Scientific analysis ranks batsmen

[Matt79]

Reckon Sachin obviously suffered as a result of the cut-off date selected (and in fairness, someone is always going to be disadvantaged by whatever cut off date is used), in a similar way to what happened to Lara when ESPN did their list.

Think the article posted takes a definite "postion" on the study as well that might have more to do with selling papers than any nuanced assessment of the study's methodology.

 

[Daemon]

Obviously there are and will be limitations to any form of mathematical approach taken with regards to situations such as these.

For instance the quality of runs isn't considered at all. Runs scored against different oppositions are of different quality . Hell, even the quality of runs scored against each bowler is different.

 

[viktor]

I didn't read the pdf but did they take into account giving more points for a bigger sample? Kambli and a few others are placed a bit too high up. A cut-off of about 40 innings makes the list look more credible.

I agree. There should have been a higher cut-off. However, I don't think Kambli is rated above Gavaskar at all, except Table 6. The leftmost columns are rankings based on averages..it's not something the authors claim.