Best six hitters

[thierry henry]

lol Marc.

Cairns has hit more or less the same amount as sixes as Richards, with about 1/3 the runs and 1/2 the innings. Face it, you have a preconception here about Richards and no argument is going to change it.

 

[BlackCap_Fan]

I think what Nibblet said,says it all.Cairns has batted just over half as much as Sir Viv.at this rate he'll have 160 odd sixes by the time he has 182 innings.

Runs to sixes ratio has almost no part in the best six hitters.


I admit Cairns hasn't faced the class of bowlers that King Viv did (although he has hit mcgrath,akhtar and other class bowlers for six)but when A guy almost passes you in a bit over half the innings you played,it says something.

batsmen 1 plays 16 innings.He hits 12 sixes.batsmen 2 faced 9 innings,and hits 12 sixes.Who is better?

 

[Eclipse]

I think what Nibblet said,says it all.Cairns has batted just over half as much as Sir Viv.at this rate he'll have 160 odd sixes by the time he has 182 innings.

Runs to sixes ratio has almost no part in the best six hitters.


I admit Cairns hasn't faced the class of bowlers that King Viv did (although he has hit mcgrath,akhtar and other class bowlers for six)but when A guy almost passes you in a bit over half the innings you played,it says something.

batsmen 1 plays 16 innings.He hits 12 sixes.batsmen 2 faced 9 innings,and hits 12 sixes.Who is better?

The point is Viv was more an out and out batsman than Cairns and he would not have tryed to hit as many sixes as Cairns.

IMO if Viv wanted to hit a six he was easly as capable as Cairns.

 

[BlackCap_Fan]

The point is Viv was more an out and out batsman than Cairns and he would not have tryed to hit as many sixes as Cairns.

IMO if Viv wanted to hit a six he was easly as capable as Cairns.

so you're saying that cairns has got more sixes than viv because he strives to get sixes?

besides, I thought this thread was about the best six hitter in the world,not the best batsmen in the world.

 

[hellnback]

It seems to have come down to either Sir Viv Richards or Chris Cairns.

Many are arguing innings-to-six ratio, or a percentage of runs scored as sixes as their arguments. Suppose these are both valid in their own regards and probably a factor in the whole equation in the end.

So maybe too is that Viv would have had to deal with the 'new ball' many more times at 3 & 4 than Chris Cairns with hit batting position of 6, maybe this why Viv was more circumspect (if you could ever call his batting circumspect!!!) when batting, afterall you don't want 30/2 to become 36/3.

Whereas Cairns would come in at 6 and either build on a teams start and make things better, or if the New Zealand team had a brilliant start he had a license to let-her-rip. I don't see him being as aggressive when New Zealand is 80-odd/5.

Makes me wonder what Viv's ratio per innings was when he walked in when the team was comfortable...

Makes me wonder what Test Strike Rates were... I bet they were both in a fair clip...

The fact that Viv tried and succeeded in hitting that many sixes and still managed to average 50+ has to figure into the equation too. Especially so when from the mid-eighties when Viv seemed to get bored in batting and his batting average declined.

Another point I will add is Viv could hit ANY ball ,from anyone, for six, he had no weakness, whereas Chris Cairns doesn't quite have that ability and is suspect in some areas.

Has anyone ever considered this from the bowlers perspective??? I bet you that any top bowler would back his chances against Cairns whereas against Viv they'd be praying for abit of luck.

Viv would hit the Hadlee's & Lillee's out of the attack. Cairns just mostly murders the change bowlers, abit like Hick in his day.

Overall my pick would be Viv over Cairns, there's too many times Viv ALSO hit sixes in pressure situations when his side needed runs, 189* in 1984 which included an unbroken 106 for the 10th wicket (ironically with Holding, who got 10 or so, though has been mentioned in this thread), 110* in 58 balls in 1986/7 (100 in 56) against the new ball when they needed a declaration, the time he put it out of the ground into a pond in England after he played and missed 3 times (to Thomas was it???) and was 'shown what a ball looked like', then telling Thomas that 'he knows what it looks like why don't he go fetch it'.

Front foot, back foot, off-side, leg-side, short or full, Viv put them into the stands, and people would travel 100's of miles or Km's to come see it. Cairns doesn't have that Aura.

 

[Craig]

Welcome aboard pal.

I couldnt agree more about your comments. Do stick around.

 

[luckyeddie]

Let me be the first to add nothing to this thread, other than to welcome hellnback to the boards and congratulate him on a most enlightening post, and one which should have gone a long way to settling the argument.

There are few on the boards who remember the Master Blaster in all his glory - suffice to say, there were few occasions when his demeanour was motivated by anything other than the interests of the team - at least in the big games.

If Viv had been less of a batsman (let's say played more for his spin bowling) and he had gone in 7 or 8, there would have been many more opportunities for the long handle.

Similarly, if Chris Cairns had been less of a bowler, he would have concentrated more on his batting - and probably gone in higher, therefore having less opportunity to bat with the tail and sometimes chance his arm.

Being an all-rounder is a trade-off.

 

[BlackCap_Fan]

I like your comments too.Highlighted alot of things we hadn't looked at.

but if Viv,like you said,could hit any ball he wanted to for six,how come he only hit 84 sixes in 190 or so innings?


stick around.

 

[luckyeddie]

I like your comments too.Highlighted alot of things we hadn't looked at.

but if Viv,like you said,could hit any ball he wanted to for six,how come he only hit 84 sixes in 190 or so innings?


stick around.

COULD doesn't always mean WOULD - he was capable of doing so. I've seen him back away and hit an attempted yorker square on the off side for six - off Mike Hendrick of all people - in a mundane county match which was just drifting to a draw. A few guys started chanting 'Hit de ball' when Hendo came charging in again - and Viv just blocked the next couple of deliveries before turning towards us with a huge grin on his face.

 

[hellnback]

BlackCap_Fan: I understand your affiliation to Chris Cairns. I'm a New Zealander too. But if it came to a crunch, I would have travelled from farther away to go watch Lance Cairns than I would go to watch his son Chris. does that make him a better six hitter???

Afterall he does hold the New Zealand record for the quickest legitimate First-Class hundred at 43 balls if I remember correctly. The late David Hookes has the record at 34.

A innings in Melbourne in 1981 with New Zealand in deep trouble, made him a cult figure in Australia, and he was a New Zealander!!!

All against the likes of Lillee, Hogg & Pascoe he hit 6 sixes on which could be argued the biggest ground in the world.

39 runs in his first 13 balls, 50 off 21, he ended with 6 x 6's 1 x 4 in a total of 52. He dispatched one ball to the longest boundary in the ground with one hand!!!.

He made the commentators spout this line during the carnage "the spectators down at long-off have now become an endangered species".

Like Viv, people would travel a long way to see 'if' he would have a chance of batting.

It may not make him the best, or better than Chris, but it speaks volumes to how the spectator viewed him.

 

[marc71178]

Let me be the first to add nothing to this thread, other than to welcome hellnback to the boards and congratulate him on a most enlightening post, and one which should have gone a long way to settling the argument.

I also welcome him but ask what is it with Kiwi's and long well-thoughtout posts?

First Anzac, now you!

 

[luckyeddie]

I also welcome him but ask what is it with Kiwi's and long well-thoughtout posts?

First Anzac, now you!

They always seem to be clear-thinking, well-written, highly intelligent individuals on Cricket Web.

And then there's the ones I know.

 

[anzac]

welcome aboard hellnback................

only caught the last of this thread but I'd have to agree with your last couple of posts..........

Chris Cairns is probably the best clean long 'hitter' in the current game when in form - better than Gilchrist.............who knows what he may have done if he had not been injured these past few years...........

however Lance Cairns was IMO THE best big 'hitter' in the game - as evidenced by that one handed flick with 'excalibur' at the MCG.....

sir Viv would be the best 'batting 6 hitter' if you can make such a distinction...........

regardless I'm looking forward to the confrontation between Flintoff, Cairns & Oram in the upcoming tour.............

 

[Mingster]

As shown by the way he took Pollock apart then.

Oh my mistake it was Jacques Rudolph.

Did you not also catch the sixes hit by Cairns against Ntini, Pollock and Boje?

Marc, are you saying Viv never faced one partimer? Wait what's the point in asking you, you'll just wont answer it and keep saying Cairns smacked a few 6s off Rudolph...

 

[age_master]

Viv, from what i have seen of him is a hell of alot better than the kiwi all rounder - but aside from that, Gilchrist is superior anyway

 

[marc71178]

Did you not also catch the sixes hit by Cairns against Ntini, Pollock and Boje?

That innings that you've been trumpeting as showing how he's the best featured 7 sixes in total - 3 off Rudolph and 3 off Boje leaves only 1 more, which came off Ntini.

That means none off Pollock (who incidentally was taken apart by Freddie at Lords, but I've never claimed him to be that great - yet)

 

[Mingster]

That innings that you've been trumpeting as showing how he's the best featured 7 sixes in total - 3 off Rudolph and 3 off Boje leaves only 1 more, which came off Ntini.

That means none off Pollock (who incidentally was taken apart by Freddie at Lords, but I've never claimed him to be that great - yet)

Isn't it better to judge someone's hittting ability or in your case partime bully over a career rather than one innings?

So Cairns is getting stick because he can put away crap bowlers like Rudolph?

 

[marc71178]

No he's not getting stick, but putting away part-time crap does not make him better than the Masterblaster.

 

[nibbs]

Marc. Cairns is the best. End of argument...

 

[nibbs]

No he's not getting stick, but putting away part-time crap does not make him better than the Masterblaster.

marc, please don't forget the top class bowlers he has dispatched over the years.

even if Rudolph is part time and crap, it takes something special to hit him for 3 sixes in such a short space of time.