.D Aus 138 35 81.4 3.94
3.Warne S.K Aus 199 34 79.1 5.85
4.Muralitharan M Slk* 159 33 76.7 4.82
5.Ambrose C.E.L Win 145 26 60.5 5.58
6.Dillon M Win 68 26 60.5 2.62
7.Martin C.S Nzl* 72 25 58.1 2.88
8.Morrison D.K Nzl 71 24 55.8 2.96
9.Chandrasekhar B.S Ind* 80 23 53.5 3.48
10.Danish Kaneria Pak 71 23 53.5 3.09
11.Waugh S.R Aus 260 22 51.2 11.82
12.Atapattu M.S Slk 156 22 51.2 7.09
13.Waqar Younis Pak 120 21 48.8 5.71
14.Ntini M Saf* 113 21 48.8 5.38
15.Harmison S.J Eng* 86 21 48.8 4.10
16.Bedi B.S Ind 101 20 46.5 5.05
17.Atherton M.A Eng 212 20 46.5 10.60
This is a tribute to those wonderful breed of players who provide great entertainment to many. When Chris Martin starts to bat, his first run is looked forward to and applauded as enthusiastically as another batsman's 100th run. Barring three specialist batsmen, the other 14 are all wonderful bowlers, but mostly ineffective but entertaining batsmen.
Walsh leads with 43 ducks. McGrath follows him about 20% behind. Where is Martin. He is there in 7th position. Another 50 innings and he would cross Walsh.
I have done this table on the number of zeroes. The frequency is also shown. The table could as well have been on this figure, in which case Martin would have been, sorry to disappoint my favourite Kiwi readers, in second position, just behind Dillon.
A table of the highest individual scores reached does not belong to this analysis since that is a specific single innings event and does not warrant such a comparison. For 10 years, no one might reach 400 and in one week, two batsmen might go past it. However just for interest there is a 5% gap between the best and the next best score.
As requested by Richard Mackey I have added a table of Runs per innings also. This will be a fairer one for the middle order batsmen.
6. Table of Runs per Innings (minimum 2000 runs)
SNo.Bataman Cty Mat RpI %
1.Bradman D.G Aus 52 87.4 100.0
2.Pollock R.G ~ Saf 23 55.0 62.9
3.EdeC Weekes Win 48 55.0 62.9
4.Headley G.A Win 22 54.8 62.6
5.Sutcliffe H Eng 54 54.2 62.0
...
50.Lloyd C.H ~ Win 110 42.9 49.1
...
100.Graveney T.W Eng 79 39.7 45.4
Who else but Bradman on top and a slight re-distribution of the second to fifth positions.
You can download the complete file by using the following link.
http://www.thirdslip.com/misc/perrpi.txt
Or please click here.
I will do the Bowler tables next week.
Comments (66)
September 11, 2009
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Batting
Follow-up on comparing halves of players' careers
There were two very good suggestions to the above referenced article which were worth following up. One was by Arjun to have the datum of 80 innings (Bradman's career) and see what is/was the best streak in players' career. The other was Abhi/Kris's suggestion that I could look at the career in three parts, rather than two, since in most careers there is a slow start, a spurt and a slow finish. I have completed these two tables and presented these here.
The usual criteria apply. For the first table, the minimum is 80 innings and a batting average exceeding 25.00. For the second, I have retained the mid-point limits of 4000 runs and 45 Tests as the cut-off for batsmen.
Test Batsmen: Analyzing the three career splits
SNo.For Batsman |<---Career---->|Start-third| Mid-third| End-third
|Mat Runs Avge|Runs Avge|Runs Avge|Runs Avge
| | | |
1.Aus Bradman D.G | 52 6996 99.94|2229 96.91|2643 97.89|2124 106.20
2.Eng Sutcliffe H | 54 4555 60.73|1805 78.48|1537 56.93|1213 48.52
3.Eng Barrington K.F | 82 6806 58.67|2111 54.13|2379 62.61|2316 59.38
4.Win EdeC Weekes | 48 4455 58.62|1602 66.75|1643 63.19|1210 46.54
5.Eng Hammond W.R | 85 7249 58.46|2519 58.58|2396 61.44|2334 55.57
6.Win Sobers G.St.A | 93 8032 57.78|2781 61.80|2783 60.50|2468 51.42
7.Eng Hobbs J.B | 61 5410 56.95|1773 57.19|2019 63.09|1618 50.56
8.Eng Hutton L | 79 6971 56.67|2193 56.23|2661 59.13|2117 54.28
9.Aus Ponting R.T |136 11341 55.87|2535 40.89|4530 68.64|4276 57.01
10.Slk Sangakkara K.C | 85 7308 55.36|1951 47.59|2258 48.04|3099 70.43
11.Pak Mohammad Yousuf | 82 7023 54.87|1712 40.76|2273 56.83|3038 66.04
12.Saf Kallis J.H |131 10277 54.66|2678 43.19|4209 67.89|3390 52.97
13.Ind Tendulkar S.R |159 12773 54.59|3617 50.24|5202 63.44|3954 49.42
14.Aus Chappell G.S | 87 7110 53.86|2310 53.72|2394 53.20|2406 54.68
15.Slk Jayawardene D.P.|107 8750 53.35|2653 49.13|2469 46.58|3628 63.65
16.Win Lara B.C |131 11953 52.89|3884 54.70|3504 44.92|4565 59.29
17.Pak Javed Miandad |124 8832 52.57|3074 53.93|2817 52.17|2941 51.60
18.Ind Dravid R |134 10823 52.54|3772 54.67|4001 61.55|3050 42.36
19.Zim Flower A | 63 4794 51.55|1310 43.67|1488 46.50|1996 64.39
20.Ind Gavaskar S.M |125 10122 51.12|3951 53.39|3362 54.23|2809 45.31
Average 45.91 44.28 46.84 45.10
(for all 101 batsmen)
The average of the averages figures indicates a clear move up of 5.7% from the first third to second third and a clear drop of 3.8% from the second to the third. Remember that these are on the grand average figure. Individual batsmen have clear move up and move down patterns.
Barrington, Hobbs, Hutton, Ponting (in a big way), Kallis (huge variations), Tendulkar, Dravid (again in a big way) are amongst the ones who have clearly identified low, up, low patterns.
Note the consistency across the complete career of Greg Chappell and Javed Miandad.
Sobers and Gavaskar are amongst those who have had great starts but fallen off drastically.
Bradman, Lara, Sangakkara, Mohammad Yousuf and Flower are those who have finished their careers very strongly.
To view the complete list, please click here.
Test Batsmen: By average sustained in 80+ innings
SNo.For Batsman Start Finish Inns No Runs Avge
Ins Year Ins Year
1.Aus Bradman D.G 1 (1928) to 80 (1948) 80 10 6996 99.94
2.Saf Kallis J.H 82 (2001) to 161 (2006) 80 19 4661 76.41
3.Aus Ponting R.T 87 (2002) to 178 (2006) 92 14 5904 75.69
4.Win Sobers G.St.A 28 (1958) to 111 (1968) 84 13 5283 74.41
5.Ind Dravid R 66 (2000) to 149 (2005) 84 14 4809 68.70
6.Eng Barrington K.F 34 (1961) to 121 (1968) 88 12 5154 67.82
7.Pak Mohammad Yousuf 42 (2000) to 122 (2006) 81 7 5008 67.68
8.Ind Tendulkar S.R 69 (1996) to 148 (2002) 80 8 4782 66.42
9.Eng Hutton L 42 (1947) to 123 (1954) 82 11 4687 66.01
10.Aus Hayden M.L 23 (2001) to 102 (2004) 80 8 4744 65.89
11.Eng Hammond W.R 15 (1928) to 97 (1936) 83 12 4672 65.80
12.Aus Waugh S.R 82 (1993) to 176 (1999) 95 23 4699 65.26
13.Slk Sangakkara K.C 61 (2004) to 142 (2009) 82 6 4899 64.46
14.Aus Border A.R 88 (1982) to 168 (1988) 81 14 4295 64.10
15.Win Lara B.C 126 (2000) to 205 (2005) 80 2 4985 63.91
16.Eng Hobbs J.B 15 (1910) to 95 (1930) 81 5 4827 63.51
17.Pak Inzamam-ul-Haq 91 (1999) to 175 (2005) 85 9 4795 63.09
18.Win Chanderpaul S 123 (2004) to 202 (2009) 80 17 3947 62.65
19.Eng Sutcliffe H 1 (1924) to 80 (1934) 80 9 4425 62.32
20.Pak Javed Miandad 72 (1982) to 152 (1989) 81 6 4604 61.39
Leaving the colossus outside the discussions, there is a surprise in the second position. I have kept repeating myself many a time. In all the discussions centering around Lara, Tendulkar and Ponting, Kallis has been ignored completely. People point to his lack of wicket-taking ability, forgetting the outstanding batting skills. He and Ponting are the only two batsmen who have averaged over 75 in a consecutive 80+ innings stretch. These two are closely followed by Sobers whose stretch obviously includes the 365*.
Dravid's purple patch comes next, followed by the recent stretch of Yousuf and the mid-career brilliance of Tendulkar. Hutton (not including his 364) and Hayden (including his 380) complete the top-10.
It can be seen that the 80+ innings stretch averages of the last 15 batsmen in the table are within 6 runs.
To view the complete list, please click here.
Test Batsmen: By average sustained in exactly 80 innings
SNo.For Batsman Start Finish Inns No Runs Avge
Ins Year Ins Year
1.Aus Bradman D.G 1 (1928) to 80 (1948) 80 10 6996 99.94
2.Saf Kallis J.H 82 (2001) to 161 (2006) 80 19 4661 76.41
3.Aus Ponting R.T 102 (2003) to 181 (2006) 80 13 5048 75.34
4.Win Sobers G.St.A 28 (1958) to 107 (1968) 80 12 4969 73.07
5.Ind Dravid R 96 (2002) to 175 (2006) 80 12 4652 68.41
6.Pak Mohammad Yousuf 42 (2000) to 121 (2006) 80 7 4884 66.90
7.Ind Tendulkar S.R 69 (1996) to 148 (2002) 80 8 4782 66.42
8.Aus Hayden M.L 23 (2001) to 102 (2004) 80 8 4744 65.89
9.Eng Hutton L 44 (1947) to 123 (1954) 80 10 4555 65.07
10.Eng Barrington K.F 27 (1961) to 106 (1966) 80 11 4462 64.67
11.Slk Sangakkara K.C 61 (2004) to 140 (2009) 80 6 4740 64.05
12.Eng Hammond W.R 15 (1928) to 94 (1936) 80 11 4416 64.00
13.Aus Border A.R 88 (1982) to 167 (1988) 80 14 4220 63.94
14.Aus Waugh S.R 77 (1993) to 156 (1998) 80 18 3963 63.92
15.Win Lara B.C 126 (2000) to 205 (2005) 80 2 4985 63.91
16.Eng Hobbs J.B 15 (1910) to 94 (1930) 80 5 4753 63.37
17.Win Chanderpaul S 123 (2004) to 202 (2009) 80 17 3947 62.65
18.Eng Sutcliffe H 1 (1924) to 80 (1934) 80 9 4425 62.32
19.Pak Inzamam-ul-Haq 100 (2000) to 179 (2006) 80 8 4470 62.08
20.Pak Javed Miandad 73 (1982) to 152 (1989) 80 5 4578 61.04
Arjun Hemnani wanted a table in which the stretch is exactly equal to 80 innings. I have created a different table and displayed the same here.
It can be seen that the exactly-80-innings average is slightly lower than that when more than 80 innings are considered since there is more flexibility in the extra innings. A below-average stretch can be more than made up with a very good sretch.
The tables look somewhat similar.
Comments (24)
August 26, 2009
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Batting
Following up on the Test batsmen peer analysis
The readers wanted some fine tuning to be done to the Test batsmen peer analysis. I have done these and have come out with the following tables. These have been presented with very few comments leaving the readers to draw their own conclusions. These tables have been created based on suggestions by Deon, Arjun and Rohan.
1.Batsman Peer comparisons - Basic table - Only against own team batsmen
>= 2000 Test runs. (Batpos no. 1 to 7)
SNo.Batsman Cty Runs Avge From- To <------Peer-----> Ratio
Inns Runs Avge
1.Bradman D.G Aus 6996 99.94 1928-1948 392 16166 41.24 2.42
2.Headley G.A Win 2190 60.83 1930-1954 197 5324 27.03 2.25
3.Flower A Zim 4794 51.55 1992-2002 548 15584 28.44 1.81
4.Taylor H.W Saf 2936 40.78 1912-1932 372 9104 24.47 1.67
5.Sutcliffe B Nzl 2727 40.10 1947-1965 366 8903 24.33 1.65
6.Nourse A.D Saf 2960 53.82 1935-1951 295 9811 33.26 1.62
7.Lara B.C Win 11953 52.89 1990-2006 1081 35420 32.77 1.61
8.Hazare V.S Ind 2192 47.65 1946-1953 250 7381 29.52 1.61
9.Hobbs J.B Eng 5410 56.95 1908-1930 467 16940 36.27 1.57
10.Turner G.M Nzl 2991 44.64 1969-1983 343 9855 28.73 1.55
11.McGlew D.J Saf 2440 42.07 1951-1962 300 8257 27.52 1.53
12.Hanif Mohammad Pak 3915 43.99 1952-1969 469 13841 29.51 1.49
13.Hutton L Eng 6971 56.67 1937-1955 609 23306 38.27 1.48
14.Mitchell B Saf 3471 48.89 1929-1949 355 11813 33.28 1.47
15.Habibul Bashar Bng 3026 30.88 2000-2008 481 10136 21.07 1.47
16.Barrington K.F Eng 6806 58.67 1955-1968 625 25062 40.10 1.46
17.Hammond W.R Eng 7249 58.46 1927-1947 642 25747 40.10 1.46
18.Gavaskar S.M Ind 10122 51.12 1971-1987 964 33940 35.21 1.45
19.EdeC Weekes Win 4455 58.62 1948-1958 388 15668 40.38 1.45
20.Crowe M.D Nzl 5444 45.37 1982-1995 629 19821 31.51 1.44
Readers can note that the players in stronger teams lose out. Bradman's ratio comes down and is even comparable to Headley's. Flower, an outstanding batsman in a weaker team, moves all the way upto third place. Bert Sutcliffe of New Zealand leapfrogs over many other players to the fifth position. It is no surprise that Ponting and Tendulkar are even out of the top-20.
To view the complete list, please click here.
2.Batsman Peer comparisons - Basic table
>= 2000 Test runs. (Batpos no. 1 to 6 & no. 7 avge gt 30.00)
SNo.Batsman Cty Runs Avge From- To (Mat) <------Peer-----> Ratio
Inns Runs Avge
1.Bradman D.G Aus 6996 99.94 1928-1948(128) 2439 93717 38.42 2.60
2.EdeC Weekes Win 4455 58.62 1948-1958(161) 3153 112350 35.63 1.65
3.Sutcliffe H Eng 4555 60.73 1924-1935( 91) 1682 62698 37.28 1.63
4.Pollock R.G Saf 2256 60.97 1963-1970(126) 2612 98346 37.65 1.62
5.Barrington K.F Eng 6806 58.67 1955-1968(234) 4685 170077 36.30 1.62
6.Walcott C.L Win 3798 56.69 1948-1960(199) 3911 137954 35.27 1.61
7.Hobbs J.B Eng 5410 56.95 1908-1930(102) 1965 70137 35.69 1.60
8.Sobers G.St.A Win 8032 57.78 1954-1974(353) 7100 258499 36.41 1.59
9.Headley G.A Win 2190 60.83 1930-1954(194) 3789 146760 38.73 1.57
10.Hammond W.R Eng 7249 58.46 1927-1947(117) 2169 82513 38.04 1.54
11.Hutton L Eng 6971 56.67 1937-1955(143) 2705 100796 37.26 1.52
12.Chappell G.S Aus 7110 53.86 1970-1984(300) 5949 219541 36.90 1.46
13.Ponting R.T Aus 11341 55.87 1995-2009(615) 12369 474630 38.37 1.46
14.Javed Miandad Pak 8832 52.57 1976-1993(460) 8975 327935 36.54 1.44
15.Tendulkar S.R Ind 12773 54.59 1989-2009(792) 15813 602604 38.11 1.43
16.Kallis J.H Saf 10277 54.66 1995-2009(599) 12027 461711 38.39 1.42
17.Mohammad Yousuf Pak 7023 54.87 1998-2009(522) 10590 411465 38.85 1.41
18.Lara B.C Win 11953 52.89 1990-2006(661) 13132 494758 37.68 1.40
19.Flower A Zim 4794 51.55 1992-2002(431) 8500 313208 36.85 1.40
20.Worrell F.M.M Win 3860 49.49 1948-1963(252) 5004 178259 35.62 1.39
This is a variant of the basic table. The comparisons are only against the top six batsmen and the seventh, if he has a Batting average greater than 30.
To view the complete list, please click here.
3.Batsman Peer comparisons - Middle order batsmen
Batsman Peer comparisons - Middle order batsmen
>= 4000 Middle order runs
No.Batsman Cty BPos Inns Runs Avge <------Peer------> Ratio
Avge Out Inns Runs Avge
1.Bradman D.G Aus 3.65 70 6996 99.94 1584 60056 37.91 2.64
2.EdeC Weekes Win 4.16 75 4399 58.65 2050 72238 35.24 1.66
3.Sobers G.St.A Win 5.09 128 7658 59.83 4672 170899 36.58 1.64
4.Barrington K.F Eng 4.07 113 6604 58.44 3074 113584 36.95 1.58
5.Hammond W.R Eng 3.70 120 6934 57.78 1393 52840 37.93 1.52
6.Chappell G.S Aus 4.04 132 7110 53.86 3911 143805 36.77 1.46
7.Javed Miandad Pak 4.24 167 8789 52.63 5893 218066 37.00 1.42
8.Ponting R.T Aus 3.84 203 11341 55.87 8118 320424 39.47 1.42
9.Compton D.C.S Eng 4.34 114 5805 50.92 2195 79104 36.04 1.41
10.Tendulkar S.R Ind 4.28 233 12758 54.76 10370 404928 39.05 1.40
11.Kallis J.H Saf 3.80 188 10277 54.66 7889 311872 39.53 1.38
12.Lara B.C Win 3.78 223 11828 53.04 8593 331446 38.57 1.38
13.May P.B.H Eng 3.66 96 4525 47.14 2223 76254 34.30 1.37
14.Sangakkara K.C Slk 3.09 123 6899 56.09 5594 229171 40.97 1.37
15.Dravid R Ind 3.27 191 10334 54.10 7788 308540 39.62 1.37
16.Waugh S.R Aus 5.42 211 10910 51.71 8293 314060 37.87 1.37
17.Mohammad Yousuf Pak 4.71 128 7023 54.87 6963 279859 40.19 1.37
18.Border A.R Aus 4.70 220 11116 50.53 5257 195282 37.15 1.36
19.Flower A Zim 5.03 93 4786 51.46 5568 211502 37.99 1.35
20.Harvey R.N Aus 3.65 126 6147 48.79 3131 112807 36.03 1.35
This is again a variant of the basic table. The comparisons are only against the top six batsmen and the seventh, if he has a Batting average greater than 30. Note that these peer average figures are now slightly higher since the P.A.Patels and Ramdins have been left out.
To view the complete list, please click here.
4.Batsman Peer comparisons - Basic table
Between 1000 and 2000 Test runs.
SNo.Batsman Cty Runs Avge From- To (Mat) <------Peer----->Ratio
Inns Runs Avge
1.Shrewsbury A Eng 1277 35.47 1882-1893( 37) 819 17249 21.06 1.68
2.Paynter E Eng 1540 59.23 1931-1939( 63) 1338 48476 36.23 1.63
3.Barnes S.G Aus 1072 63.06 1938-1948( 38) 782 31858 40.74 1.55
4.Kambli V.G Ind 1084 54.20 1993-1995(100) 2153 76700 35.62 1.52
5.Davis C.A Win 1301 54.21 1968-1973( 79) 1775 64075 36.10 1.50
6.Mead C.P Eng 1185 49.38 1911-1928( 61) 1276 42819 33.56 1.47
7.Ryder J Aus 1394 51.63 1920-1929( 46) 965 35621 36.91 1.40
8.Grace W.G Eng 1098 32.29 1880-1899( 57) 1314 31139 23.70 1.36
9.Faulkner G.A Saf 1754 40.79 1906-1924( 67) 1506 46487 30.87 1.32
10.Bland K.C Saf 1669 49.09 1961-1966( 97) 2132 79264 37.18 1.32
11.Jardine D.R Eng 1296 48.00 1928-1934( 60) 1260 46007 36.51 1.31
12.Reid J.F Nzl 1296 46.29 1979-1986(193) 4080 145746 35.72 1.30
13.Rae A.F Win 1016 46.18 1948-1953( 64) 1387 50295 36.26 1.27
14.Goodwin M.W Zim 1414 42.85 1998-2000(105) 2313 77858 33.66 1.27
15.Hayward T.W Eng 1999 34.47 1896-1909( 56) 1279 34904 27.29 1.26
16.Duff R.A Aus 1317 35.59 1902-1905( 22) 486 13753 28.30 1.26
17.Pullar G Eng 1974 43.87 1959-1963( 63) 1378 49027 35.58 1.23
18.MacLaren A.C Eng 1931 33.88 1894-1909( 64) 1478 40936 27.70 1.22
19.Brown W.A Aus 1592 46.82 1934-1948( 68) 1446 55587 38.44 1.22
20.Houghton D.L Zim 1465 43.09 1992-1997(183) 3981 141210 35.47 1.21
This table shows the batsmen who have scored between 1000 and 2000 runs. Thus many late order batsmen are included.
To view the complete list, please click here.
5.Maximum Peer ratio reached by a batsman
Only batsmen who have played in over 50 Tests considered
Only after 50 Tests are crossed
Figures shown are at the beginning of concerned Test
SNo.Cty Batsman Test Test BatAvg Peer Ratio
No Avge
1.Aus Bradman D.G 303 52 101.39 30.65 3.31
2.Eng Hobbs J.B 176 51 61.27 27.17 2.25
3.Win Sobers G.St.A 642 66 63.77 29.12 2.19
4.Eng Hammond W.R 257 60 61.61 29.23 2.11
5.Eng Sutcliffe H 234 50 62.27 30.12 2.07
6.Eng Barrington K.F 629 76 60.66 29.39 2.06
7.Pak Javed Miandad 966 56 58.56 28.88 2.03
8.Eng Hutton L 387 71 61.71 30.70 2.01
9.Win Richards I.V.A 956 52 58.78 29.20 2.01
10.Ind Tendulkar S.R 1591 91 58.87 29.42 2.00
11.Aus Hayden M.L 1688 52 58.98 29.99 1.97
12.Aus Ponting R.T 1821 108 59.96 30.54 1.96
13.Ind Dravid R 1743 89 58.45 30.25 1.93
14.Zim Flower A 1581 57 56.60 29.26 1.93
15.Aus Gilchrist A.C 1678 50 58.24 30.52 1.91
16.Ind Gavaskar S.M 871 62 57.27 30.15 1.90
17.Saf Kallis J.H 1856 112 58.20 30.62 1.90
18.Aus Harvey R.N 447 50 54.32 28.57 1.90
19.Aus Chappell G.S 913 70 55.58 29.65 1.87
20.Eng May P.B.H 476 59 49.76 27.09 1.84
Bradman reached his maximum ratio at the beginning of his last Test. Only the top-10 have crossed 2.00. Note the quality of the top-10.
To view the complete list, please click here.
6.Minimum Peer ratio reached by a batsman
Only batsmen who have played in over 50 Tests considered
Only after 50 Tests are crossed
Figures shown are at the beginning of concerned Test
SNo.Cty Batsman Test Test BatAvg Peer Ratio
No Avge
1.Saf Pollock S.M 1528 50 27.15 28.84 0.94
2.Bng Habibul Bashar 1864 50 31.38 32.21 0.97
3.Ind Kapil Dev N 1032 72 29.75 30.33 0.98
4.Pak Imran Khan 973 50 29.88 30.20 0.99
5.Eng Knott A.P.E 734 53 30.84 30.91 1.00
6.Eng Flintoff A 1922 76 31.69 31.55 1.00
7.Win Hooper C.L 1303 52 30.64 30.20 1.01
8.Pak Rameez Raja 1313 53 30.93 30.30 1.02
9.Nzl Burgess M.G 891 50 30.88 30.07 1.03
10.Eng Lamb A.J 1099 53 32.31 31.15 1.04
11.Aus Wood G.M 1110 58 31.39 29.80 1.05
12.Win Dujon P.J.L 1175 81 32.51 31.01 1.05
13.Saf Waite J.H.B 578 50 30.75 28.99 1.06
14.Eng Smith M.J.K 700 50 32.08 30.33 1.06
15.Nzl Cairns C.L 1689 58 32.13 30.17 1.06
16.Nzl Wright J.G 1068 50 32.13 29.96 1.07
17.Nzl Congdon B.E 769 51 33.07 31.00 1.07
18.Eng Rhodes W 193 58 29.94 27.72 1.08
19.Eng Butcher M.A 1636 50 31.94 29.56 1.08
20.Ind Shastri R.J 1150 72 33.88 30.95 1.09
Only four batsmen have ever been at a peer ratio value of below 1.00. The only top flight batsmen in the top-10 minimum peer ratio list are Hooper, Rameez, Burgess and Lamb.
To view the complete list, please click here.
7.Comparison between maximum and minimum peer ratios reached
Only batsmen who have played in over 50 Tests considered
Only after 50 Tests are crossed
Max-Min is the ratio of Maximum to Minmum
Spread is the spread on either side of the mean
Figures shown are at the beginning of concerned Test
SNo Cty Batsman BatAvg Peer Ratio BatAvg Peer Ratio Max Spread
Avge Max Avge Min -Min
1.Aus Waugh S.R 51.87 29.37 1.77 35.76 30.16 1.19 1.49 19.6%
2.Saf Kallis J.H 58.20 30.62 1.90 41.00 28.84 1.42 1.34 14.5%
3.Aus Ponting R.T 59.96 30.54 1.96 43.71 29.33 1.49 1.32 13.6%
4.Slk de Silva P.A 43.89 29.65 1.48 34.06 30.16 1.13 1.31 13.4%
5.Pak Imran Khan 38.23 30.41 1.26 29.88 30.20 0.99 1.27 12.0%
6.Win Hooper C.L 37.67 29.73 1.27 30.64 30.20 1.01 1.26 11.4%
7.Aus Gilchrist A.C 58.24 30.52 1.91 47.89 31.39 1.52 1.26 11.4%
8.Saf Pollock S.M 34.90 29.91 1.17 27.15 28.84 0.94 1.24 10.9%
9.Pak Inzamam-ul-Haq 51.79 30.36 1.71 40.71 29.41 1.38 1.24 10.7%
10.Ind Vengsarkar D.B 46.21 29.61 1.56 37.41 29.61 1.26 1.24 10.6%
11.Slk Sangakkara K.C 57.00 31.80 1.79 46.31 31.84 1.45 1.23 10.5%
12.Pak Saleem Malik 46.97 30.64 1.53 37.86 30.65 1.24 1.23 10.5%
13.Eng Gooch G.A 44.75 30.00 1.49 36.53 30.14 1.21 1.23 10.4%
14.Aus Boon D.C 46.83 30.33 1.54 39.07 30.71 1.27 1.21 9.6%
15.Pak Mohammad Yousuf 56.65 30.77 1.84 46.66 30.64 1.52 1.21 9.5%
16.Win Dujon P.J.L 38.91 30.70 1.27 32.51 31.01 1.05 1.21 9.5%
17.Win Chanderpaul S 49.71 30.66 1.62 39.17 29.31 1.34 1.21 9.5%
18.Saf Gibbs H.H 49.46 30.14 1.64 42.05 30.81 1.36 1.21 9.3%
19.Ind Tendulkar S.R 58.87 29.42 2.00 49.26 29.69 1.66 1.20 9.3%
20.Win Richards I.V.A 58.78 29.20 2.01 49.93 29.96 1.67 1.20 9.2%
This is a very revealing maximum / minimum comparison list. A high value in the last two columns indicates extreme average values. A value of over 10% indicates clearly that there is a wide gap between segments of career. The last column is a spread on either side of the mean between maximum and minimum. Steve Waugh has a spread of nearly 20%. Kallis and Ponting are also very high in the list. Lara is somewhere in the middle with a spread of 5% and is amongst the lowest amongst batsmen who have played a high number of Tests. Too much should not be read at the low values of Sutcliffe and Bradman since both of them have played just over 50 Tests.
To view the complete list, please click here.
Jeff's follow-up analysis (with Jeff's commentary)
Following on from my comment about weighting the peer averages by the
innings played against each team by each player, I've done this now for
the top 20 players in the original list (using Statsguru which took me
quite a long time !)
I thought the readers would be interested in the results. There were no great differences doing this, but a couple of players ratios moved a fair bit.
Headley was the main beneficiary, moving up from number 7 to number 2 -
he played a fair bigger proportion of his innings against strong England
teams than his peers did and so his average is more impressive than it
first appears. Lara also moves up, as do a couple of others. Tendulkar moves up a place.
Ponting suffers through this because (as said earlier) he didn't have to
face his own team and Hammond also falls a bit because he played a lot
of times against a weak South Africa.
Flower is perhaps the most surprising casualty - you might expect him to
rise as he didn't have the chance to score against Zimbabwe like his
peers did. However, it seems that he only played only one match against
Australia in his entire career, and this has cost him.
Jeff's analysis summary
New Prev Diff Ananth Jeff
1. 1. <> Bradman D.G Aus 3.27 3.32
2. 7. +5 Headley G.A Win 1.97 2.10
3. 2. -1 EdeC Weekes Win 2.04 2.07
4. 5. +1 Walcott C.L Win 2.00 2.05
5. 4. -1 Pollock R.G Saf 2.00 1.99
6. 3. -3 Sutcliffe H Eng 2.02 1.98
7. 9. -2 Sobers G.St.A Win 1.95 1.97
8. 6. -2 Barrington K.F Eng 2.00 1.97
9. 8. -1 Hobbs J.B Eng 1.96 1.95
10. 11. +1 Hutton L Eng 1.90 1.92
11. 10. -1 Hammond W.R Eng 1.94 1.88
12. 13. +1 Chappell G.S Aus 1.79 1.81
13. 14. +1 Tendulkar S.R Ind 1.78 1.80
14. 19. +5 Lara B.C Win 1.75 1.80
15. 12. -3 Ponting R.T Aus 1.81 1.79
16. 15. -1 Kallis J.H Saf 1.77 1.76
17. 17. <> MohammadYousuf Pak 1.76 1.74
18. 16. -2 Javed Miandad Pak 1.76 1.71
19. 18. -1 Flower A Zim 1.75 1.69
20. 20. <> Sangakkara K.C Slk 1.73 1.63
Many thanks to Jeff. I am very happy to see someone who does not have access to database and supporting programs like me doing this, so to say, by long hand. May his tribe flourish.
Arjun Hemnani has asked for a Maximum/Minimum table based on the top-6/7 batsmen only. I have completed that work and have uploaded the tables to my site. It can be downloaded by clicking on the following links.
http://www.thirdslip.com/misc/peermax1.txt
http://www.thirdslip.com/misc/peermin1.txt
Comments (35)
August 17, 2009
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Batting
Comparing Test batsmen with their peers
|
|
|
Don Bradman's average was 3.27 times that of his peers
© Getty Images
|
| I have done a lot of cricket analysis work over the past 20+ years. I love doing all this work. However once a while a new idea comes across which I consider as a watershed moment in my analytic efforts. The idea of comparing a player with peer players (the base idea of which was provided by Abdulla) is one such spark. I am very excited about this since it is one of the truest measures of a players' capabilities. This is a follow-up article to the one on Test bowlers.
The idea is to compare a player's performances with his peers. The comparison with one's own team is a limited step and is quite useful. However the real comparison is with all the peer players since it takes perfect care of the vexed question of a player playing in a very strong team. I had done this in a limited way for ODI Strike Rates. Now I have extended this to Test Players in a much more extended manner as explained below.
1. For each player, create a match subset of their career limits, in other words from their first to last Tests. For Tendulkar it is 1127(1989) to 1918(2009), a subset of 792 Tests, the longest span for any player.
2. Sum the three main data elements, Innings, Not Outs, and Runs Scored for all the players for these matches. The Batting Average is used for comparison since this is the most accepted of all measures.
3. Subtract the player's own career figures from the total for the match subset and post these figures as a database segment. Even though the players' own numbers are quite low compared to the match subsets (Tendulkar 12773 out of 749558 runs) and the impact of this subtraction is minimal, it is done to get an exact peer segment.
4. For batsmen, first the base table is created. This table compares the batsman's bating average with the composite average of all batsmen during his playing span. This covers all batsmen since separate comparisons are done for specialized batting positions such as Opening, Middle order and Late order.
I have not done a separation by period. This is a pure peer comparison, cutting across all divisions.
First let us look at the basic Batsman table.
1. Batsman Peer comparisons - Basic table
>= 2000 Test runs
No.Batsman Cty Runs Avge From- To (Mat) <------Peer-----> Ratio
Inns Runs Avge
1.Bradman D.G Aus 6996 99.94 1928-1948(128) 3722 113802 30.58 3.27
2.EdeC Weekes Win 4455 58.62 1948-1958(161) 4829 138734 28.73 2.04
3.Sutcliffe H Eng 4555 60.73 1924-1935( 91) 2600 78032 30.01 2.02
4.Pollock R.G Saf 2256 60.97 1963-1970(126) 3900 118766 30.45 2.00
5.Walcott C.L Win 3798 56.69 1948-1960(199) 5982 169812 28.39 2.00
6.Barrington K.F Eng 6806 58.67 1955-1968(234) 7072 207904 29.40 2.00
7.Headley G.A Win 2190 60.83 1930-1954(194) 5745 177352 30.87 1.97
8.Hobbs J.B Eng 5410 56.95 1908-1930(102) 3069 88958 28.99 1.96
9.Sobers G.St.A Win 8032 57.78 1954-1974(353) 10721 317459 29.61 1.95
10.Hammond W.R Eng 7249 58.46 1927-1947(117) 3344 101007 30.21 1.94
11.Hutton L Eng 6971 56.67 1937-1955(143) 4149 123572 29.78 1.90
12.Ponting R.T Aus 11267 56.05 1995-2009(612) 18664 577309 30.93 1.81
13.Chappell G.S Aus 7110 53.86 1970-1984(300) 8979 270067 30.08 1.79
14.Tendulkar S.R Ind 12773 54.59 1989-2009(792) 24004 736785 30.69 1.78
15.Kallis J.H Saf 10277 54.66 1995-2009(599) 18270 564569 30.90 1.77
16.Javed Miandad Pak 8832 52.57 1976-1993(460) 13470 401608 29.81 1.76
17.Mohammad Yousuf Pak 7023 54.87 1998-2009(522) 16015 500382 31.24 1.76
18.Flower A Zim 4794 51.55 1992-2002(431) 13040 384939 29.52 1.75
19.Lara B.C Win 11953 52.89 1990-2006(661) 20051 607578 30.30 1.75
20.Sangakkara K.C Slk 7095 55.43 2000-2009(421) 12848 411708 32.04 1.73
Even though the batsman peer span is shown in years, the actual computations are done for the exact match of debut onwards. The years make more sense while reading the table. The "inns" value shown on these tables is after subtracting the Not outs.
No surprise at the first placed batsmen. It would have been a shock if it had been anyone else. What is surprising is the ratio of Bradman. An amazing 3.27. Weekes is the first among 9 equals who have ratios from 1.94 to 2.04. These 10 batsmen are among the best ever, all 10 having played their game before 1970.
The batsman with the highest ratio among the contemporary players is Ponting, with a ratio of 1.81, followed by Tendulkar with 1.78 and the unheralded Kallis with 1.77. This, despite the commonly percieved notions of weaker teams, and hence cheaper runs. Note the high placement of Andy Flower.
It should be noted that the peer averages are comparable across ages, at either side of 30. Mohommad Yousuf's peer average is the highest at 31.24. His span is 1998-2009. As also Kallis'. The lowest Peer average numbers are for the early 1950s.
To view the complete list, please click here.
Now we come to the comparison tables for specialized batting positions. These are determined by isolating the runs scored by batsmen in these specialized positions only and then comparing with runs scored in these positions by other batsmen. Opening is determined by the positions 1-2, Middle order by positions 3-7 and Late order by positions 8-11. The only question mark could be with no.7. However when you realize that top-quality batsmen such as Gilchrist, Healy, Knott, Marsh, Imran, Kapil, Botham, S Pollock, Flintoff, Boucher et al have scored over 25,000 Test runs amongst them at no.7 position, it has to belong to the Middle order classification.
First let us look at the Opening position. This time I have also shown the Batting Position Average value. This is the average of the batting position the batsman has batted in, with the opening positions being considered as no.2. Thus a value of 2.00 means that the batsman has batted in the opening positions only.
2. Batsman Peer comparisons - Opening batsmen
>= 2500 opening runs
No.Batsman Cty BPos Inns Runs Avge <------Peer------> Ratio
Avge Out Inns Runs Avge
1.Sutcliffe H Eng 2.05 74 4522 61.11 507 18443 36.38 1.68
2.Hobbs J.B Eng 2.15 91 5130 56.37 591 21419 36.24 1.56
3.Hutton L Eng 2.18 119 6721 56.48 846 30900 36.52 1.55
4.Simpson R.B Aus 3.27 66 3664 55.52 2578 94513 36.66 1.51
5.Amiss D.L Eng 2.50 61 3276 53.70 1318 49067 37.23 1.44
6.Hayden M.L Aus 2.00 170 8626 50.74 4339 153809 35.45 1.43
7.Gavaskar S.M Ind 2.21 191 9607 50.30 2439 86489 35.46 1.42
8.Saeed Anwar Pak 2.11 84 3957 47.11 2677 90241 33.71 1.40
9.Smith G.C Saf 2.21 118 6108 51.76 2115 78959 37.33 1.39
10.Sehwag V Ind 2.36 105 5378 51.22 2360 88396 37.46 1.37
11.Langer J.L Aus 2.42 106 5112 48.23 4127 146726 35.55 1.36
12.Gibbs H.H Saf 2.64 111 5242 47.23 3483 124196 35.66 1.32
13.Boycott G Eng 2.02 168 8091 48.16 2277 82894 36.40 1.32
14.Lawry W.M Aus 2.00 111 5234 47.15 1086 39476 36.35 1.30
15.Slater M.J Aus 2.00 124 5312 42.84 2154 71763 33.32 1.29
16.Greenidge C.G Win 2.03 166 7488 45.11 2684 94699 35.28 1.28
17.Boon D.C Aus 2.85 58 2614 45.07 2131 75453 35.41 1.27
18.Hunte C.C Win 2.00 72 3245 45.07 1082 38410 35.50 1.27
19.Stewart A.J Eng 3.91 75 3348 44.64 3464 122407 35.34 1.26
20.Vaughan M.P Eng 2.86 68 3093 45.49 2803 101414 36.18 1.26
The three great English openers lead the table. Then Simpson and another top quality English opener, Amiss, although Amiss' contemporary openers posted a high average. Hayden and Gavaskar clock in next despite the somewhat lower peer averages. It is also an indicator that more often than not Gavaskar waged a lone battle. The next three positions are held by openers from the current and immediately precding era.
Alec Stewart is one of the very few batsmen who has scored enough runs in both opening and middle order positions to qualify for both lists. His opening average is considerably better and he is in the 19th position. Readers should not forget that the runs in the table are the runs scored in the opening positions only.
To view the complete list, please click here.
3. Batsman Peer comparisons - Middle order batsmen
>= 4000 middle order runs
No.Batsman Cty BPos Inns Runs Avge <------Peer------> Ratio
Avge Out Inns Runs Avge
1.Bradman D.G Aus 3.65 70 6996 99.94 1841 64844 35.22 2.84
2.EdeC Weekes Win 4.16 75 4399 58.65 2388 79001 33.08 1.77
3.Sobers G.St.A Win 5.09 128 7658 59.83 5363 185285 34.55 1.73
4.Barrington K.F Eng 4.07 113 6604 58.44 3512 122194 34.79 1.68
5.Hammond W.R Eng 3.70 120 6934 57.78 1628 57387 35.25 1.64
6.Chappell G.S Aus 4.04 132 7110 53.86 4450 156700 35.21 1.53
7.Compton D.C.S Eng 4.34 114 5805 50.92 2569 86396 33.63 1.51
8.Ponting R.T Aus 3.85 201 11267 56.05 9177 344014 37.49 1.50
9.Javed Miandad Pak 4.24 167 8789 52.63 6639 234403 35.31 1.49
10.Tendulkar S.R Ind 4.28 233 12758 54.76 11806 437913 37.09 1.48
11.May P.B.H Eng 3.66 96 4525 47.14 2593 83403 32.16 1.47
12.Kallis J.H Saf 3.80 188 10277 54.66 8981 336648 37.48 1.46
13.Sangakkara K.C Slk 3.09 121 6845 56.57 6328 246703 38.99 1.45
14.Harvey R.N Aus 3.65 126 6147 48.79 3651 122850 33.65 1.45
15.Lara B.C Win 3.78 223 11828 53.04 9833 359979 36.61 1.45
16.Dravid R Ind 3.27 191 10334 54.10 8859 332724 37.56 1.44
17.Mohammad Yousuf Pak 4.71 128 7023 54.87 7884 300580 38.13 1.44
18.Waugh S.R Aus 5.42 211 10910 51.71 9473 341102 36.01 1.44
19.Flower A Zim 5.03 93 4786 51.46 6408 230728 36.01 1.43
20.Border A.R Aus 4.70 220 11116 50.53 5914 209290 35.39 1.43
The middle order table shows no surprises. Again Mohammad Yousuf's peer batsmen batting average is quite high, only exceeded by Sangakkara's peer average. The early 50s show the lowest middle order batsman averages.
To view the complete list, please click here.
4. Batsman Peer comparisons - Late order batsmen
( >=500 late order runs and BPos avge >8.0)
No.Batsman Cty BPos Inns Runs Avge <------Peer------> Ratio
Avge Out Inns Runs Avge
1.Johnson M.G Aus 9.03 22 762 34.64 695 11199 16.11 2.15
2.Strang P.A Zim 8.17 25 737 29.48 2546 36143 14.20 2.08
3.Vettori D.L Nzl 8.34 98 2959 30.19 4851 73245 15.10 2.00
4.Symcox P.L Saf 8.44 23 668 29.04 1781 25879 14.53 2.00
5.Broad S.C.J Eng 8.03 20 628 31.40 635 10389 16.36 1.92
6.Reiffel P.R Aus 8.40 34 936 27.53 1855 26951 14.53 1.89
7.Blignaut A.M Zim 8.31 30 835 27.83 1944 29804 15.33 1.82
8.More K.S Ind 8.33 44 1180 26.82 1458 22140 15.19 1.77
9.Smith I.D.S Nzl 8.34 60 1667 27.78 2418 38154 15.78 1.76
10.Boje N Saf 8.10 42 1125 26.79 2843 43787 15.40 1.74
11.O'Keeffe K.J Aus 8.06 23 606 26.35 1076 16462 15.30 1.72
12.Nash D.J Nzl 8.82 30 729 24.30 3147 44928 14.28 1.70
13.Vaas WPUJC Slk 8.09 109 2783 25.53 5557 83365 15.00 1.70
14.Chandana U.D.U Slk 8.29 21 519 24.71 2567 38534 15.01 1.65
15.Verity H Eng 8.52 28 620 22.14 506 7101 14.03 1.58
16.Ghavri K.D Ind 8.53 41 900 21.95 1281 18099 14.13 1.55
17.Wasim Akram Pak 8.14 97 2160 22.27 4784 70503 14.74 1.51
18.Madan Lal S Ind 8.18 30 669 22.30 2577 38789 15.05 1.48
19.Wardle J.H Eng 8.10 26 568 21.85 1197 18002 15.04 1.45
20.Allen D.A Eng 8.63 34 805 23.68 973 16025 16.47 1.44
This is a very interesting table. The additional qualification of Batting position average ensures that only genuine late order batsmen are compared. Mitchell Johnson has recently started batting at no.8. Hence his entry into this table. Soon he will go out of the table as he builds more innings at no.8 and possibly no.7.
Johnson is on top with a ratio of 2.15. The others are good quality late order batsmen. Anyone who has a ratio of greater than 1.4 should be classified as a top quality late order batsman.
To view the complete list, please please click here.
If readers want different cut-offs for the tables, they are welcome to suggest the same.
Since the tables cover, with almost no exception, all the top batsmen of the world with variable career spans, I have given below the extreme peer average values in various classifications. The base table shows maximum spread, 10.7% on either side of 28.65, since it includes all batsmen, batting at 1-11. The Opening batsmen table has a spread of 7.4% on either side of 33.78. The Middle order table has a spread of 9.3% on either side of 32.69.
Base table (All batsmen)
Low: 24.58 1890-1912 S.E.Gregory
High: 32.71 2005-1009 Mike Hussey
Opening batsmen
Low: 33.24 1950s C.C.Mcdonald
High: 38.47 1970s Fredericks
Middle order batsmen
Low: 32.16 1951-1961 Peter May
High: 39.34 2005-2009 Kevin Pietersen
Late order batsmen
Low: 14.03 1930s Verity
High: 16.47 1960s D Allen
Comments (69)
July 13, 2009
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Batting
A follow-up to ODI strike rates
The earlier article uncovered a measure which could stand firm across decades, across different types of pitches/conditions and across different types of bowling skills and strategies. There were not many comments. However there were two comments which suggested enhancing the analysis by expanding the scope of coverage. These two were very sound and I decided to do a follow-up immediately before coming out the eagerly-awaited Test Bowler Analysis next week.
First a recap. The initial analysis compared the Batsman career strike rate with the rest of the team's strike rate, in the matches played by the batsman. The concerned table is given below.
Player career strike rates compared to own team strike rates
SNo Batsman Cty Mat Runs Balls S/R OBRuns OBBalls S/R BSRF
1.Shahid Afridi Pak 276 5642 5083 1.110 49132 65461 0.751 147.9%
2.Kapil Dev N Ind 225 3783 3979 0.951 32898 49298 0.667 142.5%
3.Powell R.L Win 108 2085 2157 0.967 17332 24678 0.702 137.6%
4.Richards I.V.A Win 187 6721 7451 0.902 25859 38757 0.667 135.2%
5.Sehwag V Ind 205 6592 6472 1.019 37006 46569 0.795 128.2%
6.Wasim Akram Pak 356 3717 4224 0.880 51127 73789 0.693 127.0%
7.Jayasuriya S.T Slk 431 13151 14443 0.911 70806 97706 0.725 125.6%
8.Klusener L Saf 171 3576 3978 0.899 26076 35034 0.744 120.8%
9.Flintoff A Eng 141 3393 3819 0.888 20940 28419 0.737 120.6%
10.Gilchrist A.C Aus 287 9619 9923 0.969 52125 64341 0.810 119.7%
11.Tikolo S.O Ken 117 3213 4214 0.762 16758 26291 0.637 119.6%
12.Cairns C.L Nzl 215 4950 5879 0.842 33299 47167 0.706 119.3%
13.Zaheer Abbas Pak 62 2572 3216 0.800 8669 12863 0.674 118.7%
14.Chappell G.S Aus 74 2331 3088 0.755 10480 16449 0.637 118.5%
15.de Silva P.A Slk 308 9284 11497 0.808 46393 67537 0.687 117.6%
16.Gower D.I Eng 114 3170 4222 0.751 17751 27765 0.639 117.4%
17.McCullum B.B Nzl 153 2984 3353 0.890 22785 29918 0.762 116.9%
18.Botham I.T Eng 116 2113 2816 0.750 17981 27866 0.645 116.3%
19.Pollock S.M Saf 303 3519 4059 0.867 40335 54126 0.745 116.3%
20.Pietersen K.P Eng 92 3127 3576 0.874 14069 18585 0.757 115.5%
...
77.Inzamam-ul-Haq Pak 378 11739 15827 0.742 60323 81270 0.742 100.0%
...
142.Taylor M.A Aus 113 3514 5867 0.599 18912 25762 0.734 81.6%
143.Yasir Hameed Pak 56 2028 3029 0.670 10522 12777 0.824 81.3%
144.Tillakaratne H.P Slk 200 3789 6544 0.579 28664 39951 0.717 80.7%
145.Mudassar Nazar Pak 122 2653 5067 0.524 17685 25900 0.683 76.7%
146.Marsh G.R Aus 117 4357 7721 0.564 18347 24649 0.744 75.8%
To view the complete list, please click here.
There were two excellent suggestions. The more far-reaching and top-drawer suggestion came from Abdulla who suggested that I compare the player strike rates with the strike rates applicable for all the players during the players' career. A simple suggestion. However this was also quite difficult to develop but has far-reaching implications in that it allows us to look at a players' career in true perspective, viz., in relation to his exact peers.
I have built a Player career span segment of the database. The great thing is that such comparisons can now be made not just on strike rates but on other relevant factors such as Batting and Bowling averages, Strike Rates, Bowling accuracy, Runs per match et al. My sincere thanks to Abdulla for opening the door on this fascinating treasure-trove.
In both cases I have taken care that the players' own performances and team extras are excluded from the Match and Player career span figures (for want of a better term. Readers are invited to offer their suggestions for this measure.)
Player career strike rates compared to Player career span strike rates
SNo Batsman Cty St/Rt <---Player Career Span---> Ratio
Mats Runs Balls St/Rt
1.Shahid Afridi Pak 1.110 1727 675319 905740 0.746 148.9%
2.Kapil Dev N Ind 0.951 884 315912 472334 0.669 142.1%
3.Sehwag V Ind 1.019 1399 542088 726324 0.746 136.5%
4.Richards I.V.A Win 0.902 657 231329 347757 0.665 135.6%
5.Powell R.L Win 0.967 821 317559 432398 0.734 131.6%
6.Gilchrist A.C Aus 0.969 1559 606126 816737 0.742 130.6%
7.Jayasuriya S.T Slk 0.911 2223 852640 1166792 0.731 124.6%
8.Wasim Akram Pak 0.880 1704 648988 913613 0.710 123.9%
9.Symonds A Aus 0.924 1479 576233 770030 0.748 123.5%
10.Zaheer Abbas Pak 0.800 325 111928 172049 0.651 122.9%
11.Klusener L Saf 0.899 1136 440634 601710 0.732 122.8%
12.Flintoff A Eng 0.888 1405 547613 731734 0.748 118.7%
13.Yuvraj Singh Ind 0.893 1226 477541 630604 0.757 117.9%
14.Dhoni M.S Ind 0.909 657 258316 334702 0.772 117.8%
15.Chappell G.S Aus 0.755 196 66408 103226 0.643 117.3%
16.Tendulkar S.R Ind 0.856 2231 851567 1164382 0.731 117.1%
17.McCullum B.B Nzl 0.890 1040 406431 534609 0.760 117.1%
18.Pollock S.M Saf 0.867 1634 642511 863944 0.744 116.6%
19.Cairns C.L Nzl 0.842 1644 634542 875659 0.725 116.2%
20.de Silva P.A Slk 0.808 1735 653214 921125 0.709 113.9%
...
83.Samuels M.N Win 0.756 1071 422058 558413 0.756 100.1%
84.Javed Miandad Pak 0.672 1053 377675 559175 0.675 99.5%
...
142.Wessels K.C Saf 0.556 770 276221 408463 0.676 82.2%
143.Habibul Bashar Bng 0.605 1590 625424 843319 0.742 81.5%
144.Campbell S.L Win 0.590 743 291157 400299 0.727 81.2%
145.Tillakaratne H.P Slk 0.579 1598 612869 857466 0.715 81.0%
146.Mudassar Nazar Pak 0.524 514 182279 271972 0.670 78.1%
To view the complete list, please click here.
This is truly the measure of greatness. I would appreciate if readers understand that this only compares the Strike Rates and not bring in the Averages into the discussion. That will be the subject of another analysis.
Shahid Afridi truly stands tall in terms of his strike rate comparison with his peers. During his career of 276 matches, a total of 1727 matches were played. The average strike rate, sans Afridi, during these 1727 matches, is an impressive .746 and Afridi outscores his peers at an astounding 148.9%. An underrated player, even by his own countrymen at times, he stands supreme.
Kapil Dev outscored his peers by a wide margin of 42.1% indicating how far ahead he was, at least as far as strike rates are concerned. Then comes Sehwag who has an impressive 36.5% and the incomparable Richards who also has a very good lead over his peers of 35.6%. Ricardo Powell completes the top 5 clocking in at 31.6%.
The Top-10 is rounded by Gilchrist, Jayasuriya, Wasim Akram. Symonds and Zaheer Abbas. All great strikers of the ball. The surprise is the position of Zaheer Abbas. He scored at 22.9% over his peers, indicating his immense contributions during a low scoring period.
There is a significant change so far as Tendulkar is concerned. He outscored his team-mates by 13.9%. Hoever he has outscored his peers, over 431 matches in a span of 2231 matches by an impressive 17.1%.
Samuels and Miandad have almost perfectly matches their peer strike rates. The rear of the table is populated by players who were not known for their striking ability.
The second one, made by Karthik, suggested that I expanded the scope a little bit by comparing with the strike rates applicable for the rest of the match rather than the rest of the innings. This makes a lot of sense since it adjusts for widely varying performances in the same match. My thanks to Karthik.
Player career strike rates compared to Match strike rates
SNo Batsman Cty St/Rt <---Match figures---> Ratio
Runs Balls St/Rt
1.Shahid Afridi Pak 1.110 99136 133940 0.740 150.0%
2.Richards I.V.A Win 0.902 55082 85923 0.641 140.7%
3.Kapil Dev N Ind 0.951 69813 102464 0.681 139.5%
4.Powell R.L Win 0.967 36314 50521 0.719 134.5%
5.Sehwag V Ind 1.019 78773 99466 0.792 128.6%
6.Gilchrist A.C Aus 0.969 106771 139873 0.763 127.0%
7.Wasim Akram Pak 0.880 102549 147528 0.695 126.6%
8.Jayasuriya S.T Slk 0.911 153293 211317 0.725 125.5%
9.Klusener L Saf 0.899 53273 72429 0.736 122.2%
10.Symonds A Aus 0.924 63755 82415 0.774 119.5%
...
77.Gambhir G Ind 0.839 30372 36203 0.839 100.0%
...
144.Marsh G.R Aus 0.564 39756 56599 0.702 80.3%
145.Tillakaratne H.P Slk 0.579 63736 86846 0.734 78.9%
146.Mudassar Nazar Pak 0.524 37385 55308 0.676 77.5%
To view the complete list, please click here.
There is not much of a difference in the ratios when we include the other team's strike rates indicating that the top players outperform their own team mates and match peers by similar margins.
Powell moves down to fourth spot moving Kail Dev and Richards up. Gilchrist moves up substantially indicating that his team mates scored raather freely as compared to his match peers. Gambhir has matched his team mates and match peers exactly. No major change is there at the end except that Marsh moves off the bottom which is now occupied by Mudassar Nazar.
Comments (18)
July 7, 2009
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Batting
ODI Strike Rates - a fresh look (and a preview of Test Bowler Analysis)
|
|
|
Shahid Afridi outscores his team-mates by more than 37%
© Getty Images
|
| Since I need some time to complete the Test Bowler Analysis, I have come out with an article on ODI Strike Rates. What started as an interim article has turned out to be a very interesting one.
Whenever we compare measures across years we always have problems since the relevant period strategies, pitch/ground conditions, quality of bowling (or batting), prevailing laws etc vary significantly. Shahid Afridi's 100+% strike rate cannot be blindly compared to Viv Richards' sub-90 strike rate since everything has changed over the years.
I have created a new factor comparing the Batsman career strike rate with the rest of the team's strike rate, in the matches played by the batsman. The great thing with this measure is that this stands firm across decades, across different types of pitches/conditions and across different types of bowling skills and strategies.
If the average scoring rate of the period was way below currently acceptable values, no problem, this condition applies to all the players in that match. Was the pitch unplayable, no problem, this condition applies to all the players in that match. Was the pitch a belter, no problem. Were the grounds small or huge, no problems. Was there a devastating bowling attack, no problem. Was it the East African or Canada bowling attack, no problem, all should have helped themselves to the buffet lunch. And so on. Our comparison applies only to matches played by the batsman so these are completely valid.
The analysis has also evolved. My first idea was to compare the batsman's career strike rate to the team's overall strike rate. Then I changed to the concerned match strike rate of the team but this had an element of overlap since the player's own performance is embedded in the team's performance. Finally I came out with the idea of taking into account the other players' strike rates. This has worked out very well.
Now let us look at the tables. The criteria is that the concerned batsman should have scored a minmum of 2000 ODI runs. Even this means that there is a sample size of 146 batsmen. This table is current upto match no. 2855, the fourth ODI between West Indies and India.
Table of Career strike rates to Concerned match team strike rates
SNo Batsman Cty Mat Runs Balls S/R OBRuns OBBalls S/R BSRF
1.Shahid Afridi Pak 276 5642 5083 1.110 52937 65461 0.809 137.3%
2.Kapil Dev N Ind 225 3783 3979 0.951 35676 49298 0.724 131.3%
3.Powell R.L Win 108 2085 2157 0.967 18941 24678 0.768 125.9%
4.Richards I.V.A Win 187 6721 7451 0.902 28195 38757 0.727 124.1%
5.Sehwag V Ind 205 6592 6472 1.019 40230 46569 0.864 117.9%
6.Wasim Akram Pak 356 3717 4224 0.880 55541 73789 0.753 116.9%
7.Jayasuriya S.T Slk 431 13151 14443 0.911 77876 97706 0.797 114.2%
8.Klusener L Saf 171 3576 3978 0.899 27976 35034 0.799 112.6%
9.Gilchrist A.C Aus 287 9619 9923 0.969 56114 64341 0.872 111.1%
10.Flintoff A Eng 141 3393 3819 0.888 22790 28419 0.802 110.8%
11.Chappell G.S Aus 74 2331 3088 0.755 11416 16449 0.694 108.8%
12.Pollock S.M Saf 303 3519 4059 0.867 43168 54126 0.798 108.7%
13.Cairns C.L Nzl 215 4950 5879 0.842 36554 47167 0.775 108.6%
14.Zaheer Abbas Pak 62 2572 3216 0.800 9520 12863 0.740 108.1%
15.Tikolo S.O Ken 117 3213 4214 0.762 18721 26291 0.712 107.1%
16.Gower D.I Eng 114 3170 4222 0.751 19486 27765 0.702 107.0%
17.McCullum B.B Nzl 153 2984 3353 0.890 24937 29918 0.834 106.8%
18.Pietersen K.P Eng 92 3127 3576 0.874 15244 18585 0.820 106.6%
19.Botham I.T Eng 116 2113 2816 0.750 19731 27866 0.708 106.0%
20.de Silva P.A Slk 308 9284 11497 0.808 51495 67537 0.762 105.9%
21.Rhodes J.N Saf 245 5935 7310 0.812 42228 54993 0.768 105.7%
22.Trescothick M.E Eng 123 4335 5086 0.852 21661 26647 0.813 104.9%
23.Symonds A Aus 198 5088 5504 0.924 34568 39054 0.885 104.4%
24.Tendulkar S.R Ind 425 16684 19481 0.856 76047 92266 0.824 103.9%
25.Moin Khan Pak 219 3266 4011 0.814 37111 47228 0.786 103.6%
...
40.Gibbs H.H Saf 244 8038 9647 0.833 45073 54128 0.833 100.0%
...
142.Yasir Hameed Pak 56 2028 3029 0.670 11363 12777 0.889 75.3%
143.Wessels K.C Saf 109 3367 6057 0.556 16626 22456 0.740 75.1%
144.Tillakaratne H.P Slk 200 3789 6544 0.579 31601 39951 0.791 73.2%
145.Mudassar Nazar Pak 122 2653 5067 0.524 19282 25900 0.744 70.3%
146.Marsh G.R Aus 117 4357 7721 0.564 20183 24649 0.819 68.9%
Note: The OB figures reflect the aggregate of the runs/balls of the other batsmen who batted in all the innings in which the concerned batsman has batted. If the concerned batsman did not bat at all, the figures for that innings are not included in the aggregate.
As expected Shahid Afridi is at the top. He has out-scored his team-mates by an amazing margin of 37.3% although his team-mates themselves score at a fair clip, 80.9. This underscores his value to the team. He outperforms his team-mates by such a wide margin, I fail to understand how the selectors could ever drop him, I am not even referring to his bowling.
Look at the second entry, also a proof that this measure cuts across years with ease. Kapil Dev has outperformed his team-mates by over 26%. His team-mates have been sluggish. However this understandable since those were the times. It was outstanding performance by Kapil Dev to score at a great strike rate of over 90% during those days when 70 was the norm.
Third player in the table is Ricardo Powell, who has out-scored his team-mates by over 25%. Whatever happened to Powell.
Now comes two interesting entries. Viv Richards' value to his team cannot be exemplified more than by this measure. He has outscored his team-mates by over 21%, day in and day out. This, coupled by the achievements of those mean and fiery fast men, was primarily responsible for the West Indian successes of the 1970s/80s.
Then comes the modern great, Sehwag. His team, India itself, has scored at a pretty good rate, 86.4. Sehwag has still managed to outscore his team-mates by 18%. This single factor has been one of the main reasons for the Indian team's recent successes.
In the next 5 places we have Wasim Akram, Jayasuriya, Kluesener, Gilchrist and Flintoff who have all outscored their team-mates by over 10%. All are great strikers.
Tendulkar has managed to outscore his team-mates by around 4%, mainly because the rest of the team, with a number of attacking batsmen, including Sehwag, Yuvraj et al, have scored at a good rate of 82.4. But his contributions, in the opening position, have been outstanding. Note the relatively lower placement of Symonds, just over 4%, indicating, a la Tendulkar, the higher scoring rate of his team-mates, in this case a very high 88.5.
Gibbs is the only batsman who has almost exactly mirrored his team-mates' achievements.
At the other hand we have mostly defensive batsmen of olden years, led by Geoff Marsh whose team-mates have outscored him by over 30%. The only modern batsman is Yasser Hameed who has scored at an amazing 25% below his team-mates, accepting that this group includes Afridi.
To view the complete list, please click here.
The above table includes the team extras in the runs scored. Thus the rest-of-the-team strike rates is slightly higher. I have given below the same table, this time excluding the team extras. No major changes.
SNo Batsman Cty Mat Runs Balls S/R OBRuns OBBalls S/R BSRF
1.Shahid Afridi Pak 276 5642 5083 1.110 49132 65461 0.751 147.9%
2.Kapil Dev N Ind 225 3783 3979 0.951 32898 49298 0.667 142.5%
3.Powell R.L Win 108 2085 2157 0.967 17332 24678 0.702 137.6%
4.Richards I.V.A Win 187 6721 7451 0.902 25859 38757 0.667 135.2%
5.Sehwag V Ind 205 6592 6472 1.019 37006 46569 0.795 128.2%
6.Wasim Akram Pak 356 3717 4224 0.880 51127 73789 0.693 127.0%
7.Jayasuriya S.T Slk 431 13151 14443 0.911 70806 97706 0.725 125.6%
8.Klusener L Saf 171 3576 3978 0.899 26076 35034 0.744 120.8%
9.Flintoff A Eng 141 3393 3819 0.888 20940 28419 0.737 120.6%
10.Gilchrist A.C Aus 287 9619 9923 0.969 52125 64341 0.810 119.7%
11.Tikolo S.O Ken 117 3213 4214 0.762 16758 26291 0.637 119.6%
12.Cairns C.L Nzl 215 4950 5879 0.842 33299 47167 0.706 119.3%
13.Zaheer Abbas Pak 62 2572 3216 0.800 8669 12863 0.674 118.7%
14.Chappell G.S Aus 74 2331 3088 0.755 10480 16449 0.637 118.5%
15.de Silva P.A Slk 308 9284 11497 0.808 46393 67537 0.687 117.6%
16.Gower D.I Eng 114 3170 4222 0.751 17751 27765 0.639 117.4%
17.McCullum B.B Nzl 153 2984 3353 0.890 22785 29918 0.762 116.9%
18.Botham I.T Eng 116 2113 2816 0.750 17981 27866 0.645 116.3%
19.Pollock S.M Saf 303 3519 4059 0.867 40335 54126 0.745 116.3%
20.Pietersen K.P Eng 92 3127 3576 0.874 14069 18585 0.757 115.5%
21.Trescothick M.E Eng 123 4335 5086 0.852 19830 26647 0.744 114.5%
22.Lamb A.J Eng 122 4010 5290 0.758 19026 28691 0.663 114.3%
23.Rhodes J.N Saf 245 5935 7310 0.812 39173 54993 0.712 114.0%
24.Tendulkar S.R Ind 425 16684 19481 0.856 69447 92266 0.753 113.8%
25.Crowe M.D Nzl 143 4704 6464 0.728 20206 31581 0.640 113.7%
...
77.Inzamam-ul-Haq Pak 378 11739 15827 0.742 60323 81270 0.742 100.0%
...
142.Taylor M.A Aus 113 3514 5867 0.599 18912 25762 0.734 81.6%
143.Yasir Hameed Pak 56 2028 3029 0.670 10522 12777 0.824 81.3%
144.Tillakaratne H.P Slk 200 3789 6544 0.579 28664 39951 0.717 80.7%
145.Mudassar Nazar Pak 122 2653 5067 0.524 17685 25900 0.683 76.7%
146.Marsh G.R Aus 117 4357 7721 0.564 18347 24649 0.744 75.8%
Test Bowler Analysis
I have given below a brief write-up on the Test Bowler Analysis. If you want to send in your comments on this, please do so, as a separate comment, titling the same, "Test Bowler Analysis".
1. Period Separation: These periods have been identified with lot of thought and deliberation with inputs from a few interested readers. Many related factors have gone into this process. Separate tables will be prepared for different periods. I have considered, and rejected, a separation of Pace and Spin since there will be too many tables and we will not have the charm of a Murali/Warne vs Hadlee/Lillee comparison.
- The bowling era: 1877-1914 (134 Tests and 370 players)
- The batting era: 1920-1969 (535 Tests and 980 players)
- The balanced era: 1970-2009 (1251 Tests and 1220 players).
2. Match Performance: This is a very important aspect of any such analysis. Many readers have completely forgotten that this is not career-based and takes into account every ball bowled and wicket captured weighted by the match conditions and the opposition. Those who are shouting at the rooftops that the career-end figures are not favourable to one player over the other should take the trouble of understanding this aspect of analysis carefully. This will incorporate the following factors.
- Wickets captured (Base)
- Balls bowled (Base) - to recognize long spells
- Batsmen dismissed - based on his score at time of dismissal (Base)
- Overall quality of batting team - primarily top-7 batsmen
- Bowling accuracy - relative to the innings scoring rate
- Own team's bowling quality (to take care of very strong bowling sides)
- Match-related pitch characteristics
- Match situation (incl first day spinners' performances, defending low/high totals in innings 2, innings 3 situation, levels of fourth innings totals defended, win margins et al.
- Home/Away - incorporating relative team strengths
- Result - incorporating relative team strengths.
3. Career Achievements: This is an equally important aspect of any such analysis. It also encompasses aspects of bowling which do not require consideration of the match conditions or situation. The only longevity measure is the "Career wickets captured" measure with no more than a 10% weight. This will incorporate the following factors.
- Career Wickets captured
- Bowling Strike rate (BpW)
- Bowling accuracy (RpO)
- Average Quality of batsmen dismissed - based on CtD batting average
- Type of wickets captured - Top order / Middle order / Late order
- % of wickets with own efforts - Bowled/Lbw/C&b (Still undecided on this).
Once again reminding the readers to send separate comments on this topic.
Comments (28)
June 27, 2009
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Batting
Test Batsmen Analysis: a follow-up
|
|
|
Brian Lara remains on the top of the list as the best Test batsman since 1960
© AFP
|
| The follow-up to a major article is always fraught with pitfalls. One has to make sure that the changes are not just cosmetic, nor be influenced by a point only because it is made by the majority, nor knee-jerk reactions and finally must significantly improve the original submission. Each change has to be carefully considered and implemented. Hence, I have taken the time required to peruse all comments (over 700 in all), sift amongst these, pick up the meaningful and valid ones and come out with a revised set of tables which are a great improvement and should satisfy most readers. Let me summarise the changes below.
These changes are given in order of importance and the impact on the original submission.
1. The Match Performance points are divided by the number of innings played rather than the matches played. This will impact the calculations significantly and benefit players such as Richards who have played the second innings infrequently.
2. The Scoring rate measure has been dropped. This is again a significant change since it gets all the batsmen on an equal keel and is fair to all.
3. Instead a new measure, the Consistency index has been added. This information is available across years and for all the batsmen. Details of the calculations for this measure have been given elsewhere.
4. The weight for %-Team Score has been reduced from 10 to 5. This is fair to players who have played in relatively stronger teams. To those who have questioned this measure, for flimsy reasons, let me say that the highest value in this measure is that of Bradman, batsman extraordinary, in very strong Australian teams.
5. In Match Performance calculations, the Bowling quality measure is now Career-to-date instead of final career figures. This is also quite significant since the early Test figures for many bowlers is quite different to their career-end figures. The other benefit is that the Ratings figures calculated do not vary during subsequent calculations.
6. The Bowling quality is determined by a combination of Bowling Average and Strike Rate. This is based on Arjun Hemnani's excellent suggestion. This is fair to bowlers such as Waqar Younis, Marshall, Donald et al who are great strike bowlers but concede runs.
7. The Pitch Index calculations have undergone a very significant change. Now I am determining the Pitch index, not from the team scores and wickets, but using only the scores of the top 7 (or applicable) batsmen of each innings. This ensures that both the teams make their contributions to the index value. Also that the late order wickets do not distort the picture. I have also used the RpI rather than RpW. Makes lot more sense.
8. I had taken into account the relative team strengths in the Result parameter. Now I have extended this to the Home/Away parameter also. It means that instead of giving the benefit to the Away team automatically, now I take into account the relative team strengths. In other words, if Australia or India tour Bangladesh they will not automatically get the Away bonus. For Bangladesh touring, say, Sri Lanka, the Away bonus will be suitably increased.
9. "The Runs added with late order batsmen" measure's weight has been reduced from 1.00-1.30 to 1.00-1.20. This has been done to ensure the correct weight for the more important measures such as Pitch type, Bowler's quality et al.
10. Finally I have introduced a new measure called R-Factor. More on this later.
Consistency Index:
The Consistency index has been calculated as follows.
The career of each batsman was split into 5-Test slices. His 5-Test performance (Runs per innings used rather than Batting average so that the impact of not outs is negated) was measured against the Career RpI figures and the number of below-average performance slices (below 75%) used to determine the more significant part of the Consistency Index. 5-Test slices have been used since these represent a reasonable number to determine consistency. There is sufficient slack within 5 Tests to recover from bad form.
The other part of the Consistency index is based on the % of single digit dismissals. Together these two determine the Consistency record of the batsman.
The most consistent batsman is Alistair Cook of England, who has had no below-average slice and only 17.9% of single-figure dismissals. He gets an Index value of 4.28. Ross Taylor of New Zealand is also very consistent as, surprisingly, is Afridi. Amongst top batsmen, Hobbs and Sutcliffe are right at the top.
At the other end are Karthik, with 1.79 points, Wishart with 1.88 points, Richie Benaud with 2.05 points et al.
Separate tables for different eras:
I have also separated the tables into two independent ones. The first is for batsmen who started their career before 31 December 1959 and the other for batsmen who started their career after 1 January 1960. These dates have been decided after a lot of deliberations, summarized below.
I had earlier decided on 1 January 1940 as the cut-off date. Unfortunately very few Tests had been played upto that point (274 out of 1920) and there are not enough batsmen. Even 1 January 1960 cut-off does not give us enough Tests. However 483 Tests out of 1920 is a far better share.
The other key factor is that the 1950s (and some might say, the 1960s) really belonged to the old fashioned method of playing Test cricket and a Hutton or Barrington or Hanif Mohommad or Vijay Hazare would very easily fit in with the first era. Anyhow whatever date I take for cut-off there would be objections and this is a good enough point. It is also 50 years back.
I have also followed the separation very strictly, with debut match as the only criterion, knowing fully well that some players might have made their debut in 1958-59 but played most of their matches after 1960. Jarman who made his debut in Test no 483 (started on 19 December 1959) is placed in the first era while Durrani who made his debut in Test no 484 (started on 1 January 1960) is placed in the second era, and so on. I have to work on certain guidelines and have to be true to those. The number of players in the first era is a healthy 1124. The second era contains 1435 players.
I have also implemented another one of Arjun's suggections. That is to give a simple ratio between 2.0 and 0.0 against each batsman, based on a suitable mean, so that their position can be determined instantly and comparisons become easier. For this a value of 35.0 has been used as the notional mean (it does not matter what this figure is). Readers will instantly note the value of this single figure when they peruse the tables.
Let us now look at the revised tables.
The best Test batsmen: 1960-2009
No. Cty Batsman Ratio Total Match Bat Runs Cons %-TS R-Factor
Pts Perf Avge Pts Idx Pts
1. Win Lara B.C 1.44 50.26 (22.63 10.43 11.93 3.37 1.90)
2. Ind Tendulkar S.R 1.41 49.24 (20.44 10.69 12.85 3.70 1.55)
3. Aus Ponting R.T 1.38 48.24 (21.54 10.85 10.88 3.54 1.44)
4. Ind Dravid R 1.31 45.98 (19.93 10.11 10.92 3.50 1.51)
5. Ind Gavaskar S.M 1.31 45.83 (20.52 10.02 10.12 3.49 1.67)
6. Saf Kallis J.H 1.30 45.65 (19.92 10.56 10.23 3.43 1.51)
7. Win Richards I.V.A 1.28 44.97 (21.81 9.90 8.65 3.11 1.50)
8. Aus Border A.R 1.28 44.83 (18.38 10.07 11.16 3.79 1.44)
9. Aus Waugh S.R 1.27 44.52 (18.35 10.12 10.90 3.86 1.28)
10. Slk Sangakkara K.C 1.26 43.98 (22.20 10.33 6.73 3.12 1.61)
11. Slk Jayawardene D.P 1.25 43.81 (20.59 10.00 8.15 3.49 1.58)
12. Pak Javed Miandad 1.25 43.62 (19.53 10.42 8.83 3.24 1.61)
13. Aus Hayden M.L 1.24 43.49 (20.77 9.83 8.54 2.93 1.42)
14. Pak Mohammad Yousuf 1.24 43.35 (21.36 10.60 6.81 2.98 1.60)
15. Pak Inzamam-ul-Haq 1.23 43.05 (19.39 9.71 8.91 3.56 1.47)
16. Aus Chappell G.S 1.23 42.91 (20.21 10.54 7.01 3.57 1.58)
17. Saf Pollock R.G 1.18 41.37 (22.20 11.88 2.22 3.42 1.66)
18. Win Chanderpaul S 1.18 41.21 (18.59 9.55 8.56 3.04 1.48)
19. Eng Gooch G.A 1.17 41.02 (18.85 8.45 8.75 3.41 1.56)
20. Saf Smith G.C 1.17 40.78 (20.14 9.46 6.39 3.31 1.49)
Lara continues to stay in no.1 position but his lead over Tendulkar has been considerably reduced (only around 2%). Ponting is at third position at a similar distance from Tendulkar. In fourth and fifth place are Dravid and Gavaskar. Then we get Kallis, who can ever deny the contributions he has made without fuss. Now comes Richards, probably correctly placed in the Top-10. He could have been in the Top-5 with no complaints. Then we have the two great Australian batsmen, Border and Steve Waugh. The incomparable Sangakkara completes the top-10.
Jayawardene follows next and then the fighter-extraodinary, Javed Miandad. I am happy that three top-class Pakistani batsmen, Miandad, Mohd Yousuf and Inzamam occupy 3 of the next 4 places, Hayden occupying the 12th place. Greg Chappell, Greame Pollock and Chanderpaul are correctly placed in the Top-20 which is completed by Graham Gooch and Greame Smith.
Lara's ratio is 1.44, Sangakkara's 1.26 and Greame Smith's 1.17. It can be seen that the top-10 batsmen have a spread of only 12.5% and the spread between 11 and 20 is only 7%. The only way to treat these tables is to look at these players as "First 1/2/5/10/20 ... amongst equals".
To view the complete list, please click here
Given below is the support table. The data is self-explanatory. For the two Consistency index related columns, explanations have been given below.
The best Test batsmen ever: 1960-2009 - Support data
SNo. Cty Batsman Inns Rating Runs Bat ( Adj) Consistency %-TS
Pts Avge 1 2
1. Win Lara B.C 232 50.26 11953 52.15 (0.99) 26.9% 26.7% 19.0%
2. Ind Tendulkar S.R 261 49.24 12773 53.46 (0.98) 25.0% 23.8% 15.5%
3. Aus Ponting R.T 221 48.24 10956 54.26 (0.97) 26.9% 20.8% 14.4%
4. Ind Dravid R 233 45.98 10823 50.54 (0.96) 29.6% 21.9% 15.1%
5. Ind Gavaskar S.M 214 45.83 10122 50.10 (0.98) 20.0% 25.7% 16.7%
6. Saf Kallis J.H 221 45.65 10277 52.79 (0.97) 30.8% 20.4% 15.1%
7. Win Richards I.V.A 182 44.97 8540 49.52 (0.99) 29.2% 25.3% 15.0%
8. Aus Border A.R 265 44.83 11174 50.33 (1.00) 25.8% 24.2% 14.4%
9. Aus Waugh S.R 260 44.52 10927 50.58 (0.99) 21.9% 24.6% 12.8%
10. Slk Sangakkara K.C 132 43.98 6764 51.65 (0.94) 37.5% 18.9% 16.1%
11. Slk Jayawardene D.P 167 43.81 8254 50.02 (0.94) 20.0% 22.8% 15.8%
12. Pak Javed Miandad 189 43.62 8832 52.08 (0.99) 32.0% 20.1% 16.1%
13. Aus Hayden M.L 184 43.49 8626 49.17 (0.97) 42.9% 19.6% 14.2%
14. Pak Mohammad Yousuf 134 43.35 6770 53.00 (0.96) 37.5% 22.4% 16.0%
15. Pak Inzamam-ul-Haq 200 43.05 8830 48.56 (0.98) 16.7% 23.5% 14.7%
16. Aus Chappell G.S 151 42.91 7110 52.70 (0.98) 17.6% 22.5% 15.8%
17. Saf Pollock R.G 41 41.37 2256 59.38 (0.97) 20.0% 24.4% 16.6%
18. Win Chanderpaul S 206 41.21 8576 47.76 (0.97) 33.3% 25.2% 14.8%
19. Eng Gooch G.A 215 41.02 8900 42.27 (0.99) 25.0% 24.2% 15.6%
20. Saf Smith G.C 135 40.78 6343 47.28 (0.94) 26.7% 22.2% 14.9%
No of below-average 5-Test slices
Consistency 1 % = ---------------------------------
Total number of 5-Test slices
No of single digit dismissals
Consistency 2 % = -----------------------------
Total number of innings
To view the complete list, please click here
The best Test batsmen: 1877-1959
SNo. Cty Batsman Ratio Total Match Bat Runs Cons %-TS R-Factor
Pts Perf Avge Pts Idx Pts
1. Aus Bradman D.G 1.97 69.08 (36.62 19.35 6.91 3.70 2.50)
2. Eng Hobbs J.B 1.36 47.57 (23.93 12.34 5.49 3.99 1.82)
3. Win Sobers G.St.A 1.29 45.03 (20.67 11.48 8.03 3.28 1.58)
4. Eng Hutton L 1.27 44.37 (20.72 11.35 6.93 3.55 1.83)
5. Eng Barrington K.F 1.26 44.27 (20.97 11.71 6.81 3.08 1.70)
6. Win Headley G.A 1.25 43.86 (24.07 12.00 2.18 3.45 2.16)
7. Eng Sutcliffe H 1.25 43.62 (21.88 11.61 4.52 3.88 1.72)
8. Eng Hammond W.R 1.24 43.49 (19.78 11.27 7.31 3.43 1.70)
9. Win EdeC Weekes 1.22 42.69 (21.16 12.21 4.44 3.11 1.77)
10. Win Walcott C.L 1.16 40.67 (20.29 11.75 3.73 3.30 1.61)
11. Aus Harvey R.N 1.16 40.50 (19.22 9.92 6.18 3.56 1.62)
12. Win Kanhai R.B 1.13 39.44 (18.86 9.37 6.23 3.55 1.43)
13. Eng May P.B.H 1.12 39.14 (19.65 9.63 4.48 3.75 1.63)
14. Eng Cowdrey M.C 1.12 39.05 (18.00 8.75 7.65 3.22 1.43)
15. Eng Compton D.C.S 1.10 38.64 (17.88 10.06 5.70 3.43 1.57)
16. Saf Nourse A.D 1.08 37.94 (19.28 10.61 2.92 3.30 1.82)
17. Eng Dexter E.R 1.07 37.32 (18.15 9.45 4.51 3.75 1.46)
18. Aus Simpson R.B 1.06 37.12 (18.25 9.21 4.87 3.28 1.52)
19. Win Worrell F.M.M 1.06 37.10 (18.10 10.14 3.86 3.50 1.49)
20. Aus Morris A.R 1.03 36.10 (18.45 9.68 3.53 2.99 1.45)
Bradman is on top with a Rating value of 69.08 (and ratio of 1.97). He is followed, at a distance, by Hobbs and Sobers. Hutton and Barrington complete the top-5. The next 5 positions are monopolized by the West Indians, Headley, Weekes and Walcott and two great English batsmen, Sutcliffe and Hammond.
If we take Bradman's numbers away, the spread between 2 and 10 is a managable 14%.
I would appreciate if readers digest the tables before making the usual "xyz is better than abc" or "how can pqr be so low (or high)" or "". I will again repeat that intangible and non-measurable factors have no place in this analysis. This analysis has the heart of a cricket lover but the mind of a cricket analyst are behind it.
To view the complete list, please click here
Given below is the support table. The data is self-explanatory.
The best Test batsmen ever: 1877-1959 - Support data
SNo. Cty Batsman Inns Rating Runs Bat ( Adj) Consistency %-TS
Pts Avge 1 2
1. Aus Bradman D.G 80 69.08 6996 96.75 (0.97) 20.0% 17.5% 25.0%
2. Eng Hobbs J.B 102 47.57 5410 61.68 (1.08) 16.7% 12.7% 18.2%
3. Win Sobers G.St.A 160 45.03 8032 57.40 (0.99) 31.6% 19.4% 15.8%
4. Eng Hutton L 138 44.37 6971 56.73 (1.00) 25.0% 17.4% 18.3%
5. Eng Barrington K.F 131 44.27 6806 58.55 (1.00) 37.5% 19.8% 17.0%
6. Win Headley G.A 40 43.86 2190 60.02 (0.99) 25.0% 20.0% 21.6%
7. Eng Sutcliffe H 84 43.62 4555 58.04 (0.96) 18.2% 14.3% 17.2%
8. Eng Hammond W.R 140 43.49 7249 56.35 (0.96) 29.4% 17.1% 17.0%
9. Win EdeC Weekes 81 42.69 4455 61.06 (1.04) 30.0% 24.7% 17.7%
10. Win Walcott C.L 74 40.67 3798 58.75 (1.04) 33.3% 17.6% 16.1%
11. Aus Harvey R.N 137 40.50 6149 49.61 (1.02) 18.8% 21.9% 16.2%
12. Win Kanhai R.B 137 39.44 6227 46.84 (0.99) 25.0% 17.5% 14.3%
13. Eng May P.B.H 106 39.14 4537 48.14 (1.03) 7.7% 25.5% 16.3%
14. Eng Cowdrey M.C 188 39.05 7624 43.74 (0.99) 26.1% 25.0% 14.3%
15. Eng Compton D.C.S 131 38.64 5807 50.30 (1.00) 25.0% 20.6% 15.7%
16. Saf Nourse A.D 62 37.94 2960 53.07 (0.99) 28.6% 21.0% 18.2%
17. Eng Dexter E.R 102 37.32 4502 47.23 (0.99) 16.7% 18.6% 14.6%
18. Aus Simpson R.B 111 37.12 4869 46.04 (0.98) 25.0% 24.3% 15.2%
19. Win Worrell F.M.M 87 37.10 3860 50.71 (1.02) 10.0% 29.9% 14.9%
20. Aus Morris A.R 79 36.10 3533 48.42 (1.04) 33.3% 25.3% 14.5%
No of below-average 5-Test slices
Consistency 1 % = ---------------------------------
Total number of 5-Test slices
No of single digit dismissals
Consistency 2 % = -----------------------------
Total number of innings
To view the complete list, please click here
The significant changes to the tables are summarized below. Most of these should make the tables more acceptable to many readers.
1. All batsmen are treated across years uniformly with the same set of parameters.
2. Consistency amongst batsmen has been recognized well. Note the high consistency figures of Tendulkar, Border, Steve Waugh et al.
3. Performances of lower ranked teams have been recognized more.
4. The quality of bowling faced has a much sharper definition. I may very well do a separate article on this fascinating aspect.
5. The gap between Lara and Tendulkar has narrowed to 2%.
6. Richards has moved up significantly.
7. Steve Waugh and Alan Border have moved up.
8. The three top Pakistani batsmen are reasonably well placed.
9. There are no major changes in the first era other than the revised set of batsmen included in this set.
R-Factor:
The points for all the measures add up to 90. The balance of 10 points has been reserved for R-Factor, expanding to Reader-Factor. The readers have complained that many points have not been taken into account. These points range from ridiculous, silly, absurd, obscure to relevant, sensible, valid and crystal-clear. Of course no analysis can take care of all such factors, especially as these are mostly intangible and non-measurable. Hence I have invented the R-Factor. It is your tool to be used the way you want. Convert the tables to Excel sheets, plug in your own R-Factor values and do what you want. Frame your results, circulate amongst yourselves and in general, have a ball. My only request to all is, whatever you do, do not send anything you have done on this to me.
You may, of course, ignore it completely.
Some of the factors I have been informed as not having considered are outlined below.
- Playing in a good team.
- Playing in a poor team.
- Expectations of a billion people.
- Coming from an island of population of 7500.
- Lack of support.
- Short pitched bowling.
- Lack of helmets, thigh guards, chest support etc.
- Injuries.
- Selectors' foibles.
- Terrorizing bowlers.
- Too much cricket.
- Too little cricket.
et al.
Only comments which add value to the article and derived conclusions will be published. Comments which are repetitive, say the same things ad nauseum, which are with the theme of "abc is the best, not pqr" type, which say, in different forms, "if you take away this measure, xyz will be on top", "abc is better than pqr because his average against ... is higher" type of comments, "there is no change from the earlier table" after a cursory 2-minute perusal etc will not be published. I gave a lot of leeway last time in publishing of comments. This time I will weed out such comments from the beginning. They are coming in the way of serious readers from appreciating the article and the user responses.
I want to emphasize once again, whether your comment is published or not is in your hands. Another important point. Anonymous comments will not be published.
My sincere thanks to Arjun Hemnani's whose quality ideas were the foundation for a number of these changes. My thanks to others like Jack (Jagdeep Singh), Ashik, Shankar et al.
Comments (132)
May 22, 2009
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Batting
Summary tables on Test batsmen
I came out with an article on Test Batsmen a few days back and this article received an unprecedented number of responses. There were a number of useful suggestions and I am considering incorporation of a number of these suggestions. Since this process is going to take some time and I also have a number of T20/IPL analysis to be done, I have come out, in the interim, with a number of useful batsmen tables. The purpose of these are to provide at one place very useful information for comparison. There are no assumptions or parameters in these tables and what is presented are only facts. I have made only some explanatory comments on these tables.
The weighted bowling quality measure, which has been shown as the last column in all the tables, has been derived by using the career-to-date values as suggested by many readers. There is no major difference. However there is no doubt that this is the correct method. The real difference is with the lesser bowlers. For the great bowlers with 300+ wickets in their career, the CtD averages do not show any significant variation once a certain stage of career has been crossed.
1. Top run scorers for 8 periods
Aus Ponting R.T 2000s 8864 @ 59.89 36.00
Saf Kallis J.H 2000s 8428 @ 58.94 37.69
Aus Hayden M.L 2000s 8365 @ 52.94 36.23
Ind Dravid R 2000s 8125 @ 53.45 37.62
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2000s 6932 @ 52.92 37.74
Slk Jayawardene D.P.M.D 2000s 6581 @ 56.25 38.81
Win Lara B.C 2000s 6380 @ 54.07 34.43
Saf Smith G.C 2000s 6343 @ 50.34 38.70
Win Chanderpaul S 2000s 6342 @ 53.29 35.04
Ind Laxman V.V.S 2000s 6115 @ 49.72 36.61
Eng Stewart A.J 1990s 6409 @ 40.82 35.22
Aus Waugh M.E 1990s 6371 @ 41.64 36.73
Aus Taylor M.A 1990s 6306 @ 40.95 36.75
Eng Atherton M.A 1990s 6217 @ 38.38 34.31
Aus Waugh S.R 1990s 6213 @ 53.10 36.17
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1990s 5626 @ 58.00 37.97
Win Lara B.C 1990s 5573 @ 51.60 36.12
Slk de Silva P.A 1990s 4448 @ 46.82 37.85
Aus Slater M.J 1990s 4425 @ 45.15 37.02
Aus Boon D.C 1990s 4303 @ 45.29 38.61
Aus Border A.R 1980s 7418 @ 54.54 34.54
Eng Gower D.I 1980s 6196 @ 42.44 33.86
Pak Javed Miandad 1980s 5642 @ 54.78 37.02
Win Richards I.V.A 1980s 5209 @ 49.61 35.04
Win Greenidge C.G 1980s 5151 @ 45.99 35.43
Ind Gavaskar S.M 1970s 5647 @ 55.91 37.72
Ind Viswanath G.R 1970s 4611 @ 46.11 36.56
Aus Chappell G.S 1970s 4357 @ 53.79 36.08
Win Kallicharran A.I 1970s 3917 @ 49.58 34.70
Win Fredericks R.C 1970s 3809 @ 45.89 33.59
Eng Barrington K.F 1960s 6397 @ 59.79 37.82
Eng Cowdrey M.C 1960s 4788 @ 48.86 36.99
Aus Lawry W.M 1960s 4717 @ 49.65 37.27
Win Sobers G.St.A 1960s 4563 @ 60.04 36.48
Eng Dexter E.R 1960s 4232 @ 50.38 36.91
Eng Hutton L 40s-50s 5626 @ 54.62 39.27
Eng Compton D.C.S 40s-50s 5339 @ 49.90 40.02
Aus Harvey R.N 40s-50s 5107 @ 52.65 38.51
Win EdeC Weekes 40s-50s 4455 @ 58.62 37.83
Eng May P.B.H 40s-50s 4182 @ 49.20 36.49
Eng Hammond W.R WW1-WW2 6883 @ 61.46 42.87
Aus Bradman D.G WW1-WW2 5093 @ 97.94 34.50
Eng Sutcliffe H WW1-WW2 4555 @ 60.73 40.35
Eng Hendren E.H WW1-WW2 3525 @ 47.64 41.52
Eng Hobbs J.B WW1-WW2 2945 @ 56.63 39.95
Aus Hill C Pre-WW1 3412 @ 39.22 34.27
Aus Trumper V.T Pre-WW1 3163 @ 39.05 33.66
Eng Hobbs J.B Pre-WW1 2465 @ 57.33 32.64
Aus Gregory S.E Pre-WW1 2282 @ 24.54 31.60
Aus Armstrong W.W Pre-WW1 2247 @ 35.67 32.49
Note the current decade. All the ten batsmen, barring Laxman who chips in with 49.72 have averaged above 50. During the 1990s, only the three great batsmen, Steve Waugh, Tendulkar and Lara exceed 50. During the 1980s, only Border and the incomparable Miandad exceeded 50. Gavaskar, Greg Chappell and Boycott exceeded 50 during the 70's. During the early periods, Sobers, Hammond and Sutcliffe exceeded 60. Note the poor bowling faced by Hammond, however. All these are in the Top-10.
To peruse the complete table, please click here.
2. Top 20 aggregate scorers during a calendar year
Pak Mohammad Yousuf 2006 1788 @ 99.33 35.80
Win Richards I.V.A 1976 1710 @ 90.00 32.31
Ind Gavaskar S.M 1979 1696 @ 62.81 32.93
Saf Smith G.C 2008 1656 @ 72.00 41.33
Aus Ponting R.T 2005 1540 @ 66.96 34.66
Aus Ponting R.T 2003 1503 @ 100.20 41.81
Eng Vaughan M.P 2002 1481 @ 61.71 33.95
Aus Langer J.L 2004 1481 @ 54.85 36.76
Ind Sehwag V 2008 1462 @ 56.23 36.16
Ind Viswanath G.R 1979 1420 @ 56.80 32.90
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2002 1392 @ 55.68 40.08
Aus Hayden M.L 2001 1391 @ 63.23 36.46
Aus Simpson R.B 1964 1381 @ 60.04 43.94
Aus Hayden M.L 2005 1380 @ 53.08 34.23
Eng Amiss D.L 1974 1379 @ 68.95 36.32
Ind Dravid R 2002 1357 @ 59.00 39.39
Aus Martyn D.R 2004 1353 @ 56.38 35.23
Win Lara B.C 2003 1344 @ 74.67 34.35
Eng Pietersen K.P 2006 1343 @ 53.72 32.81
Aus Ponting R.T 2006 1333 @ 88.87 33.00
...
...
Win Sobers G.St.A 1958 1193 @ 132.56 35.24
Note the fantastic aggregates of the under-rated Mohammd Yousuf, Richards, Gavaskar, Smith and Ponting (twice). Also the 100+ averages of Sobers and Ponting.
To peruse the complete table, please click here.
3. Top scorers vs each team
Eng Hobbs J.B Australia 3636 @ 54.27 36.95
Eng Gower D.I Australia 3269 @ 44.78 35.69
Eng Boycott G Australia 2945 @ 47.50 37.25
Win Lara B.C Australia 2856 @ 51.00 31.39
Eng Hammond W.R Australia 2852 @ 51.85 39.95
Ind Gavaskar S.M West Indies 2749 @ 65.45 39.59
Eng Boycott G West Indies 2205 @ 45.94 34.79
Eng Gooch G.A West Indies 2197 @ 44.84 28.55
Aus Waugh S.R West Indies 2192 @ 49.82 34.92
Saf Kallis J.H West Indies 2073 @ 74.04 39.81
Win Lloyd C.H India 2344 @ 58.60 37.37
Pak Javed Miandad India 2228 @ 67.52 39.45
Win Richards I.V.A India 1927 @ 50.71 37.42
Win Sobers G.St.A India 1920 @ 83.48 37.07
Aus Hayden M.L India 1888 @ 59.00 37.76
Aus Bradman D.G England 5028 @ 89.79 34.28
Aus Border A.R England 3548 @ 56.32 36.08
Win Sobers G.St.A England 3214 @ 60.64 34.52
Aus Waugh S.R England 3200 @ 58.18 38.13
Win Lara B.C England 2983 @ 62.15 39.14
Pak Inzamam-ul-Haq Sri Lanka 1559 @ 59.96 39.03
Ind Tendulkar S.R Sri Lanka 1408 @ 56.32 38.56
Ind Azharuddin M Sri Lanka 1215 @ 55.23 40.34
Nzl Fleming S.P Sri Lanka 1166 @ 58.30 39.14
Win Lara B.C Sri Lanka 1125 @ 86.54 33.76
Eng Compton D.C.S South Africa 2205 @ 53.78 43.98
Eng Hammond W.R South Africa 2188 @ 62.51 44.29
Aus Ponting R.T South Africa 2030 @ 56.39 31.34
Win Lara B.C South Africa 1715 @ 49.00 31.96
Aus Harvey R.N South Africa 1625 @ 81.25 43.52
Ind Gavaskar S.M Pakistan 2089 @ 56.46 35.01
Aus Border A.R Pakistan 1666 @ 59.50 34.36
Aus Chappell G.S Pakistan 1581 @ 63.24 37.65
Slk Jayasuriya S.T Pakistan 1490 @ 51.38 35.42
Slk de Silva P.A Pakistan 1475 @ 42.14 35.52
Pak Javed Miandad New Zealand 1919 @ 79.96 42.31
Aus Border A.R New Zealand 1500 @ 51.72 35.72
Ind Tendulkar S.R New Zealand 1406 @ 52.07 34.82
Saf Kallis J.H New Zealand 1356 @ 67.80 40.58
Ind Dravid R New Zealand 1318 @ 59.91 33.63
Slk Atapattu M.S Zimbabwe 1145 @ 95.42 48.01
Ind Dravid R Zimbabwe 979 @ 97.90 42.11
Ind Tendulkar S.R Zimbabwe 918 @ 76.50 42.62
Nzl Astle N.J Zimbabwe 813 @ 50.81 40.86
Pak Inzamam-ul-Haq Zimbabwe 772 @ 42.89 42.03
Slk Sangakkara K.C Bangladesh 876 @ 73.00 46.75
Slk Jayawardene D.P.M.D Bangladesh 863 @ 66.38 47.63
Slk Dilshan T.M Bangladesh 771 @ 77.10 43.68
Saf Smith G.C Bangladesh 743 @ 82.56 51.82
Slk Samaraweera T.T Bangladesh 600 @ 66.67 45.56
Sehwag and Taylor against Pakistan, Kallis against West Indies, Javed Miandad against New Zealand, Sobers and Zaheer Abbas against India, Lara against Sri Lanka, Harvey and Jayawardene against South Africa and of course Bradman against England are the stand-out performers.
To peruse the complete table, please click here.
4. Top 20 away scorers
Ind Tendulkar S.R 7165 @ 54.28 37.18
Ind Dravid R 6430 @ 56.90 37.50
Win Lara B.C 5736 @ 47.80 34.12
Aus Border A.R 5431 @ 56.57 36.32
Win Richards I.V.A 5404 @ 50.50 34.98
Pak Inzamam-ul-Haq 5226 @ 47.94 37.92
Aus Waugh S.R 5217 @ 55.50 36.68
Ind Gavaskar S.M 5055 @ 52.11 36.94
Saf Kallis J.H 4713 @ 52.37 36.46
Aus Ponting R.T 4680 @ 50.87 35.89
Win Lloyd C.H 4634 @ 46.81 34.32
Pak Javed Miandad 4351 @ 45.80 34.31
Win Greenidge C.G 4349 @ 42.22 35.22
Eng Hammond W.R 4245 @ 66.33 43.22
Nzl Fleming S.P 4225 @ 45.92 36.68
Eng Cowdrey M.C 4087 @ 44.91 35.90
Win Chanderpaul S 4082 @ 42.52 34.10
Ind Ganguly S.C 4032 @ 41.57 37.68
Aus Waugh M.E 4010 @ 40.51 37.17
Win Sobers G.St.A 3957 @ 50.73 33.67
...
...
Aus Bradman D.G 2674 @ 102.85 35.18
The list is headed by Tendulkar and followed by two great contemporary batsmen. Tendulkar has been equally effective home and away while Dravid has been better away. Lara has significantly under-performed away from home, but against very good bowling attacks. Hammond has a very high away average, tempered by the fact that a lot of these runs have been scored against weak bowling attackes. For the record, Bradman has the highest away batting average. Note Steve Waugh's excellent away average.
To peruse the complete table, please click here.
5. Vs Team performance for selected 5 players
Eng Hobbs J.B Aus 3636 @ 54.27 36.95
Eng Hobbs J.B Saf 1562 @ 60.08 33.52
Eng Hobbs J.B Win 212 @ 106.00 53.90
Career Total 5410 @ 56.95 36.62
Aus Bradman D.G Eng 5028 @ 89.79 34.28
Aus Bradman D.G Ind 715 @ 178.75 45.15
Aus Bradman D.G Saf 806 @ 201.50 36.54
Aus Bradman D.G Win 447 @ 74.50 45.89
Career Total 6996 @ 99.94 36.39
Win Richards I.V.A Aus 2266 @ 44.43 33.79
Win Richards I.V.A Eng 2869 @ 62.37 35.40
Win Richards I.V.A Ind 1927 @ 50.71 37.42
Win Richards I.V.A Nzl 387 @ 43.00 30.80
Win Richards I.V.A Pak 1091 @ 41.96 32.44
Career Total 8540 @ 50.24 34.84
Ind Tendulkar S.R Aus 2748 @ 56.08 34.45
Ind Tendulkar S.R Bng 556 @ 139.00 44.19
Ind Tendulkar S.R Eng 2150 @ 61.43 40.07
Ind Tendulkar S.R Nzl 1406 @ 52.07 34.82
Ind Tendulkar S.R Pak 1057 @ 42.28 36.08
Ind Tendulkar S.R Saf 1202 @ 35.35 35.16
Ind Tendulkar S.R Slk 1408 @ 56.32 38.56
Ind Tendulkar S.R Win 1328 @ 57.74 41.18
Ind Tendulkar S.R Zim 918 @ 76.50 42.62
Career Total 12773 @ 54.59 37.80
Win Lara B.C Aus 2856 @ 51.00 31.39
Win Lara B.C Bng 173 @ 86.50 45.84
Win Lara B.C Eng 2983 @ 62.15 39.14
Win Lara B.C Ind 1002 @ 34.55 35.36
Win Lara B.C Nzl 704 @ 41.41 39.19
Win Lara B.C Pak 1173 @ 53.32 34.95
Win Lara B.C Saf 1715 @ 49.00 31.96
Win Lara B.C Slk 1125 @ 86.54 33.76
Win Lara B.C Zim 222 @ 55.50 44.09
Career Total 11953 @ 52.89 35.22
Hobbs and Bradman have scored most of their runs against the good attacks of Australia/England and South Africa. Almost all of Richards' runs have come against good attacks. The major difference between Tendulkar and Lara is that Tendulkar has scored nearly 1500 runs against the weak attacks of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Lara has scored only 400 runs against these attacks. This explains the overall poorer bowling quality faced by Tendulkar.
To peruse the complete table, please click here.
6. Career progression for 5 selected players
Eng Hobbs J.B 1908 302 @ 43.14 30.01
Eng Hobbs J.B 1909 132 @ 26.40 31.70
Eng Hobbs J.B 1910 539 @ 67.38 27.25
Eng Hobbs J.B 1911 85 @ 42.50 30.89
Eng Hobbs J.B 1912 964 @ 68.86 32.53
Eng Hobbs J.B 1913 105 @ 52.50 41.95
Eng Hobbs J.B 1914 338 @ 67.60 41.78
Eng Hobbs J.B 1920 108 @ 54.00 48.56
Eng Hobbs J.B 1921 397 @ 49.62 41.40
Eng Hobbs J.B 1924 527 @ 75.29 32.94
Eng Hobbs J.B 1925 401 @ 57.29 35.82
Eng Hobbs J.B 1926 486 @ 81.00 35.17
Eng Hobbs J.B 1928 312 @ 62.40 49.64
Eng Hobbs J.B 1929 413 @ 51.62 45.54
Eng Hobbs J.B 1930 301 @ 33.44 42.62
Career Total 5410 @ 56.95 36.61
Aus Bradman D.G 1928 19 @ 9.50 29.26
Aus Bradman D.G 1929 449 @ 89.80 28.28
Aus Bradman D.G 1930 978 @ 122.25 35.37
Aus Bradman D.G 1931 781 @ 111.57 41.82
Aus Bradman D.G 1932 468 @ 234.00 36.57
Aus Bradman D.G 1933 396 @ 56.57 35.79
Aus Bradman D.G 1934 758 @ 94.75 33.14
Aus Bradman D.G 1936 120 @ 30.00 28.27
Aus Bradman D.G 1937 690 @ 138.00 28.98
Aus Bradman D.G 1938 434 @ 108.50 35.44
Aus Bradman D.G 1946 421 @ 210.50 39.76
Aus Bradman D.G 1947 457 @ 65.29 42.49
Aus Bradman D.G 1948 1025 @ 113.89 41.68
Career Total 6996 @ 99.94 36.39
Win Richards I.V.A 1974 199 @ 99.50 32.76
Win Richards I.V.A 1975 272 @ 20.92 33.41
Win Richards I.V.A 1976 1710 @ 90.00 32.31
Win Richards I.V.A 1977 257 @ 28.56 34.98
Win Richards I.V.A 1978 62 @ 31.00 40.15
Win Richards I.V.A 1979 140 @ 140.00 33.86
Win Richards I.V.A 1980 857 @ 65.92 31.39
Win Richards I.V.A 1981 474 @ 67.71 34.03
Win Richards I.V.A 1982 158 @ 39.50 27.15
Win Richards I.V.A 1983 588 @ 39.20 43.49
Win Richards I.V.A 1984 789 @ 46.41 35.58
Win Richards I.V.A 1985 383 @ 54.71 35.01
Win Richards I.V.A 1986 506 @ 50.60 31.38
Win Richards I.V.A 1987 300 @ 42.86 35.19
Win Richards I.V.A 1988 867 @ 51.00 35.39
Win Richards I.V.A 1989 287 @ 35.88 38.29
Win Richards I.V.A 1990 141 @ 28.20 45.25
Win Richards I.V.A 1991 550 @ 39.29 39.13
Career Total 8540 @ 50.24 34.83
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1989 215 @ 35.83 35.40
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1990 373 @ 41.44 37.42
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1991 78 @ 19.50 31.68
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1992 419 @ 41.90 40.75
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1993 640 @ 91.43 40.95
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1994 700 @ 70.00 40.41
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1995 58 @ 29.00 45.67
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1996 623 @ 41.53 39.98
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1997 1000 @ 62.50 37.20
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1998 647 @ 80.88 35.63
Ind Tendulkar S.R 1999 1088 @ 68.00 34.72
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2000 575 @ 63.89 38.69
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2001 1003 @ 62.69 35.61
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2002 1392 @ 55.68 40.08
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2003 153 @ 17.00 37.16
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2004 915 @ 91.50 36.27
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2005 444 @ 44.40 37.39
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2006 267 @ 24.27 37.51
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2007 776 @ 55.43 40.63
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2008 1063 @ 48.32 37.05
Ind Tendulkar S.R 2009 344 @ 68.80 33.11
Career Total 12773 @ 54.59 37.79
Win Lara B.C 1990 49 @ 24.50 29.55
Win Lara B.C 1992 195 @ 32.50 43.13
Win Lara B.C 1993 586 @ 58.60 36.62
Win Lara B.C 1994 996 @ 71.14 39.55
Win Lara B.C 1995 1222 @ 67.89 38.09
Win Lara B.C 1996 226 @ 25.11 43.84
Win Lara B.C 1997 859 @ 40.90 34.98
Win Lara B.C 1998 608 @ 43.43 33.44
Win Lara B.C 1999 832 @ 59.43 28.49
Win Lara B.C 2000 497 @ 29.24 28.28
Win Lara B.C 2001 1151 @ 63.94 29.93
Win Lara B.C 2002 351 @ 35.10 35.93
Win Lara B.C 2003 1344 @ 74.67 34.35
Win Lara B.C 2004 1178 @ 58.90 39.10
Win Lara B.C 2005 1110 @ 65.29 35.12
Win Lara B.C 2006 749 @ 41.61 36.39
Career Total 11953 @ 52.89 35.21
Note how Richards finished his career. The last 5 years have been well below the high standards he had set. The other batsmen have finished well, Tendulkar playing very well and counting. He is going to comfortably maintain the career average of around 55+ to the end.
To peruse the complete table, please click here.
So that the readers can download these six tables and study at leisure I have uploaded the zip file.. Please click here to download the zip file.
Finally I have given below an idea of the changes expected to be done when I re-do the Top Test Batsmen analysis.
1. Use CtD bowling values.
2. Use new Wted Bow Index, using Average and Strike rate, based on Arjun Hemnani's suggestion.
3. Remove Scoring Rate measure.
4. Reduce % Team share weight to 5%.
5. Work out Consistency index for 5% based on 10-Test slices for each batsman.
6. Improve the pitch Index calculations.
7. Determine match performance figures based on number of innings played.
8. Prepare two independent sets of tables: Pre-1940 and Post-1945.
9. Finally R-Factor (you have to wait for the article to know about this).
Comments (86)
May 7, 2009
Posted by Ananth Narayanan at
in Batting
The great Test batsmen - a look across 132 years
|
|
|
Brian Lara is next only to Sir Don in the all-time list of Test batsmen
© AFP
|
| This is one of the most awaited analyses and has been in the pipeline for long. Many readers have asked for this analysis and finally I have been able to complete the same. I have given below a summary of how I have gone about this complex analysis process. This is based on my own observations and comments raised by a number of readers over the past few months.
1. There has to be equal weight given to Match performances and Career achievements. The match analysis should deal with the specific match-related measurable situations only.
2. The batsman's longevity related measure such as career runs scored has to be recognised, but at a lower weighting level, no more than 15-20% of the total.
3. There has to be a clear recognition of the quality of bowling faced
by the batsman in every match. A hundred against Australia has to be
valued at a much higher level than a hundred against Bangladesh or New
Zealand in 1933.
4. The batting average should be considered the most
significant of the career-related measures. However this has to be
adjusted based on the par batting average(s) of the period(s) spanned
by the batsman's career. A pre-WW1 batsman's average has to be adjusted
upwards for the low batting averages prevalent during these period
while a current batsman's average has to be adjusted downwards in view
of the high batting averages prevalent. If a batsman's career spans
multiple periods, there has to be proportionate adjustment.
5. The batsman's career strike rate has become an important measure.
This should be recognized, if available. For those batsmen whose
strike rate information is not available, this parameter will not be
included. If the strike rate is available for part of the batsman's
career, it will be considered for that part only. This is explained in
detail later. There is a case for the innings strike rate to be incorporated in the Match Performance calculations. However this revised methodology necessarily requires the strike rate to be a career-based calculation rather than match innings based.
6. Non-measurable cricketing factors such as bouncers,
helmets, uncovered pitches et al cannot be incorporated. Nice for healthy
discussions, but not beyond.
A lengthy introduction, however the weighty topic required
this. Now let us look at the details.
First a minimum criteria is to be established. I have decided
to keep the minimum runs required at 2000 runs so that great batsmen such as
George Headley, Greame Pollock, Ponsford, Macartney, Hazare, O'Neill,
McCabe et al would come in for consideration. If I had raised the bar
to 3000 runs, all these wonderful players would have missed out. It is
also true that in a different era and political situation they would
have played more Tests.
Now for the Ratings methodology.
The Match Performances would carry a weight of 50 points,
based on the methodology explained below. Career Achievements will carry a
weight of 50 points, based on methodology explained later.
Match Performances:
The following factors are considered.
Base for calculation will be Runs scored.
Other factors
are explained below. Each of these is a multiplicative parameter,
ranging either side of 1.00. For certain parameters such as result,
home/away, runs added with late order et al, there would not be a
below 1.00 value.
1. Pitch type.
2. Quality of bowling - weighted by actual balls bowled by each bowler.
3. Position at batsman entry (5 for 1, 100 for 2, 24 for 3, 325 for 4 et al).
4. Runs added with late order batsmen (no. 8 onwards).
5. Innings type (1/2/3/4, Score faced, Target et al).
6. Match result, taking into consideration relative team strengths.
7. Match location (Home/Away).
8. Match importance (Series status).
The points for each innings are computed, summed and divided by the number of matches played to arrive at the Match Performance Ratings value. The highest Match Performance Ratings value is 40.03 achieved by Bradman. George Headley is the next best in this category with 28.48 points followed by Lara with 27.31 points. Thus the limit of 50 we set has worked out well.
Career achievements:
The points allocation, totalling to 50 points, is explained below.
1. Batting average: 20 points (for an adjusted average of 100.00).
Adjusted by the years spanned by the batsman career and the average Batting Average during the period. The adjustment is done proportionately. Most of the adjustment has been downward, between 1% and 6% (for the 2000s batsmen). The highest adjustment has been 20%, for batsmen such as Hill, Trumper whose entire
career has been before Pre-WW1.
The highest adjusted average is that of Bradman, whose average of 99.96
has been adjusted down to 96.75. He gets 19.35 points and is followed
by Hobbs (61.68) with 12.34 points and Weekes (61.06) with 12.21
points.
2. Runs scored: 15 points (for scoring 15,000 Test runs).
Away runs are given a slightly higher weight as explained. Scoring 1050 home runs gets one point for the
batsman while 950 away runs will be enough to get one point. The differential of 10% seems very reasonable. This is the only longevity-based measure and carries a weight of only 15%.
This is a straight-forward calculation. Tendulkar is the highest and gets 12.85 points followed by Lara with 11.93 and Border with 11.16 points.
3. Scoring rate: 10 points (for a scoring rate of 100).
The full 10 points (and a total of 100 points) will be the base for batsmen like Sehwag, Hayden et al, whose career strike rate is available in complete. For batsmen such as Bradman, Hobbs et al, there will be no points taken, consequently the total points for
consideration of the Ratings points % will be 90. For batsmen such as Lara, Tendulkar
et al, proportionate points, out of 10, will be considered, consequently the
total points for consideration of the Ratings points % will be between
90 and 100. This delicate tweak was suggested by Shyam (Ananthanarayan).
Among those whose complete data is available, Gilchrist leads in this measure with 8.20 points followed by Sehwag with 7.87 points and Pieterson with 6.32 points.
4. % of Team runs scored: 5 points (for scoring 25% of team runs).
Bradman is the leader in this measure, having
scored 24.98% of the team runs. He gets 4.99 points, followed by Headley with 4.32 points and Lara with 3.79 points.
Now for the Top-20 table.
The best Test batsmen of all time
No.Cty Batsman Mat Total Rating Match BatAvg Runs BatSR %-TS Max
Pts Pts Perf Pts Pts Pts Pts Pts
1.Aus Bradman D.G 52 (71.27) 79.19 40.02 19.35 6.91 .... 4.99 90.00
2.Win Lara B.C 131 (58.44) 59.40 27.31 10.43 11.93 4.98 3.79 98.38
3.Ind Tendulkar S.R 159 (53.68) 54.59 22.43 10.69 12.85 4.60 3.11 98.33
4.Aus Ponting R.T 131 (54.46) 54.46 23.95 10.85 10.88 5.91 2.87 100.00
5.Eng Hobbs J.B 61 (48.53) 53.93 27.07 12.34 5.49 .... 3.64 90.00
6.Win Sobers G.St.A 93 (48.14) 53.49 25.48 11.48 8.03 .... 3.16 90.00
7.Eng Hutton L 79 (47.78) 53.09 25.85 11.35 6.93 .... 3.66 90.00
8.Ind Gavaskar S.M 125 (47.40) 52.51 23.81 10.02 10.12 0.11 3.35 90.28
9.Win Headley G.A 22 (46.98) 52.20 28.48 12.00 2.18 .... 4.32 90.00
10.Ind Dravid R 134 (51.80) 51.80 23.58 10.11 10.92 4.17 3.02 100.00
11.Aus Hayden M.L 103 (51.71) 51.71 24.47 9.85 8.54 6.01 2.84 100.00
12.Win EdeC Weekes 48 (45.83) 50.92 25.65 12.21 4.44 .... 3.53 90.00
13.Saf Kallis J.H 131 (50.73) 50.73 22.51 10.56 10.23 4.42 3.01 100.00
14.Eng Barrington K.F 82 (45.63) 50.70 23.72 11.71 6.81 .... 3.39 90.00
15.Aus Border A.R 156 (46.62) 50.40 21.50 10.07 11.16 1.01 2.89 92.50
16.Pak Mohammad Yousuf 79 (50.37) 50.37 24.50 10.60 6.81 5.26 3.20 100.00
17.Slk Sangakkara K.C 80 (50.09) 50.09 24.23 10.33 6.73 5.59 3.21 100.00
18.Aus Chappell G.S 87 (45.27) 50.04 24.31 10.54 7.01 0.24 3.17 90.48
19.Ind Sehwag V 69 (49.69) 49.69 23.59 9.40 5.77 7.87 3.06 100.00
20.Win Richards I.V.A 121 (44.67) 49.39 22.81 9.90 8.65 0.31 2.99 90.45
Any doubts as to the position of Bradman at the top should
disappear after this analysis. Bradman is the best in three measures (Match
Performance, Batting Average and % of Team Score). He is ahead of the
next best batsman by a whopping 25%. A series average of 57 by Bradman
was considered to be a failure. It is necessary to agree, once and for
all, that Bradman is and was the best Test batsman who ever played.
Note the qualification, "Test", however. Who can forget the 334, 304,
270, 173* that Bradman scored.
Lara's second position again should not surprise any one.
Playing for a weak team, mostly with inconsistent support, he essayed
some of the best Test innings ever. 153*, 213, 277, 375/400 should
figure in anybody's list of Top-20 innings. He also scored at a fair
pace. Finally has there ever been a better batsman's Test series than
the one, away, against Sri Lanka when he scored 688 runs, all in a
losing cause. Lara is way behind Bradman but is very comfortably ahead
of the next batsman.
The third and fourth positions should be looked together. Tendulkar and Ponting are
separated only in the second decimal, that too because of Ponting's below-average
series aginst South Africa. Two wonderful batsmen, capable of saving or winning Tests,
fully deserving of their high place in this table. If Tendulkar is a more all-round
batsman with an outstanding technique and no weakness, Ponting is the more attacking
batsman but with a known weakness against top class spinners.
Hobbs is in fifth position, deservedly so, no doubt aided by
the upwards revision of his batting average. He played on a number of
bowler-friendly pitches and it is difficult to think of a better opener
other than the one who appears slightly below him.
The top-10 is completed by Sobers, Hutton, Gavaskar, Headley
and Dravid. Every one of these batsmen deserves his position. Headley
is in the Top-10 despite playing only 22 Tests and scoring 2190 runs.
This is a vindication of the Ratings methodology in that a batsman who
has scored only a fifth of the runs the others have scored can still
come into the Top-10.
Richards' position at no.20 might be questioned by some. The
problem is that Richards, with his carefree attitude alternated great
performances with very average performances in his Test career. This is
clearly shown in the Match performances points, quite low at 22.81.
Also his adjusted average is below 50. Finally a simple indicator is the fact
that he has taken 121 Tests to score 8540 runs (71 runs per Test) as
compared to Lara, 131 Tests and 11953 runs (91 runs per Test) or
Hayden, 103 Tests and 8625 runs (84 runs per Test). It is also true
that he never faced the most fearsome bowling attack at that time.
Similarly Hammond's 22nd position (Pieterson is at no.21) must
also be looked at with surprise. This is explained by the fact that a
fair proportion of his runs were scored against very weak New Zealand
attacks and average South African and West Indian attacks.
To view the complete list, please click here.
The support information for the Top-20 batsmen is given below.
The best Test batsmen of all time: Support data
SNo. Cty Batsman Mat Rating Runs Batting (Adj) BatSR %-TS Career
Pts Average (%) BowQty
1. Aus Bradman D.G 52 79.19 6996 96.75 (0.97) .... 25.0% 36.1
2. Win Lara B.C 131 59.40 11953 52.15 (0.99) 59.4* 19.0% 35.4
3. Ind Tendulkar S.R 159 54.59 12773 53.46 (0.98) 55.2* 15.5% 37.1
4. Aus Ponting R.T 131 54.46 10956 54.26 (0.97) 59.1 14.4% 37.0
5. Eng Hobbs J.B 61 53.93 5410 61.68 (1.08) .... 18.2% 35.7
6. Win Sobers G.St.A 93 53.49 8032 57.40 (0.99) .... 15.8% 33.4
7. Eng Hutton L 79 53.09 6971 56.73 (1.00) .... 18.3% 38.4
8. Ind Gavaskar S.M 125 52.51 10122 50.10 (0.98) 38.5* 16.7% 35.6
9. Win Headley G.A 22 52.20 2190 60.02 (0.99) .... 21.6% 32.6
10. Ind Dravid R 134 51.80 10823 50.54 (0.96) 41.7 15.1% 37.0
11. Aus Hayden M.L 103 51.71 8626 49.27 (0.97) 60.1 14.2% 37.3
12. Win EdeC Weekes 48 50.92 4455 61.06 (1.04) .... 17.7% 36.1
13. Saf Kallis J.H 131 50.73 10277 52.79 (0.97) 44.2 15.1% 37.1
14. Eng Barrington K.F 82 50.70 6806 58.55 (1.00) .... 17.0% 36.0
15. Aus Border A.R 156 50.40 11174 50.33 (1.00) 40.5* 14.4% 34.0
16. Pak Mohammad Yousuf 79 50.37 6770 53.00 (0.96) 52.6 16.0% 38.7
17. Slk Sangakkara K.C 80 50.09 6764 51.65 (0.94) 55.9 16.1% 39.4
18. Aus Chappell G.S 87 50.04 7110 52.70 (0.98) 50.8* 15.8% 33.4
19. Ind Sehwag V 69 49.69 5757 47.02 (0.94) 78.7 15.3% 36.0
20. Win Richards I.V.A 121 49.39 8540 49.52 (0.99) 68.1* 15.0% 33.8
'*' means only part strike rate information is available.
The values are self-explanatory. The Batting Average shown is the
adjusted figure and the figure in brackets shows the adjustment done. To view the complete list, please click here
One final note on the quality of bowling faced. For correct
cricketing reasons I had incorporated this measure in the "Match
Performance" segment so that a 100 scored against a strong Australian
attack would carry a lot more weight than a similar innings against a
weak Bangladeshi attack. However I have also done another complicated
exercise, to provide an analytical answer to those who had mentioned
that Bradman faced weak bowling attacks.
I considered every innings played by a batsman, multiplied this by
the weighted bowling quality for the particular innings, summed this
value and divided by the total number of runs scored. There cannot be a better indicator of the quality of bowling faced than this. The last column above indicates this weighted bowling quality indicator for the top-20 batsmen.
It is clear that Bradman faced as good a bowling attack, on an
average, as any one else in the Top-10. In fact he faced a better
bowling attack than Tendulkar, Ponting, Hayden and Dravid. So that
argument should be put to rest.
Amongst the top batsman the batsman who faced the most
powerful bowling attack was Graham Gooch, Alec Stewart, Atherton et al, around 30. This
is quite understandable, considering the quality of West indian bowlers
Gooch faced.
The least powerful attack was faced by Ames, Hammond et al, with around 45. If one looks at the 1932-33 New Zealand attack (sum total of 29 career Test wickets) we can understand this. Then come Sangakkara, Atapattu and Jayasuriya. Understandable considering the tons of runs scored by them against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.
To view the complete bowling quality list, please click here
If an analysis is made combining both Tests and ODIs, which I would do later, it is almost certain that Tendulkar would be no.1, although I expect that Richards,
Lara and Ponting would run him close. We obviously have to exclude great batsmen such as Bradman, Hobbs, Sobers et al from this exercise.
Based on the requests from readers an illustration of the Match Performance Ratings calculation will be posted at the earliest.
Match Performance Ratings - Illustrative example
This innings is one of the top-3 innings ever played (might even be the best ever).
Laxman V.V.S
Ind vs Aus, Kolkatta, 2001
Runs scored: 281
Base points: 70.25
- Runs multiplied by 0.25. Really does not matter, can be
anything. 0.25 has been selected since there is no need to
do any scaling up/down later.
Multiplicative indices
Bowling quality: 1.109 (Range: 0.75 to 1.25)
- Weighted bowling average determined by summing product
of bowler's average and balls bowled in the match by
each bowler and dividing by team balls.
- Strong Australian attack. Well above average.
Pitch type: 0.899 (Range: 0.80 to 1.20)
- The pitch characteristics for the concerned year.
- Very good batting pitch.
Entry: 1.075 (Range: 1.00 to 1.15)
- Complex formula based on the innings position at batsman entry.
1/2 innings dealt different to 3/4 innings.
Openers dealt with in a special manner.
- 3rd innings, 222 in arrears at 52 for 1.
Match situation: 1.30 (Range: 1.00 to 1.30)
- Various conditions such as which innings, arrears faced,
target in front of team used. Notional target in case of 3rd
innings and Actual target in case of 4th innings.
- Follow on 274 behind - Still in arrears.
Runs with Late order: 1.00 (Range: 1.00 to 1.30)
- Runs added with batsmen 7-11.
- No runs with late order. No change.
Win bonus: 1.09 (Range: 1.05 to 1.10)
- Result after considering the relative team strengths.
- Win against very strong team - 21% better.
Home/Away: 1.00 (1.00 to 1.05)
- Away bonus only if win is against good teams,
not weak teams (e-g), Ban/Zim/Nzl(1920s) et al.
- Home. No change.
Series status: 1.04 (Range: 0.98 to 1.06)
- Complex analysis based on series status. Maximum for
deciding tests and minimum for dead rubbers.
- 3 test series, trailing 0-1.
Match Performance Rating points: 110.88 (70.25 x 1.5784).
For each batsman, the MPR points are added and divided by the number of innings played to arrive the Match performance Ratings Index.
If anyone thought that I sit and do these individually (and so can modify figures as I wanted), think again. There have been 67438 innings played until now. I have complex computer algorithms for each of these parameters and these are automatically worked out with no manual intervention.
Just to give the readers an indication of the validity of method let me compare two innings by Lara (same batsman chosen to avoid 20 comments). The 400* gets a MPR value of 65.20 points while the 213 carries a MPR value of 73.83 points.
If you are interested in perusing the "C" program code for just one index, just mail me. I will send you the code. It is not made available to all in view of the highly technical nature of the same.
Comments (421)
|
RSS Feed
