ITC Databases, records

[Pratters]

I love ITC (Internet Test Cricket) which is the same as International Test cricket.

I would love to see some records of people posted here along with databases people are willing to share.

If its too inconvenient, please e mail them to me at pratyushkhaitan@hotmail.com

 

[kears_falcon_9]

I swear this program has some bugs because i bowled Justin Langer and he took 10 for 3 or sumthing. And also i think my highest team score is well over the 1000's and my highest individual score is somewear around 400.

 

[CricketGames.com]

I wouldn't say they ae bugs. Internet Test Cricket is very dependent on the database you use and then which teams you play. If you always played Australia vs Bangladesh then records and averages would get skewed.

Even if niether of those factors are relevant it would be more of a bug if Langer always took 3-10 but a one off occurance would not be an issue and similar things have happened in real life with non bowlers turning their arm and taking a few wickets. Likewise a highest score of 400 is not that far fetched or a highest total of 1000 - The A.I. will happily bat in to the third day which most teams wouldn't although Sri Lanka scored very close to 1000 a few years ago.

Daniel.

 

[marc71178]

I swear this program has some bugs because i bowled Justin Langer and he took 10 for 3 or sumthing. And also i think my highest team score is well over the 1000's and my highest individual score is somewear around 400.

If you fiddle with the database or get just one thing wrong, then that sort of thing happens.

It's not a bug, but a user error.

I found that sort of thing in extensive testing for ALFTA.

 

[age_master]

400 happens occasionally for me, hardly too unrealistic if you have teams like Australia playing a number of series against crap sides

 

[DJellett]

I wouldn't say they ae bugs. Internet Test Cricket is very dependent on the database you use and then which teams you play. If you always played Australia vs Bangladesh then records and averages would get skewed.

Even if niether of those factors are relevant it would be more of a bug if Langer always took 3-10 but a one off occurance would not be an issue and similar things have happened in real life with non bowlers turning their arm and taking a few wickets. Likewise a highest score of 400 is not that far fetched or a highest total of 1000 - The A.I. will happily bat in to the third day which most teams wouldn't although Sri Lanka scored very close to 1000 a few years ago.

Daniel.

Ah yes but he is saying Langer took 10 wickets for 3 runs (using Aussie teminology) not 3 wickets for 10 runs (English)

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Ah yes but he is saying Langer took 10 wickets for 3 runs (using Aussie teminology) not 3 wickets for 10 runs (English)

No. In "Aussie terminology", 3-10 is three wickets for 10 runs for a bowler, and it is also 3 wickets for 10 runs for a team. We don't switch them around as English people do.

 

[kears_falcon_9]

I was the one that rote the first bit and im not English im Aussie and Langer took 10 WICKETS for 3 RUNS....... ive always said wickets/runs

 

[marc71178]

3-10 or 10-3 it's still an error at your end though.