Sachin Tendulkar better than Don Bradman, new study shows

[Daemon]

Always knew he was a myth

 

[ganeshran]

I consider him a fine player - but the below grandiose paragraph is stretching it.

The real problem here stems entirely because Bradman is far too superhuman to be real. He was so much better than everyone else that he must have been a caricature. An invention by statisticians to prove a point to their students about outliers and statistical impossibilities. He was a phantom. Seen by many, his exploits recorded but entirely unbelievable by any rational being. If, instead, his average was 75 or even 80 then he would be undisputedly the best player of all time. Not only that, but he'd be within the realms of possibility. But with an average of 99.94, he is nothing more than an old wives tale. His exploits simply unfathomable to those who never saw him play.

 

[Burgey]

Ya, they had that screwed belief at that time. Even third umpire was not around.

The third umpire won't be about in Monday because of skewed beliefs

The more things change....

 

[Migara]

Wow, I just noticed my George there
Lets be honest here. The standard of the game has improved due to techniques being investigated more, cricket becoming a fulltime job etc. Bradman would not average 99.94 nowadays imho. I still rate him at that level when creating an All Time XI because you can only compare his prowess with the level bowlers he was facing, as the development of bowlers and batsmen should be roughly parallel.

Basically, I rate his 99.94 average as one that deserves to be seen as a 99.94 average across the historical board, because I feel that as much as the art of bowling may have been less developed, so too was the art of batting.

I differ from you there. I would say standards bowling and fielding were much inferior to that of batting. Imagine, no reverse swing, no doosras, no mystery bowlers, no four prong pace attacks trying to kill you. I'd treat that 99.94, a tad lower.

 

[MrPrez]

You could argue that batsmen had low-quality bats, nowhere near the technical assistance batsmen get nowadays, and other stuff.

 

[Migara]

You could argue that batsmen had low-quality bats, nowhere near the technical assistance batsmen get nowadays, and other stuff.

Not true if we add Sobers in to the equation.

 

[fredfertang]

Not true if we add Sobers in to the equation.

I had a Slazenger Gary Sobers bat when I was a kid - it was ****ing useless, no better than the Special Colin Cowdree (sic) that my Uncle picked up from a market stall in Rawtenstall for two bob

 

[MrPrez]

Explain?

EDIT: @ Migara

 

[Migara]

MrPrez: the bat quality improved very recently. There were batsmen who played with slightly better bats against vastly superior attacks (some trying to kill you) and averaged 50-60

 

[MrPrez]

Yes... and Bradman averaged 40 runs more per innings. That is a substantial amount, even if the bowling attacks that he faced were weaker.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

http://sports.ndtv.com/cricket/news...n-tendulkar-close-to-don-bradmans-style-study

Inzy WAG.

 

[Migara]

Yes... and Bradman averaged 40 runs more per innings. That is a substantial amount, even if the bowling attacks that he faced were weaker.

Nah, when he received something close to what West Indian pace battery he averaged 55. Just about 5 - 10 runs above what ATG batsmen did against West Indies pace battery

 

[MrPrez]

How many matches did he play against this bowling line up?

 

[Migara]

How many matches did he play against this bowling line up?

Please qualify "this"

 

[Burgey]

Migara conveniently ignores the WI pace battery not having the benefit of a Bodyline field.

Standard.

 

[Howe_zat]

This thread wasn't actually as bad as a lot of people were making it out to be, even though it was never really going to go anywhere particularly good.

One thing people were discussing that I felt I had to comment on was use of the CLT and normal distribution. I'm afraid that doesn't hold at all, the set of all of a batsman's innings can't be modelled as a normal distribution, because a normal distribution assumes that the population mean and mode are equal, and the distribution is symmetric about the mean.

 

[Neil Pickup]

The "rotary method" is a very interesting read and I'd suggest all students of batting technique to give it a bit of research as there are certainly pointers that we can all learn from.

 

[Neil Pickup]

This thread wasn't actually as bad as a lot of people were making it out to be, even though it was never really going to go anywhere particularly good.

One thing people were discussing that I felt I had to comment on was use of the CLT and normal distribution. I'm afraid that doesn't hold at all, the set of all of a batsman's innings can't be modelled as a normal distribution, because a normal distribution assumes that the population mean and mode are assumed to be equal, and the distribution is symmetric about the mean.

OK, stats time, what distribution would you use to model batsmen's innings?

What tests would you consider as appropriate to make a call on the significance level of their average after 80 Tests?

 

[fredfertang]

Migara conveniently ignores the WI pace battery not having the benefit of a Bodyline field.

Standard.

DRJ averaged 127 against Bodyline therefore Jardine>Bradman with Tendulkar not qualified to join the comparison

 

[MrPrez]

The bowling line up that he supposedly averages 55ish against.