Search results for query: *

Statsman74.... I appreciate the input. You're essentially 100% right in what you say. I don't disagree. But don't think this is all about me hating on 'not outs'. I call if efficiency rating because this method is about evaluating a batter's consistency as a batter. It's just another...

I don't think that's going to help. 1) Not Outs is an achievment that should be part of the 2nd category (which is a bonus category). Hypothetic would be wrongly punished with a rating of 0.00 without all his 99 not outs. 2) Who's to say Bradman didn't get out next ball for 299? 3) Officially...

Cool that does look a lot better now. Thanks guys for discussing and brainstorming. I'll do a Bowling Efficiency Rate tomorrow and run it by you guys again.

Here's a re-adjustment to see how it stacks up.... Name 50's% 100's% NO's% 200's% 300+'s% Lara 35.34 41.46 2.58 20.59 28.57 Tendulkar 35.68 46.05 10.33 11.43 0.00 Ponting 38.12 46.05 13.81...

But let me try something.... Let me tinker with the formula. I'll explain when I post it, few mins please....

That's because you're looking at like runs scored. It's purely about hitting the marks 50 100 200 and how frequently you do it. Not about how many you're scoring per inns. You could score 99, 99, 99. and be averaging 99, but you're efficiency is not 99. It's 3 50's / 3 inns and 0 100's...

Hussey's first 18 innings... Inns-18 NO's-4 50's-4 100-3 200-0 300-0 7 / 18 x 100 = 38.89 (number of 50's and 100's / inns) 3 / 7 x 100 = 42.86 (number of 100's out of 50's and 100's) 38.89 + 42.86 / 2 = 40.88 4 / 18 = 22.22 (number of NO's divided by inns) (no 200s or...

YOTC, but you're just counting his LAST SIX INNINGS. He has batted a full 24 innings. Overall, from debut to now, his efficiency is around 54. His last 6 innings have actually PUSHED his efficiency rate up from where his first 18 innings were at.

Lara scored 7 scores over 200. Of those 2 went for over 300. 2 divided by 7 x 100 = 28.57% Bradman scored 12 scores over 200. Of those 2 went for over 300. 2 divided by 12 x 100 = 16.67% IE, just in this category, Lara converted more of his doubles into triples. But don't forget...

As for the idea that this is too complex, that's not really fair or true, considering Cricket has millions of stats, some very complex like the ICC Rankings, etc, and is a sport all about stats and the more stats to dissect players' achievments and compare them to each other. I will probably...

It hasn't really punished Hussey tho. To be fair, he has only completed 24 innings and achieved 8 50's and 5 100's. No doubles. Meanwhile, someone like Lara, the only one above him, has completed a full career of 232 innings, has 40 more 50's and 29 more hundreds, as well as 7 scores over 200...

It's not about bringing any batters average down. It's about removing any possibility of an anomaly warping the integrity of the stat or the method. (I did emphasize many times in the post the word "anomaly" and that this method was created to remove/minimize them). Ex: In the current batting...

Too much is weighted on batting average. On its own, it isn't enough. Batting average (runs/outs) or Innings Average (runs/innings) are open to anamolies. For instance, a player can be not out so many times that his average can be much higher than his highest score. Taking a leaf out of...

You're very right on both counts. About Lara....very true, and a reason why in some ways he wasted his talent. He was destroying records whenever he put his mind to it. Whenever he truly focused on getting a big score he would get it with a conviction and aggression unlike many. His average etc...

Well, if Hanif Mohammed could score 499 in a 1950s FC match then Lara's 501* can be topped. These sorts of highest test score or highest match aggregate scores or highest partnership records often happen in the sub-continent where there are tandem spinners used days on end (more overs) and...

The best ones I reckon are these.... "Surely you're not going, doctor? There's still one stump standing." "Why are you so fat?" "Because every time I make love to your wife, she gives me a biscuit." "It's red, round and weighs about five ounces, in case you were wondering." "Greg...

Then again, if McGrath and Warne alone can account for 1200 Australian Test wickets, imagine what another 9 top class bowlers could do. Especially on a balanced wicket, not ODI flat track. Still, the batters coming on to bowl would likely sort out the "bowling" side. When you think of the best...

Don't forget there are no keepers in either side, so whatever edges happened the "bowlers" side would probably drop a lot of them in the slips. While there would actually be a few specialist slips/backup keepers in the "batsmen" side to take whatever edges did come their way. With this in mind...

Hayden SR....... 60.79 tests, 75.90 ODI Kallis SR........... 42.84 tests, 70.42 ODI But....SR isn't as significant as Real Ave. Some players' games are to be methodical and stout, others robust and aggressive. It's what you do with either style (Real Ave) that counts as to how effective a...

Lara has only had 6 not outs his whole test career. Overall, as a test average this would have a hugely reduced effect compared with say Steve Waugh who has had 46 not outs and a bloated average. Here are some comparisons.... Player Inn NO Runs Current Ave Real Ave Lara 214 6...

You make good points. I guess why statistics are so relied upon is that statistics is all that spectators, commentators, and the players have to compare themselves and their achievments. I guess to back up your post, when Richie Benaud, Ian Botham, or Gary Sobers, etc, come out and say things...

Averages bloat with not outs. If they averaged a batsman based simply on runs/innings batted, you'd have far different results. Tendulkar and Steve Waugh for instance have far higher averages because of their not outs, and would probably be lower compared to players like Lara who have far fewer...

It's not just stats alone though crownie. It's a combination of things. Stats, quality of opposition, covered pitches, their struggles against seamers/swingers/unfriendly wickets, etc.

ECHUCABOY - Well Richie Benaud has seen them, and he rates them best team ever by a long stretch. In fact, he even puts the Windies 80's side just below it like Sobers did. If Richie has seen everything and everyone, then his is the word on it. As for only playing England....they were an...

Exactly, meaning that's an even bigger feat for him and players of that era than todays crop. I mentioned that a handful of posts up. You mentioning that again only serves to back up the fact Bradman/Co were a better team than the 00 side.

Basing that judgment on the fact Bradman was 2 times better than anyone in his era or since, and the whole team under him was by synergy better than most of that era and since. The overall team basically twice as good.

Crownie, you don't have to always see something before you can judge. I think the statistics and other known facts (like uncovered pitches) are testament to the class of the '48 side and Bradman himself. Example...not everyone has even seen let alone heard of Gupte, so who is anyone then to...

Collingwood's side and Bradman & Co. are a world of class apart.

Sobers is right. a) It is his personal/professional judgment, b) That judgment is highly on the mark, not 100%, but up there. The Australian batting line-up would have struggled far worse against that pace attack than the Windies would have against Warne/McGrath. They would've struggled against...

All i know is that when a sport first creates an alternate version of itself to attract crowds, and then creates alternate versions of the alternate versions, and constantly tampers with rules to bring excitement to the game.....that essentially it all means there is something flawed with the...