New feature: Zero to Sixty; Important Runs in Test Cricket

[chasingthedon]

Ya, Sanga is definitely missing a few thousand runs

Oops, short-changed him about 75 innings!

I'll have to check the others also, will update shortly.

 

[ankitj]

Good read.

I will however stop at average in important innings and not consider difference between important and regular innings averages. That latter number penalizes a batsman who did as well in regular innings as in important ones. That should make one a better batsman not worse for same level important innings average.

 

[mr_mister]

Great read, top work.

It's easy to look at Ponting's average and forget just how ridiculously good he was. He was a run machine whose average suffered dramatically by playing on past when his eye went.

And it was his eye going, since when he returned to shield cricket after retirement he averaged 100, suggesting it was simply that age had diminished his reflexes somewhat.

Does that actually prove that though?

 

[stephen]

Does that actually prove that though?

No.

I imagine that Ponting's early career batting at 5 was where many of his unimportant innings came from. He was coming in behind some other very good batsmen and didn't do very well there (by his standards). This probably has helped him a bit in this analysis.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Exposes Border and Kallis as the downhill skiing ****s that they were.

 

[Victor Ian]

Kallis, maybe yes. I'd guess many of Border's regular innings would be of the nothing to lose flavour, which considering the effect of ridicule for Australia at the time might well count as important too.

 

[Bolo]

Exposes Border and Kallis as the downhill skiing ****s that they were.

Sure. Analysis of impact average reveals the term downhill skiier is primarily complementary to Kallis and Border. As you were.

 

[Migara]

There is nothing called not important or important runs. Just relative importance of runs.

 

[trundler]

There is nothing called not important or important runs. Just relative importance of runs.

Therefore making some runs less important than others.. which is what this set out to measure.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Therefore making some runs less important than others.. which is what this set out to measure.

It's too binary

 

[Borges]

Apparently the overwhelming majority of the runs scored (close to three fourths of all runs) turn out to be very important runs.

I'm somewhat sceptical about these results; for instance I do not think that most people would agree with the conclusion that the Lesser AB was a notorious downhill skier.

 

[chasingthedon]

Good read.

I will however stop at average in important innings and not consider difference between important and regular innings averages. That latter number penalizes a batsman who did as well in regular innings as in important ones. That should make one a better batsman not worse for same level important innings average.

Wasn't my intention to suggest a batsman is better in that regard, simply for comparison purposes. When I summarise all batsmen I'll note e.g. batsmen who averaged over 50 for both.

For example, suppose Bradman had turned out to be 90 for important innings and 110 for regular, I wouldn't for a moment suggest that makes him lesser than a batsman who averaged 50 in important innings and 30 in regular innings. Nonetheless, I think the comparison is an interesting one.

 

[chasingthedon]

It's too binary

01010111 01101000 01100001 01110100 01100101 01110110 01100101 01110010

 

[TheJediBrah]

I do not think that most people would agree with the conclusion that the Lesser AB was a notorious downhill skier.

I thought that was just accepted fact tbh, I don't think it should take away from how good a player he is but a lot of his runs seemed to come when SA were already in a comfortable situation

 

[chasingthedon]

Let me check this - CricketArchive changed its format and I had to append two separate lists, I may have messed that up.

Sadly my cat died over the weekend so it will be a little while longer checking this.

 

[trundler]

Sadly my cat died over the weekend so it will be a little while longer checking this.

Sorry to hear. My condolences.

 

[the big bambino]

Really surprising. He is behind Jayawardene by a massive margin despite more career runs for the same team batting higher up the order. Sanga must be the anti-ponting on this list

I guess we can appreciate the greatness of Ponting without diminishing his reputation on the basis of a distorted differential in his away v home averages.

 

[Bolo]

I guess we can appreciate the greatness of Ponting without diminishing his reputation on the basis of a distorted differential in his away v home averages.

Feel free to give Ponting props. But not by looking at an error in Sangas stats after it has been shown as such. Or by pretending Pontings home away difference isn't important- the circumstances that contributed to it are significantly responsible for his high placement, demonstrable through the records of most bats we are seeing.

 

[chasingthedon]

Sorry to hear. My condolences.

Cheers. 17 years - as my dad says, she had a good innings.

 

[the big bambino]

Feel free to give Ponting props. But not by looking at an error in Sangas stats after it has been shown as such. Or by pretending Pontings home away difference isn't important- the circumstances that contributed to it are significantly responsible for his high placement, demonstrable through the records of most bats we are seeing.

Don't know about the first part but the circumstances around the second have been explained to you. Without wishing to start up an old issue, there is nothing wrong with actually admitting you got something wrong once in while. Instead of finding justifications as to why it isn't you but its the evidence that must be wrong.