Jacques Kallis vs Ricky Ponting

[Johan]

Actually it does reward Ponting for being superior in other two venues. It's just that he was not superior to compensate for being poor by a larger margin in some other places. It's still a short cut and I agree looking at individual venues can give you more clues.

Also, it's not randomly chosen 5 sides. I picked based on best 5 W/L. Otherwise poeple starts citing some knocks selectively and ingoring many failures.

Ponting actually has the same trend even if you include other decent teams,

From 1995 - 2015 [ only 7 teams have W/L above 0.5, quality falls a lot with WI ]

View attachment 44425




See collective performance away for Ponting versus many others in tests involving top 7 teams during career.

Ponting Avg 41, far below others.

View attachment 44424





Same trend even if you include WI and minnows:

Ponting averages 45, far below others.

View attachment 44426


You can see that Ponting away avg during one of the flatest periods,

39 in tests involving top 5 sides
41 in tests involving top 7 sides
45 in tests involving all sides.

It shows how he can increase his average as you go lower down the quality, but still far below his peers.

We all miss that when we start doing checklist for each venue and start declaring that one batsman is superior to another in 2 and vice versa. This aggregates involving top 5 sides, top 7 sides and all sides shows the same trend for Ponting. Ponting wasn't that great when playing outside home grounds. That's where looking at aggreagte top 5 or some criterion can help to see what did you actually produce taken together.

Some may argue that it's just poor in one venue which brings him down. Well, many batsmen in above list were poor in 1 and 2 or even 3 venues. They did make it up by being excellent in other venues and produced more than Ponting taken together.

I am not going to use this to rank all those batsmen above Ponting, but when comparing two batsmen of similar stature, it's a good factor to consider. It's still is just a factor with some flaws as you pointed out.

first thing first, As I said, Neutral on Kallis vs Ponting.

but this doesn't even make sense, you're generalizing that Ponting was not good at playing away from home solely on the basis of piggybanking off of his India record, Ponting actually did a lot better than Jack in two of the four countries you listed and thus, by extension, I'd argue that a more accurate assessment would be that Ponting could not bat in India and that would be a fair point.

also, I don't think W/L is a good method anyway, New Zealand seems to have comparable output to India for example. This happens a lot actually, for example current Pakistan has better W/L record than current West Indies but I'd rate runs against West Indies in West Indies higher than Pakistan in Pakistan.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

regardless of that, I don't think sucking in three venues and making up for it by bashing one is better than just sucking in one venue, sucking in three venues basically means that you're useless in a lot more matches than just in one, that's like saying Kane Williamson's away record is excused because he scores in Pakistan and the West Indies, it's silly.

Regardless, Ponting never even faced Pakistan properly, and Pakistan is what propped up Kallis's numbers, here are their numbers away from home among people they faced, without India. Here are their away numbers without India.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...5;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting average in

is Ponting's work in India a strike against him? Absolutely! it's unacceptable for the greater batter of a side to average 25 odd in the homeland of a nation listed as the final frontier, but is it really fair to generalize India with everyone else and act like Kallis's away record is better in general? no imo, as it ignores Jack's own caveats (England) and that Ponting was far superior in two venues you picked while being terrible in one. Overall, I think your methodology failed when it deemed Ponting inferior in collective four venues where Ponting is greatly superior in two of them and it's even in one metric.

 

[Johan]

I did not handpick based on my liking. I simply took 5 best test teams during his entire career and to avoid subjectivity I took the best 5 W/L. NZ did not appear there so I excluded NZ.

As per Sanga making runs on greentops against Bond goes, All of us remember some stand out in tougher conditions. But if you are so good then why not stand anywhere close to top over all agasint top teams of your career?

I don't think we should be ignoring Sanga not doing well in India. SL has yet to win a single test in India but won a few in NZ. That's where clubbing teams and seeing aggregate can help and we can avoid subjectively of only remembering good knocks and forgetting bad ones. We mostly rememeber good ones.

I put Ponting numbers for away. It's not not anywher close to best during that time. It does not mean that I will rate all other batsmen above him. His home runs off course counts, but it's a weakness and becomes easily visible when we see aggregate top 5, top 7 and all teams. It's not obvious when we start doing checklist for venues and compare two batsmen. We miss this weakness.

I never asked you to ignore Sangakkara failing in India or South Africa or having a middling record in England, I only asked you to acknowledge his achievements, Sangakkara in New Zealand is absurd.

for example, 7/12/2006, Sangakkara made 100* against a Bond breathing fire on a greentop when rest of Sri Lanka literally got rolled in for 61 runs total.

15/12/2006, Sangakkara made 156* and led Sri Lanka to a win against New Zealand on a greentop, once again, against Shane Bond, the rest of the team in that inning made a collective 103 runs.

3/1/2015, Sangakkara made 203 runs against Boult and Southee when the rest of Sri Lanka got rolled in for 140 runs. He'd have won Sri Lanka the game had Kane Williamson not gone huge.

this is amazing work, and all I'm saying is that if we're gonna recongnise Sangakkara's failings in India, we should also recognise his amazing work in New Zealand as it's genuinely great.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

This poll is a lot closer than I thought it would be

 

[Coronis]

first thing first, As I said, Neutral on Kallis vs Ponting.

but this doesn't even make sense, you're generalizing that Ponting was not good at playing away from home solely on the basis of piggybanking off of his India record, Ponting actually did a lot better than Jack in two of the four countries you listed and thus, by extension, I'd argue that a more accurate assessment would be that Ponting could not bat in India and that would be a fair point.

also, I don't think W/L is a good method anyway, New Zealand seems to have comparable output to India for example. This happens a lot actually, for example current Pakistan has better W/L record than current West Indies but I'd rate runs against West Indies in West Indies higher than Pakistan in Pakistan.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

regardless of that, I don't think sucking in three venues and making up for it by bashing one is better than just sucking in one venue, sucking in three venues basically means that you're useless in a lot more matches than just in one, that's like saying Kane Williamson's away record is excused because he scores in Pakistan and the West Indies, it's silly.

Regardless, Ponting never even faced Pakistan properly, and Pakistan is what propped up Kallis's numbers, here are their numbers away from home among people they faced, without India. Here are their away numbers without India.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...5;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting average in

is Ponting's work in India a strike against him? Absolutely! it's unacceptable for the greater batter of a side to average 25 odd in the homeland of a nation listed as the final frontier, but is it really fair to generalize India with everyone else and act like Kallis's away record is better in general? no imo, as it ignores Jack's own caveats (England) and that Ponting was far superior in two venues you picked while being terrible in one. Overall, I think your methodology failed when it deemed Ponting inferior in collective four venues where Ponting is greatly superior in two of them and it's even in one metric.

lol

 

[Johan]

lol

?

is it a crazy take to say India was the one place the invincible Aussie hadn't beaten until like 2004-5 lol, iirc they didn't win a series in India in like 35 years.

 

[Johan]

He did struggle at home due to being an opener and SA conditions. But away, he was a big factor in SA doing well.

If we are picking a player with similar outputs and they differ only on home and away, I will always pick away performers. SImple reason, we get lots of HTBs but very few great away players. For any team, use of a great away player is more. Not many step up away but lots of players do well at home.

Graeme Smith is one of the best openers I have seen.

wait, how did I miss this?

anyway Smith is meh, an example of why your logic doesn't work

 

[Randomfan]

I never asked you to ignore Sangakkara failing in India or South Africa or having a middling record in England, I only asked you to acknowledge his achievements, Sangakkara in New Zealand is absurd.

this is amazing work, and all I'm saying is that if we're gonna recongnise Sangakkara's failings in India, we should also recognise his amazing work in New Zealand as it's genuinely great.

Some exceptional knocks you are pointng out is the factor for Sanga geting rated, othewise he has lots of ordinary away venues and not so impressive record against top test teams to be rated high.

 

[Johan]

Some exceptional knocks you are pointng out is the factor for Sanga geting rated, othewise he has lots of ordinary away venues and not so impressive record against top test teams to be rated high.

don't see how that counters my point about Sangakkara's New Zealand record being countable and thus working against your formula of only top 4 sides based on W/L........

 

[Randomfan]

first thing first, As I said, Neutral on Kallis vs Ponting.

but this doesn't even make sense, you're generalizing that Ponting was not good at playing away from home solely on the basis of piggybanking off of his India record, Ponting actually did a lot better than Jack in two of the four countries you listed and thus, by extension, I'd argue that a more accurate assessment would be that Ponting could not bat in India and that would be a fair point.

also, I don't think W/L is a good method anyway, New Zealand seems to have comparable output to India for example. This happens a lot actually, for example current Pakistan has better W/L record than current West Indies but I'd rate runs against West Indies in West Indies higher than Pakistan in Pakistan.

saying Kane Williamson's away record is excused because he scores in Pakistan and the West Indies, it's silly.

W/L is objecitve measure with some flaws. Coming up with subjective is going to be even more problematic due to posters ignoring poor record and focusing on good record only. But it's simply easier, quicker and objective to use W/L.

Why Kane is not rated high, it's very easy to see what he did away in tests involving top 5 sides during his career.

Top 5 during Kane's career:





Performance of batsmen away tests involving top 5 countries in same period,



It will be hard to argue that Kane is a top class batsman with such a poor record. It gets reflected quickly when you see this. That's why no one excuses Kane's away record. There is a reason I took top 5 and not took all countries. It does not allow you to make up by bashing bottom/minnows.

 

[Johan]

W/L is objecitve measure with some flaws. Coming up with subjective is going to be even more problematic due to posters ignoring poor record and focusing on good record only. But it's simply easier, quicker and objective to use W/L.

Why Kane is not rated high, it's very easy to see what he did away in tests involving top 5 sides during his career.

Top 5 during Kane's career:

View attachment 44440



Performance of batsmen away tests involving top 5 countries in same period,

View attachment 44441

It will be hard to argue that Kane is a top class batsman with such a poor record. It gets reflected quickly when you see this. That's why no one excuses Kane's away record. There is a reason I took top 5 and not took all countries. It does not allow you to make up by bashing bottom/minnows.

I was not defending Kane's away record...the opposite if anything.

 

[Randomfan]

don't see how that counters my point about Sangakkara's New Zealand record being countable and thus working against your formula of only top 4 sides based on W/L........

You are poiting out some flaws in quick short cut. I am saying that it's far better than posters makign subjective lists for all periods. As long as sample size is large, W/L capture the relative position of countries.

 

[Coronis]

You are poiting out some flaws in quick short cut. I am saying that it's far better than posters makign subjective lists for all periods. As long as sample size is large, W/L capture the relative position of countries.

Just because something is objective, doesn’t necessarily make it a good/better measure.

 

[subshakerz]

Some exceptional knocks you are pointng out is the factor for Sanga geting rated, othewise he has lots of ordinary away venues and not so impressive record against top test teams to be rated high.

His away record is like Kallis who was sub par in Eng and SL, or Dravid with SL and SA.

 

[Johan]

You are poiting out some flaws in quick short cut. I am saying that it's far better than posters makign subjective lists for all periods. As long as sample size is large, W/L capture the relative position of countries.

Yeah I agree that W/L is an objective measure but it's not really productive here, an example would be, take 80s India with Sunny/Vishi/Veng and Amarnath, I'd bet this India would beat the living hell out of 2021 England and would've a higher W/L record than 2021 England, but can one really say a Batsmen scoring runs in 80s India is more valuable/higher rated than one who scores runs in 2021 England? I would argue obviously not due to conditions and actual bowling lineups. That's why I say a closer inspection would always beat out your system.

 

[Randomfan]

I am not saying that Ponting is poor away, I was pointing out that his away record is not that great compared to other greats. Taking out your worst perofrmance is not done for anyone else, but even after taking out his worst does not make him appear near the top.

After taking out most horrible record, Ponting still shows up in the range of Kirsten, Fleming and AB. He is not really standing out against others even after taking out his worst.

Ponting's record against peer group after taking out India:





You were saying that it's just India which makes him go down versus other greats. I beg to differ. To illustrate my point.


Kallis had a great record in India and Ponting had a poor record in India. You can take out India and yet,

Kallis appears in the top 5 and Ponting outside of that.

Both have 55-65 games so a large sample size and covering all kinds of variety. We also gave huge advanatge to Ponting by taking out India where Kallis did great.

------------

You can see Ponting avg against top 5 tests teams away after removing India. I mean after removing the worst performing country you should stand out if you are great away. No one gets advantage of getting removed their worst output, let's give it to Ponting.

Even after removing India from sample size, he has avg of 45 and falls far below some other greats against top 5 sides.



I am not comapring with SRT/Lara. I am using different away list to show he simply is not that great away even after taking out his worst. In pretty much every list , if you are getting outperformed by your peers by a big margin then it's safe to say that your away record is not that great. Using checklist make it sound that Ponting was hitting it out of the park against everyone except India, but that's not the case. That's why looking at aggregate relative standing againts top 5, top 7 and all teams tells us something which we will miss with checklists.

Everyone else had to face ATG Aus team. Ponting did not have to face and yet this is his output.

If I don't know the venue, I will take Kallis over Ponting.

 

[Randomfan]

Yeah I agree that W/L is an objective measure but it's not really productive here, an example would be, take 80s India with Sunny/Vishi/Veng and Amarnath, I'd bet this India would beat the living hell out of 2021 England and would've a higher W/L record than 2021 England,

I am not comparing W/L of 80s to W/L of 2021. That does not tell me anything about relative strength of two teams. I am comparing W/L during career of one player. That tells me relative strengh of countries during entire career of a player. There will be sub periods where some other teams may be better than top 5, but it captures the over all strength of team during entire career very well.

I have found very few cases where looking at top 5 tests nations and performance against them gives way off mark answers. You can argue that the difference between 5th and 6th is not big in some period, but over all if you can't be near the top in any list ( top 5, top 7, all teams, removing your worst) then we are judging it based on our biases and not really actual output.

 

[Johan]

I am not comparing W/L of 80s to W/L of 2021. That does not tell me anything about relative strength of two teams. I am comparing W/L during career of one player. That tells me relative strengh of countries during entire career of a player. There will be sub periods where some other teams may be better than top 5, but it captures the over all strength of team during entire career very well.

I have found very few cases where looking at top 5 tests nations and performance against them gives way off mark answers. You can argue that the difference between 5th and 6th is not big in some period, but over all if you can't be near the top in any list ( top 5, top 7, all teams, removing your worst) then we are judging it based on our biases and not really actual output.

concept applies to today as well

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

New Zealand and England have better W/L ratio than India, guess who has better bowling

 

[Randomfan]

concept allows to today as well

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

New Zealand and England have better W/L ratio than India, guess who has better bowling

5 years is not a career of player, right?

Shorter the period, more noise in data.

Take at least the last 10 years.

India bowling was much better than others and they won more than others.





Some time you can have situation of team/player bulding a great track record based on HTB, that's why it's useful to see away record in the same period for India. India had the highest W/L and lowest bowling average among all teams playing away as well in the last 10 years.

Some time you can find a different sitautions, but taking the top 5 test sides does a decent job. Much better than our subjective opinions based on individual biases to rate something higher or lower. I do that many times too. I am not immune to it.

 

[Johan]

5 years is not a career of player, right?

Shorter the period, more noise in data.

Take at least the last 10 years.

India bowling was much better than others and they won more than others.


View attachment 44445


Some time you can have situation of team/player bulding a great track record based on HTB, that's why it's useful to see away record in the same period for India. India had the highest W/L and lowest bowling average among all teams playing away as well in the last 10 years.

Some time you can find a different sitautions, but taking the top 5 test sides does a decent job. Much better than our subjective opinions based on individual biases to rate something higher or lower. I do that many times too. I am not immune to it.

is 12-13 years a career?

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

England has a higher W/L, guess where it was harder to score, in England or in Sri Lanka

 

[sayon basak]

W/L ratio might not be the best way to judge bowling strength. Overall Bowling average in/against the specific country in a specific timeline should be better.