CW Test Rankings - Updated Jan 2012

[Neil Pickup]

South Africa will go top of the ICC's world rankings this week and be Officially "Best Test Nation in the World" despite having lost by an innings and 384 runs, at home to Australia last winter!

IMO The ICC Test Rankings are fatally flawed to allow something like this to happen, so I've spent the last hour and a half creating an alternative (yeah, I ought to be revising, but what the heck...)

Home Test Matches
1 Australia 1489
2 India 1223
3 West Indies 1001
4 South Africa 944
5 Sri Lanka 934
6 England 933
7 New Zealand 639
8 Pakistan 270
9 Zimbabwe 129
10 Bangladesh 0

Away Test Matches
1 Australia 1533
2 South Africa 1465
3 Pakistan 1071
4 New Zealand 1064
5 England 697
6 Sri Lanka 480
7 India 250
8 West Indies 111
9 Zimbabwe 107
10 Bangladesh 0

Overall Table
1 Australia 1513
2 South Africa 1189
3 New Zealand 839
4 England 815
5 India 769
6 Sri Lanka 735
7 Pakistan 720
8 West Indies 530
9 Zimbabwe 118
10 Bangladesh 0

I think these are quite accurate, and definitely better than the ICC's "Official" ones at any rate...

Opinions please?

 

[Blewy]

I think the ICC system works ok, BUT needs a little tinkering...

Glenn McGrath and a few others have suggested maybe a bonus point system for each test won, as at the moment it doesn't matter if u win a 5 test series 1-0 or 5-0 u get the same ammount of points....

 

[marc71178]

Having had the pleasure of looking at Neil's workings behind these figures I think his system is very good, and have recommended that he contacts the ICC (and this is in all seriousness)

 

[age_master]

yeah i think a bonus point system should be introduced for test wins

 

[Neil Pickup]

Having had the pleasure of looking at Neil's workings behind these figures I think his system is very good, and have recommended that he contacts the ICC (and this is in all seriousness)

Cheers Marc 8D

What does everyone think of the accuracy of my tables?

 

[Anil]

They look quite accurate. How did you arrive at those points?

 

[Rich2001]

I think the ICC system works ok, BUT needs a little tinkering...

Glenn McGrath and a few others have suggested maybe a bonus point system for each test won, as at the moment it doesn't matter if u win a 5 test series 1-0 or 5-0 u get the same ammount of points....

Yeah I agree with that, but why can't the scoring system just be so many points for a win (match) and draw (match), then maybe a bonus point or two for a win/drawn series... Surley that would then refect the true postions of the teams, currently Australia will go second, but if they had been awarded points for every game they won/drawn then they would be a country mile ahead of everyone else where they belong.

 

[age_master]

i just reaslised but then all test series would have to be the same length!!

 

[Rich2001]

i just reaslised but then all test series would have to be the same length!!

Well in that case, create a system where all points equal the same...

EG

3 Tests - 1 point for each match won - total number of points up for grabs 3.

5 Tests - 0.6 Points for each match won - total number of points up for grabs 3.

Do you get what I mean Age?

 

[masterblaster]

Neil mate your Rankings are superb!
They should be official

 

[marc71178]

Well Duckworth Lewis did it from nowhere...

 

[anzac]

as I have said in earlier threads IMO the ICC Test ranking system is @#$&, so this looks good to me Neil!!!!

 

[Neil Pickup]

Thanks people!

Regarding Rich/Age and a bonus point system per Tests won - I'm going spend a few minutes (or quite a lot more as it might turn out) tweaking my rankings based on a slight modification of your suggestion.

Instead of basing each series on 3pts as you suggested, I'm sticking to 2, and each Test is worth either 1pt (2-Test Series), 0.66pts (3-Test), 0.5 (4-Test) or 0.4 (5-Test).

Another small tweak is going to be that you don't only get the base points from winning the test, but also half the allowance from drawing one, otherwise the Aus-NZ 0-0 series would end up with no points each!

I'll post the modified rankings as soon as I get them sorted out (I can't see there being that much difference)

According to the BBC site, these are the problems with the current rankings:
There is no weighting for strength of opposition.
Form plays no part, with the last series between each pair of teams counting for points.
So far, each of the 10 Test teams has yet to play all of the others, so comparisons are difficult.
The results of series, not individual Tests, count for points, so a whitewash is the same as a narrow win.
Wins in home conditions count the same as those away from home.

My formulae now account for four out five of those, and I could probably sort it so there was form in there if required (although is it really that necessary? Opinions?).

 

[Neil Pickup]

Just to clarify that point made earlier with a couple of examples.

A 3-Test Series won 1-0 counts as 2-1 (i.e. 1.33 & 0.67)
A 5-Test Series won 3-1 counts as 3.5-1.5 (i.e. 1.40 & 0.60)
A 4-Test Series won 2-0 counts as 3-1 (i.e. 1.50 & 0.50)

Hope that's clear

Modified Rankings - counting Individual Matches rather than Series

Home Test Matches
1 Australia 1509
2 West Indies 1006
3 South Africa 988
4 India 985
5 Sri Lanka 881
6 England 853
7 New Zealand 791
8 Pakistan 581
9 Zimbabwe 342
10 Bangladesh 73

Away Test Matches
1 Australia 1593
2 South Africa 1260
3 New Zealand 1169
4 Pakistan 1119
5 England 1105
6 India 637
7 Sri Lanka 597
8 West Indies 274
9 Zimbabwe 248
10 Bangladesh 0

Overall Table
1 Australia 1554
2 South Africa 1116
3 England 979
4 New Zealand 969
5 Pakistan 883
6 India 823
7 Sri Lanka 757
8 West Indies 619
9 Zimbabwe 295
10 Bangladesh 31

England will lose 3rd place after this Test finishes, whatever happens.

India are only ranked 4th at Home because their comprehensive series wins have been against weak nations, and against the stronger nations the victories have been narrower, so not picking up the full complement. This works the opposite way away from home, narrow defeats now scoring points boosting their rating.

I think this is probably more accurate.

 

[Langeveldt]

I don't like to gloat or anything but I am ecstatic that SA are finally world champions (They dont look like losing against Pak)

I dont think we deserve it at all though, we are rightfully the second best team in the world, and until Australia lose Warne and McGrath and start losing some series', they deserve to be kings of cricket, simply because they play the best cricket..

The ICC should be a bit embarressed about all this, especially as SA got trashed by Australia home and away.

However im happy that SA cricket is in such a strong postition, maybe Australia will win the championship back and SA will win it againby earning it properly!

Rich

 

[marc71178]

No reply from the ICC about it yet

 

[sasnoz]

the snobs will ignore the idea because a fan comes up with it, then they will claim it in 5 years time

 

[marc71178]

Well I never gave them any details, and I think if they adopted it they would give credit, as they did to Vera and Tony.

 

[anzac]

is there any comparitive rankings re ODIs??????

:borg:

 

[marc71178]

Too hard to do as no series - but the ICC one for that is more accurate IMO.