Flem274*
123/5
came just to check on this.Cowie h4x is bigger than ever.
came to this.
came just to check on this.Cowie h4x is bigger than ever.
Always interesting to see how players stack up against their peers.
Bradman>>>>>>>>>Hammond>>Headley is no surprise but Gavaskar>Chappell>Viv is.
I'll pick Chappell over Viv anytime.Chappell has by far the highest standardised average of that lot, just played about five less years. If we included WSC, which he dominated, he'd probably be ahead of Sunny.
Viv never comes out well on these things unless people isolate peaks.
Why is this methodology so harsh on Lillee? Even Sobers is ahead of him.How much did Nufan pay you? Siddle at 60 while Lillee is only 83 lol
Might have something to with his lack of Tests in Asia/WI, so only really played in friendly conditions.Why is this methodology so harsh on Lillee? Even Sobers is ahead of him.
Yeah it's a tough one deciding who to include on the list. I'd just include everyone if I was just posting a big list of standardised averages, but given I give players a rank, including players who played for less than three years can I think discredit it somewhat as you can get some weird results with them.Seems some guys whose careers were sawn off by the wars have dropped out altogether which I think is unfair.
Nah, it doesn't. It lets them change over time. It does technically take into account every game in history, but they're all weighted for proximity/recency. For example, when determining the conditions in 1932 when Amar made his debut, a game played in 1932 would count for 1,392,670,187,228,260 times more than a game played today, making whatever happened today an statistical irrelevance when determining it. Games played a long time away from the period in question don't end up counting for anything meaningful except in cases of teams not playing each other for a long time (for example, some old India v Pakistan are still playing a non-zero role in determining how friendly India and Pakistan's home conditions are now, because they just haven't played any more recent games to over-ride them).Minor quibble with the pitch metric too as it seems it lets current conditions speak for every era of pitch preparation.
Home and away cricket being treated so separately from right near the start of this project has always hurt him given he played almost twice as many home games as he did away games, as has the importance of longevity and the fact that WSC -- a not insignificant part of how he formed his reputation -- is not included. Even just missing the longevity from his couple of seasons away playing WSC hurts him in a way.Might have something to with his lack of Tests in Asia/WI, so only really played in friendly conditions.
Yeah I can see why you'd think that but I'm sure whatever reason it has for doing it, modern cricket isn't it. Showing you this stuff is easy enough, takes 5 minutes or so to get these queries run but I just have to type in a month number and press go so it's not hard. I'm always happy to answer questions like this to help people get more of a feel for how it works.@PEWS. No that’s all fine. Mine was only a minor point. My understanding of pitches then came from Indian writers who saw both players and the conditions at the time. From memory I don’t think there is a big difference in their home and away record. It would be interesting to see a pitch rating per country as you have done specifically for the era but that would be very difficult if not impossible.
Yeah Bowes missed the list because he was deemed to have not have played three years worth of cricket. It seems odd given how long his career spanned, even ignoring the war years, but it seems he missed a lot of games for England, so he's ended up being credited with the equivalent of 2.52 years of continuous cricket.The one I can’t see on your updated list is Bowes. Did I miss him? He was about 70 on an earlier list. If he drops down or off altogether now can you say why?
Year Bowes England Credit
1932 2 3 0.67
1933 1 9 0.11
1934 3 7 0.42
1935 4 9 0.44
1938 2 6 0.33
1939 2 6 0.33
1946 1 5 0.20
Total: 2.52
Always interesting to see how players stack up against their peers.
Bradman>>>>>>>>>Hammond>>Headley is no surprise but Gavaskar>Chappell>Viv is.
Bradman gets 0 in bowling?! Blasphemy! One of his two wickets was Hammond!I've added a sheet with a full list of every player, including those not in the main sheet anymore (or ever), in case anyone had some special cases to look up. Down the button next to "Rankings", you can now select "Full List". It's actually sorted by total value (bat value + bowl value) but it's not ranked per se.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...RJyxqnl8WU_sZvK5SbDe109OA/edit#gid=2016770811
This shows that Bowes's bowling average standardised from 22.34 to 20.91, a similar standardised average to Malcolm Marshall. With his 2.53 longevity he would've been 73rd on the bowling list had he qualified for a rank.
I'm going to take a bit of a break now but I'll do this soon. Do you have an exact month in mind? Or a few of them, even?I've got a query if you don't mind.
Spin friendliness of England and South Africa in the 1950s.
Haha I think I made everyone everyone with less than five wickets get 0 in bowling to stop players who took 2/15 and never bowled again having astronomical bowling values.Bradman gets 0 in bowling?! Blasphemy! One of his two wickets was Hammond!
Let's say Jan 1954. Whenever you can.I'm going to take a bit of a break now but I'll do this soon. Do you have an exact month in mind? Or a few of them, even?