Ranking the great fast bowlers

[silentstriker]

Here is the thread where I go and ask him: http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cri...owled-test-cricket-history-3.html#post1884333

 

[wellAlbidarned]

You seem so certain about that. What evidence do you currently have given that both Imran and Thommo (see previous Mack Nicholas interview) believe that their speed was calculated "at the stumps"? That is, the batsman's stumps.

Just curious.

If you watch the high speed camera shots supposedly used to calculate the speed (they're littered throughout youtube), you'll see that they're all of the bowlers delivering the ball, not the ball reaching the batsman.

 

[watson]

Here is SSs quote from that original thread;

So, Dr. Frank Pyke was good enough to get back to me, and according to him:


The speed was measured out of the bowler's hand.

His words, straight from the guy who did the measurement. That's that.

So to me, it seems that Thommo was as quick as anyone we have now pre-injury and possibly faster, if he was still bowling 148kph post-injury, as everyone agrees he slowed down after. However, it does put him more into the reasonable range, as well as the rest of the bowlers instead of having 10 bowlers who were all supposedly capable of bowling 150+ in the seventies. I have no idea how the 'we take average speed' myth got started though, as it seems to be a common perception.

I think that we should probably take at face value the claim that Dr Pyke actually did e-mail/phone a reply to SS, although I have no real reason to be absolutely sure short of seeing the original e-mail or hearing a recording of the phone-call. I reserve the right to be sceptical. After all, this is the internet.

I guess the problem that some Cricketwebers have is the idea that none of the World's fastest bowlers in 1979 (even Thommo post injury) could muster up enough skill and effort to break into the 150kph barrier. It is completely counter-intuitive.

Judging by how far back the keeper stands in a competitive match, and by how hard the ball hits his gloves it seems plausible that Thommo, Holding, Imran etc were easily 150+ kph bowlers when they were exerting themselves. And in that 1979 study it is obvious that they were exerting themselves.

But then again, SS is perfectly correct in pointing out that human intuition is a poor guide when it comes to science. Quantam mechanics often makes no intuitive sense, but in the end we have to bow to the scientific method and empirical observation.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

No-one's ever said that they didn't bowl 150kph?

 

[watson]

I realise that - but we are referring specifically to the 1979 study where everyone was under 150kph all day. Thommo won the comp with a sub-150 kph ball (At least I think he did). This is the fact that some Cricketwebers find incredible.

 

[silentstriker]

Here is SSs quote from that original thread;



I think that we should probably take at face value the claim that Dr Pyke actually did e-mail/phone a reply to SS, although I have no real reason to be absolutely sure short of seeing the original e-mail or hearing a recording of the phone-call. I reserve the right to be sceptical. After all, this is the internet.

I never spoke to him over the phone but I would be happy to forward my conversation to you. Regarding this specific subject, it was a one line reply so I don't think there is much to that but post your email on my wall and I'll send it to you. I had additional conversation with him but unfortunately the full interview never materialized.

I guess the problem that some Cricketwebers have is the idea that none of the World's fastest bowlers in 1979 (even Thommo post injury) could muster up enough skill and effort to break into the 150kph barrier. It is completely counter-intuitive

Perhaps for you it is but it makes perfect sense to me and fits in quite nicely with every other sport in the universe. Facing 145kph bouncers without a helmet is not something to be minimized. From 145kph to 155kph is less than 7% increase in speed (and it's not like you have bunches of people at 155kph) - and now you don't have to worry about dying if you miss a hook shot. It changes perceptions.

 

[silentstriker]

And that goes for anyone else, I don't mind forwarding my email(s) with him to anyone who asks for proof - just message me on here and I'll forward it. I think it's important that people ought to be able to produce evidence for their claims.

Which is part of the reason I find this discussion odd - people's refusal to believe facts over some guy's claims of keeping to 180kph deliveries...

 

[Jager]

The 180km/h claim is ridiculous, that's for sure.

For me, I just find it hard to believe that almost all of the fast men of the 70's maxed out between 125-138km/h. If the figure was 145km/h or so, I'd much more readily take it.

 

[Psycho Macaque]

I've spoken to some that say Larwood is the fastest ever, I'm certain it'd be difficult to judge over a 40 year period. I've spoken to someone whose dad saw both Kortright and Larwood and reckoned Charlie was faster... It's one of the mysteries that makes cricket great. I'm sure there's a level of parochialism in a lot of people's judgements - such as 180km/h. Madness.

 

[kyear2]

And that goes for anyone else, I don't mind forwarding my email(s) with him to anyone who asks for proof - just message me on here and I'll forward it. I think it's important that people ought to be able to produce evidence for their claims.

Which is part of the reason I find this discussion odd - people's refusal to believe facts over some guy's claims of keeping to 180kph deliveries...

No one believe's 180kph, just dont believe the max out 138k either.
Artificial settings and 30yrd old techniques just leaves too much questions for me.
Ask Boycott if Holding was slower than Kemar Roach.

 

[silentstriker]

Yea, I'll trust Boycott's gumption over a scientific test done by a professor of sports science.

 

[smash84]

Boycott's mum can bowl at 200 km/h

 

[watson]

Underarm.

 

[smash84]

 

[silentstriker]

Underarm.

That's just her leg spinner that's at 200kph.

 

[Burgey]

I hope there will come a time when there's a means of analysing all this old footage which lets us accurately calibrate these blokes' speeds. It may well already exist, but perhaps the cost is prohibitive atm.

Be great to actually verify/ put to bed these various claims.

 

[silentstriker]

I hope there will come a time when there's a means of analysing all this old footage which lets us accurately calibrate these blokes' speeds. It may well already exist, but perhaps the cost is prohibitive atm.

Be great to actually verify/ put to bed these various claims.

Not unfortunately unless there are very high speed cameras that recorded those games that we just don't know about.

 

[watson]

I can't see how it can be done with any accuracy because of the poor quality of old black and white film.

I have seen some side on footage of Jack Gregory bowling with the keeper standing back about the length of the pitch. The carry to the keeper was hard and good. This would suggest a bowler who was fast, but just how fast exactly is anyones guess.

Indeed, how far back the keeper and slips stand to a fast bowler would give a relative comparison of speed. Now, there's some homework for someone.

 

[silentstriker]

Keepers prefer to collect at different heights, plus a lot of that also has to do with height of the bowlers and such. Certainly with the differences in speed we are talking about (say ~10%-~15%) - you probably couldn't draw any conclusions whatsoever.

 

[watson]

By looking at where Rod Marsh stands to Lillee and then comparing it to where he stands for Thomson (in the same match) you would have to conclude that Thomson is faster relative to Lillee if the distance increased by 8 metres (for example).

That's an empirical observation with a conclusion. Weak science, but science none-the-less.