CW Test Rankings - Updated Jan 2012

[Neil Pickup]

As Marc said for ODIs.. I guess I could knock something up based on this if we could work out a decent way of splitting the points for a Series.

Updated Test Rankings: 6th January 2002

Home Test Matches
1 Australia 1496
2 South Africa 1087
3 West Indies 984
4 India 968
5 Sri Lanka 875
6 England 839
7 New Zealand 776
8 Pakistan 578
9 Zimbabwe 339
10 Bangladesh 73

Away Test Matches
1 Australia 1614
2 South Africa 1260
3 New Zealand 1178
4 England 1074
5 Pakistan 945
6 India 645
7 Sri Lanka 597
8 West Indies 274
9 Zimbabwe 248
10 Bangladesh 0

Overall Table
1 Australia 1560 [+0.4%]
2 South Africa 1168 [+4.7%]
3 New Zealand 965 [-0.4%] (+1)
4 England 957 [-2.2%] (-1)
5 India 817 [-0.7%] (+1)
6 Pakistan 785 [-11.1%] (-1)
7 Sri Lanka 753 [-0.5%]
8 West Indies 608 [-1.8%]
9 Zimbabwe 294 [-0.3%]
10 Bangladesh 31 [+0.0%]

 

[Bazza]

Neil these look great on face value. Very accurate.

Two queries - could you show changes in points not perecntages for future updates, and also could you give as a bit of information regarding the calcualtions?

Finally re the ODI thingy, maybe you could just make all matches equal, irrelevant to whether it's a one-off or 7 match series. Not ideal but simplifies things somewhat. This is of course unless someone comes up with a different system?

 

[Neil Pickup]

Neil these look great on face value. Very accurate.

Two queries - could you show changes in points not perecntages for future updates, and also could you give as a bit of information regarding the calcualtions?

Finally re the ODI thingy, maybe you could just make all matches equal, irrelevant to whether it's a one-off or 7 match series. Not ideal but simplifies things somewhat. This is of course unless someone comes up with a different system?

Righto will do the points changes in future

I would do something like that for ODIs but that doesn't take into account Tri-Series and the like. That makes it very difficult to get value judgements..

Re: Calculations... I'll post at the weekend. Can't think in evenings. School. A Levels.

 

[James]

How did you get New Zealand at 7th for Home Tests?:wow:

 

[marc71178]

The home series they've won have generally been against overall weak away sides - the only real good one is SL.

Neil ranks each series based on the home teams efforts and the away teams efforts as a whole.

Looking at the figures it does all add up...

 

[Neil Pickup]

How did you get New Zealand at 7th for Home Tests?:wow:

Their Home Record, whilst good on the surface, is due to their home wins being against teams who travel very badly, and as such they don't get many points against them.

The best way to get Home points is by winning against Australia, South Africa, New Zealand and England. And New Zealand haven't whilst Sri Lanka, England, India and WI have.

New Zealand, on the other hand, succeed to a greater extent on "difficult" tours so score plenty here - enough for what I think is a fair third place overall.

 

[marc71178]

The best way to get Home points is by winning against Australia, South Africa, New Zealand and England. And New Zealand haven't whilst Sri Lanka, England, India and WI have.

Damn, you've guessed my plan for world domination, have England play against England - that way we can't lose!

 

[Anil]

Damn, you've guessed my plan for world domination, have England play against England - that way we can't lose!

How can you say that? You just might beat yourself to pulp, you know and all the world domination plans will go up in smoke.

 

[Langeveldt]

yeh, knowing the poms, Steve Harmison would come on and injure everyone, and then you wouldnt be able to dominate the world!

 

[Cloete]

geez neil!!!!!! that is the best ranking system i have ever heard!!!!! U HAVE TO FLOOD THE ICC WITH E-MAILS REGARDING UR RANKING SYSTEM!!!! that is just too good for them not to know about it. every1 who reads this thread should post an e-mail to them about neil's ranking. marc or neil wat is the e-mail address?

 

[marc71178]

That is most definitely NOT the way to impress them - we need to approach sensibly, not flood them, as they will just ignore it, and possibly have a go at Cricketweb (the entity) for spamming.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Cheers for the praise...

But I'm with Marc, that's not the way to make an impact.

 

[Cloete]

geez i was just joking. it was a way to give more praise to neil's gr8 system.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Right, I promised you this a bit ago, it's the workings behind the rankings

Long Post Alert!

First up, we take each of the most recent series played between the pairs of country and split one point between them with regard to the final series result.

Whitewash: 1.00 & 0.00
Drawn Series: 0.50 each

Other results split with test wins (draws count as half) and then co-efficiented to 1.00

2-1 in four tests: 2.5 & 1.5: 0.625 & 0.375
1-3 in six tests: 2 & 4: 0.33 & 0.66
1-0 in three tests: 2 & 1: 0.66 & 0.33

These are then multiplied by two, totalled up and averaged over the number of series played to give raw values for teams' home and away abilities.

As an example, England total 1.11 at home and 0.90 away.

The other teams then have their raw values multiplied by the raw values of the teams that they have beaten, using the relevant "Home" or "Away" value, and doubled again (to be honest I can't remember exactly why this was doubled... but the numbers turn out better).

For example, whitewashing Australia in Australia (not that it would ever happen) would be worth 1.00 * 1.77 * 2.00 = 3.53 (rounded)

The current highest value gained from one Series is Australia's 3-0 over South Africa last winter... 1.00 * 1.15 * 2.00 = 2.29 (rounded).

No one gains any points from winning at home to Bangladesh currently, they've never done anything other than lost (heavily) away from home, so as far as the rankings are concerned then it's really nothing it should care about.

We then average these to give a home score (after having multiplied it by 1000 to give some nicer-looking numbers) and do the same for away and overall scores.

Easy really...

There's a bit of a flaw in the gross under-valuing of the Bangladeshi games dragging averages down, but this will cancel itself out with time (and these rankings are based on giving credence to victories over quality opponents when it matters) rather than (as an analogy) thrashing defenceless children and this seems infinitely preferable to rating all games equally.

This explains why this system rates Sri Lanka so poorly - their series wins tend to be:

1. At Home
2. Narrow
3. Against Weaker Opposition
   [/list=1]
   
   Questions?

 

[marc71178]

Yes, does anyone know any contact email addresses for the ICC / ECB / MCC / BBC / a major cricketing personality?

 

[Bazza]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tv_and_radio/test_match_special/1362662.stm

You could try that link which is to email the TMS team.

Alternatively what about the Association of Cricket Statisticians and Historians?

http://www-usa.cricket.org/link_to_database/SOCIETIES/ENG/ACS/

This address is an email for Cricinfo where you can add Cricketweb to the links page (can't see it off hand):

vlib@cricinfo.com

If you look at this page it tells you about submitting things to them (a link for the site maybe, or to tell them about the rankings, hopefully they will have a look, give some feedback, put it on the site, etc):

http://www-usa.cricket.org/link_to_database/HELPFILES/WWWHELP/submit.html

What it tells you is that information should be submitted to

archive@cricinfo.com

...or you can fill out an online form.

Easy! :P

 

[Neil Pickup]

We're on the Cricinfo Links page

I've tried contacting the Archive without success

 

[marc71178]

What we need is someone of the stature of Gower or Botham behind us - if only I'd got me uncle to ask DIG when he took that photo of him (for me, but I shared it with you guys)

 

[Bazza]

We're on the Cricinfo Links page

I've tried contacting the Archive without success

It did say to be patient because they are very busy. I'm sure they get bombarded with all sorts of stuff which isn't particularly worthwhile (not like this!).

 

[Bazza]

We're on the Cricinfo Links page

I've tried contacting the Archive without success

It did say to be patient because they are very busy. I'm sure they get bombarded with all sorts of stuff which isn't particularly worthwhile (not like this!).

Did you try the other ones Neil?