Hypothetical test run-chase question

[Malingas Mullet]

Say Team A had a 450 run lead over Team B

Say it was the beginning of the 4th day of the test and team B were into bet at 0-0 from the very beginning of the first session.

Over the course of the two days which would you think would be a more realistic approach for team B to follow - one which could provide a satisfactory result (one which obviously involves team B not losing):

1. Play to chase the 450 run lead and win the test.

2. Play to draw, and bat out the remaining two days without losing all 10 wickets.

Please give me your opinions.

 

[Burgey]

Look to bat normally for a day and see how you're placed.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Assuming this is in a situation such as the current SA/SL Test match, where 450 is actually a total which the side is capable of attaining, then start by going for for the win, every single time. If you take that out of the equation, all you're left with is defeat. You play into the opposing side's gameplan, allow them to manipulate bowling changes, pace of the game, field settings - if you say "we can't win", what do they have to lose? Going out to block, you'll end up missing out on the four-balls, putting no pressure on the fielders, letting their confidence rise - playing yourself into a corner.

If, however, it's Bangladesh chasing 450, I'd order some pizza for about 4:00.

 

[miscer]

no choice but to chase imo if u bat slow at around 2 an over for like 170 overs ull have scored ~340 anyway and if ure capable of doing that might as well increase the run rate by less than 1 and end up winning the match. Not like there'll be a dearth of bad balls in 170 odd overs that won't enable u to up your run rate just a little bit. In this case you have so much time you should just bat normally but look to suppress risk.

edit: and as far as it being bangladesh, if they have to chase 450 to win and they have 2 days or 170ish overs to play out then might as well go for it. Again, imo in the level of difficulty playing out 170 overs at 2 an over is as hard as playing our 170 overs at 2.5 an over. If u can bat 2 days, u can score 450.

 

[Malingas Mullet]

I suppose I should have mentioned that the reason this scenario presents itself to this forum, is because I was discussing the topic of the greatest successful run-chase in test cricket history with a friend.

Knowing that no team has ever achieved a successful run chase of 450, surely a team's captain would decide there is no possible way of winning the test?

 

[miscer]

it's a lost test basically i don't have the stats but how many times has a team batted out 2 days to draw in the 4th innings? id be willing to bet it's less than 10 or maybe even 5 times in the history of the game. so im saying if u can do that then u can just win. they're both almost equally unlikely.

edit: i looked it up and it's happened a few times on a bunch of ABSOLUTE roads in timeless tests so ofcourse im referring to a realistic 5 day test.
Edit2: and assuming it's 170ish overs lets say teams have managed to bat for longer in the 4th innings only twice in history and they were all on the flattest tracks imaginable in timeless tests.

 

[Sylvester]

Definitely bat normally, it is very rare that a team could bat out 180 overs without losing 10 wickets. You need to put the pressure back on the opposition bowlers which in turn will bring more bad balls.

 

[Athlai]

it's a lost test basically i don't have the stats but how many times has a team batted out 2 days to draw in the 4th innings? id be willing to bet it's less than 10 or maybe even 5 times in the history of the game. so im saying if u can do that then u can just win. they're both almost equally unlikely.

edit: i looked it up and it's happened a few times on a bunch of ABSOLUTE roads in timeless tests so ofcourse im referring to a realistic 5 day test.
Edit2: and assuming it's 170ish overs lets say teams have managed to bat for longer in the 4th innings only twice in history and they were all on the flattest tracks imaginable in timeless tests.

2nd Test: New Zealand v India at Napier, Mar 26-30, 2009 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[miscer]

2nd Test: New Zealand v India at Napier, Mar 26-30, 2009 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

that's after the follow on... i was referring to a 4th innings chase. obviously after the follow on still trailing by 300 ure not going to sit there and try to blast 600 in 100 overs and then declare and then try to win in 80 overs.

the difference is time. again if that was the 4th innings would they not have won that chasing 450 odd? that's my point if u can bat 180 odd overs u can win...


the situation here is a 4th innings chase, chasing 450 with about 2 days or about 170 overs. teams have managed to do that twice (i filtered draws, score more than 300 in the 4th innings on statsguru i could be wrong).

 

[Days of Grace]

Just bat normally and take it ball-by-ball. If you go for the win you'll end up trying to smash good deliveries and getting out.

Any self-respecting batsman would just concentrate on the next ball in that situation.

 

[benchmark00]

Aim to get all the runs on the 4th day.

You either succeed and you spend all of day 5 in the pub, OR;

You get bowled out and you spend all of day 5 in the pub.

 

[zaremba]

Bat normally. Focus on neither the draw nor the win.

You shouldn't get locked into an overly defensive mindset because that can instil both negativity and hesitancy in the minds of the batsmen.

But just as importantly, hitting out with the aim of winning quickly is (with all due respect to benchmark's logic) completely pointless because if you manage to bat for 2 days with anything like a normal mindset you will score the required 450 anyway, particularly given the attacking fields that will be set for a considerable part of the time.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Misbah says hello.