Thommo - how quick was he?'

[rkt.india]

5 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Because, as i said, they meet the definition of being experts at cricket:  high end career professionals at any field are experts. A dude who has a PhD in history and taught history for 30 years on European History, is an expert in the field and has high end awards for it. So is the engineer with 30 years experience and high end recognition. 

So why the heck would not, high end cricket professionals, be experts in their field ? Especially when they give unanimous, direct opinion about their peers, who they played against ??

 

Thats contradictory logic. 

 

expert in cricket not in judging speeds.

[Muloghonto]

14 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

these things are taught even in highschool,who goes to an univ for that.

Lol. Sure they are. Maybe you should've known then, before making false analogies between 'what is an expert' and 'traveller'.

 

PS: To further illustrate your point, Megasthenes account, which is interesting and certain parts of it are most definitely authentic, still is not entirely analogous to a 'professional expert' : he is not an 'expert traveller'. That, in the 'Indian context' would be Ibn Battuta. All Ibn Battuta did in his life, was hob-knob with the rich & powerful and went from Morocco to Arabia to India to china to Europe to Morocco all over the bloody place. for like 40 years, till he died. So maybe he is an 'expert traveller'. Megasthenes was a nobleman appointed as an ambassador to India, went there, lived here for X years in Pataliputra, wrote about what he learnt of India and came home. Thats not an 'expert traveller'. So i really don't know what the heck Megasthenes is even doing in this discussion....

 

[express bowling]

Top international cricketers are experts at playing cricket

 

NOT experts at gauging release speeds out of the hand

 

I am unaware of any human being who can do that .... be it international cricketers or fans like us

 

That is the precise reason why speed-guns and high speed cameras are used ... because humans can't do it.    

 

 

Edited October 8, 2017 by express bowling

[Rightarmfast]

If experts were so accurate, I wonder why they got the shock of their life when Srinath comfortably outpaced Glenn Mcgrath when speed gun was used for the first time. So much so, that it became major headline!

 

 

[Muloghonto]

Just now, rkt.india said:

expert in cricket not in judging speeds.

Part of that is cricket. They faced them. You didn't. They are experts at the playing the game and assessing opposition. You are not. There is consensus. They win. Can you please show me, where this logic, is flawed ? 

Showing one-off videos and proving anecdotes wrong, is irrelevant: we are not talking about an anecdotal one-off about Holding or any such player- we are talking about what their expert opposition deemed them to be, day in, day out, having played them.

 

I can agree to the logic of 'once upon a time Thommo bowled so fast that the ball once-bounced to the boundary' as big fat exaggerations. Those are anecdotal stories, feel good stories, etc etc. sure. But many of them are not. In either case, this is not about trusting Gavaskar's memory on the exactness of some random act on the cricket field on 4th Dec, 1982. This is about what he, who is an expert at the game, thought about the speed that a bowler he's faced, was. Sure, he may not be in the the exact bracket of 138-144 or 144-148. But he sure as hell can tell apart between a guy bowling 135-140 and 145-150. And especially when we have people, who've faced bowlers who's peaks have some speed-gun recording for comparison, i simply don't see the logic, in presenting your assumptions as superior to their observation.

 

My point is very simple. We have two players. A & B. Experts have faced them both. We don't have speed recording on A, but we have some limited speed recording from B. Expert opinion unanimously converge, that A was atleast as fast as B. Ergo, we should have very little problem, accepting that A & B are comparable speeds.

[Muloghonto]

8 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Top international cricketers are experts at playing cricket

 

NOT experts at gauging release speeds out of the hand

 

I am unaware of any human being who can do that .... be it cricketers or fans like us

 

That is the precise reason why speed-guns and high speed cameras are used ... because humans can't do it.    

 

 

Not what i am saying. 

My point is very simple. We have two players. A & B. Experts have faced them both. We don't have speed recording on A, but we have some limited speed recording from B. Expert opinion unanimously converge, that A was atleast as fast as B. Ergo, we should have very little problem, accepting that A & B are comparable speeds.

 

We are not talking about humans being accurate at assigning mph value to speeds of the ball. We are talking about high end human beings able to tell how fast two balls are travelling, relative to each other.You may be surprised, but top end professional athletes in many,if not most ball-oriented sports, are exceptionally good at telling that aspect of the game. I have no reason to doubt, that expert level players are expert level guagers of speed themselves. To suggest otherwise, is to suggest that someone like Agassi cant tell straight up, without ever seeing a speed gun, if Pete Sampras has a faster 1st serve or Andy Roddick. 

 

Edited October 8, 2017 by Muloghonto

[Rightarmfast]

2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Part of that is cricket. They faced them. You didn't. They are experts at the playing the game and assessing opposition. You are not. There is consensus. They win. Can you please show me, where this logic, is flawed ? 

Showing one-off videos and proving anecdotes wrong, is irrelevant: we are not talking about an anecdotal one-off about Holding or any such player- we are talking about what their expert opposition deemed them to be, day in, day out, having played them.

 

I can agree to the logic of 'once upon a time Thommo bowled so fast that the ball once-bounced to the boundary' as big fat exaggerations. Those are anecdotal stories, feel good stories, etc etc. sure. But many of them are not. In either case, this is not about trusting Gavaskar's memory on the exactness of some random act on the cricket field on 4th Dec, 1982. This is about what he, who is an expert at the game, thought about the speed that a bowler he's faced, was. Sure, he may not be in the the exact bracket of 138-144 or 144-148. But he sure as hell can tell apart between a guy bowling 135-140 and 145-150. And especially when we have people, who've faced bowlers who's peaks have some speed-gun recording for comparison, i simply don't see the logic, in presenting your assumptions as superior to their observation.

 

My point is very simple. We have two players. A & B. Experts have faced them both. We don't have speed recording on A, but we have some limited speed recording from B. Expert opinion unanimously converge, that A was atleast as fast as B. Ergo, we should have very little problem, accepting that A & B are comparable speeds.

The same Sunil Gavaskar, when Indian team toured Australia in 2000, and when speed guns were functional, commented Mcgrath to be bowling close to 100 miles/hour!!!

[Muloghonto]

Just now, Rightarmfast said:

The same Sunil Gavaskar, when Indian team toured Australia in 2000, and when speed guns were functional, commented Mcgrath to be bowling close to 100 miles/hour!!!

So ? thats an obvious figure of speech. Doesn't change their professional opinions. I am not talking about what one said during commentary. Thats a ridiculous assumption, really. 

[Pollack]

22 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Because, as i said, they meet the definition of being experts at cricket:  high end career professionals at any field are experts. A dude who has a PhD in history and taught history for 30 years on European History, is an expert in the field and has high end awards for it. So is the engineer with 30 years experience and high end recognition. 

So why the heck would not, high end cricket professionals, be experts in their field ? Especially when they give unanimous, direct opinion about their peers, who they played against ??

 

Thats contradictory logic. 

 

Because playing Cricket is not an application of knowledge like engineering. Most learn cricket naturally. Even an observer who hasn't played much can be an expert.Infact an observer has more chance of knowing science behind various techniques while cricketers just do it without bothering much. has more  They don't need to be a professional cricketer for many years.

Edited October 8, 2017 by Pollack

[Rightarmfast]

6 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

So ? thats an obvious figure of speech. Doesn't change their professional opinions. I am not talking about what one said during commentary. Thats a ridiculous assumption, really. 

lolz! you are blabbering just for the heck of it. You may know a thing or two about engineering ( which I am not sure of), but you for sure know nothing about fast bowling. Also, you are more of a ' follower', you are not one who can make his/her own decisions. You would rather buy **** because an expert tells you so.

[Pollack]

The most so called experts cannot even distinguish between elegance and talent. Every elegant batsman is talented according to them.

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, Pollack said:

Because playing Cricket is not an application of knowledge like engineering. Most learn cricket naturally. Even an observer who hasn't played much can be an expert. They don't need to be a professional cricketer for many years.

I don't think so, in completeness of the game. For e.g., an observer has no credibility against the actual umpires/batsmen who see how fast a ball is travelling or how much a ball is moving, in real time. 

 

In either case whether it is an application of knowledge or not, is irrelevant. Because physical abilities are not, by definition, application of knowledge. A man does not 'apply knowledge' when he runs over and starts digging the heck out of a destroyed building his loved ones are at. He is doing what every animal with forelegs/hands would do- dig at it and use all his might. The level of such endeavour, by definition, cannot be encapsulated as 'knowledge'. Yet, they exist and they represent, some remarkable empiric observations, about the ability of the human body. Its pretty ignorant, IMO to say that top level athletes, involving being 0.001% of humanity at it, and its a sport involving a moving ball, he cannot tell if X is as fast as Y or not. 

Thats just denying a physical reality (ability of humans to compare a moving ball- at them, towards them, whatever- from two separate players), translatable over so many sports.

 

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, Rightarmfast said:

lolz! you are blabbering just for the heck of it. You may know a thing or two about engineering ( which I am not sure of), but you for sure know nothing about fast bowling. Also, you are more of a ' follower', you are not one who can make his/her own decisions. You would rather buy **** because an expert tells you so.

True. I know, ultimately, nothing about fast bowling. Or what it means to be a high end fast bowler. Neither do you. Only difference is, you are trying to peddle your opinion over general expert consensus, i am not egotistic enough to contradict general expert opinion where data is not available.

 

This is not about making 'decisions', its about You, the no-name guy behind a keyboard, who has no data on how fast a bowler was for 99.99999% of their bowling lives, thinking, you know more about how fast they were, than people far superior to you in the sport, who've played against them, have claimed. if for e.g., Border or Dickie Bird claims, that Ambrose is as fast as X player, we have no valid reason to doubt the idea- unless he is lying. Well, this is where consensus comes in- everyone isn't lying- so if a huge majority agree, its true. End of story. 

I am not talking about one-off claims or anecdotes, i am talking about overall career assessments, that converge across several experts. 

You expect me to trash their opinions, for your unsubstantiated opinions. Not going to happen. 

Edited October 8, 2017 by Muloghonto

[express bowling]

26 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Not what i am saying. 

My point is very simple. We have two players. A & B. Experts have faced them both. We don't have speed recording on A, but we have some limited speed recording from B. Expert opinion unanimously converge, that A was atleast as fast as B. Ergo, we should have very little problem, accepting that A & B are comparable speeds.

 

The speed that a batsman feels , depends a lot on the types of pitches being played on.

 

If a batter faces Cummins in Australia and Shannon Gabriel in India, he may feel that Cummins is quicker.

 

The amount / quality of protective gear he had, and the resulting comfort he feels, can also affect his judgement.

 

I remember facing a lively paced bowler without a helmet .... seemed very fast then .... next time I used a helmet and he did not feel as quick.

 

Quote

We are not talking about humans being accurate at assigning mph value to speeds of the ball.

 

But you were assigning a specific speed of 95 mph ... than Holding could bowl at all day  according to you  

 

Quote

We are talking about high end human beings able to tell how fast two balls are travelling. I have no reason to doubt, that expert level players are expert level guagers of speed themselves. To suggest otherwise, is to suggest that someone like Agassi cant tell straight up, without ever seeing a speed gun, if Pete Sampras has a faster 1st serve or Andy Roddick. 

 

Yes .... a Richards or a Gavaskar could say whether Holding felt quicker while playing or Roberts .... something which I know nothing about .... nor do I claim to

 

But they can't say whether Shanon Gabriel has higher release speeds or Michael Holding .... and nor can I .... that is where speed-guns or high-speed cameras are needed.

Edited October 8, 2017 by express bowling

[Rightarmfast]

In your language and in going by your logic, on this forum there are experts who have studied fast bowling and the patterns. You know nothing about it but just come here to make ridiculous comments with half baked knowledge. Its clear who people should be following and believing on this forum! Take care, over n out!

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

The speed that a batsman feels , depends a lot on the types of pitches being played on.

Irrelevant. They have : a) faced them on multiple types of pitches and b) faced them, you didn't. You are auto-disqualified agains their opinion on speeds you don't have credible data for and have not faced, either.

 

4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

If a batter faces Cummins in Australia and Shannon Gabriel in India, he may feel that Cummins is quicker.

 

The amount / quality of protective gear he had, and the resulting comfort he feels, can also affect his judgement.

 

I remember facing a lively paced bowler without a helmet .... seemed very fast then .... next time I used a helmet and he did not feel as quick.

Sure. Except in this case, batsmen being helmeted mostly. 

 

4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

But you were assigning a specific speed of 95 mph ... than Holding could bowl at all day  according to you  

I said 95mph, because thats roughly how fast Waqar was, at his peak, i.e. 93-95mph zone. There are players who've played Holding, who rated him at the same zone. Its a simple, association with evidence from people who credibly faced those two players. 

 

 

4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Yes .... a Richards or a Gavaskar could say whether Holding felt quicker while playing or Roberts .... something which I know nothing about .... nor do I claim to

so ergo, when they say, that facing Holding was quicker or not versus Waqar, we can extend the same courtesy. And we have figures for Waqar, ergo, we can use that benchmark with high probability of correctness.

 

4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

But they can't say whether Shanon Gabriel has higher release speeds or Michael Holding .... and nor can I .... that is where speed-guns or high-speed cameras are needed.

 

No, but if we know Shannon Gabriel is slower than Waqar, coz we had speed-guns for both and batsmen who played them both claim they are around the same speed as Waqar, we can effectively say if they were faster than Shannon Gabriel or not.

 

[express bowling]

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Irrelevant. They have : a) faced them on multiple types of pitches and b) faced them, you didn't. You are auto-disqualified agains their opinion on speeds you don't have credible data for and have not faced, either.

 

Irrelevant ...... because I am not claiming any specific speeds for any pacers who have not bowled under speed-guns or high-speed cameras

 

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

 

Sure. Except in this case, batsmen being helmeted mostly. 

Lots of batters played Thomson, Holding, Roberts without helmets .... or without visors ..... and without chest / thigh / arm guards

 

Batters played Waqar using everything

 

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

 

I said 95mph, because thats roughly how fast Waqar was, at his peak, i.e. 93-95mph zone. There are players who've played Holding, who rated him at the same zone. Its a simple, association with evidence from people who credibly faced those two players. 

 

Waqar at his peak was generally clocked at 135 k to 150 k range .... that is 84 mph to 93 mph ..... fastest ball ever recorded  was 153 kph or 95 mph

 

Sure .... Holding could have been similar pace in his peak 2 or 3 years too.

 

Does not mean 95 mph all day.... that is the fastest recorded speed    

 

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

so ergo, when they say, that facing Holding was quicker or not versus Waqar, we can extend the same courtesy. And we have figures for Waqar, ergo, we can use that benchmark with high probability of correctness.

 

Yuvraj once said that he did not have problems facing Waqar because he has faced Ashish Zaidi .... do you think they were similar in terms of speed ?

 

Unless a batter faces 2 pacers in the same matches on the same pitches.... it is difficult to form exact opinions about relative speeds unless the difference is significant.

 

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

 

No, but if we know Shannon Gabriel is slower than Waqar, coz we had speed-guns for both and batsmen who played them both claim they are around the same speed as Waqar, we can effectively say if they were faster than Shannon Gabriel or not.

 

 

Waqar has not clocked higher speeds on an an average compared to Gabriel.

 

[express bowling]

16 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

yeah thomson said he bowled at 110 mph at his peak at mcc meeting and imran khan and mark nicholas  nodded along ,i guess we must believe such experts as we are nobodies infront of them in stature and achievements in terms of cricket,here is that video, 

 

 

 

 

Imran Khan also says here that the wicket-keeper was near the boundary or something to the same effect.

 

And we can see from multiple videos where the WK stood when Thomson bowled.   

[rkt.india]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

Not what i am saying. 

My point is very simple. We have two players. A & B. Experts have faced them both. We don't have speed recording on A, but we have some limited speed recording from B. Expert opinion unanimously converge, that A was atleast as fast as B. Ergo, we should have very little problem, accepting that A & B are comparable speeds.

 

We are not talking about humans being accurate at assigning mph value to speeds of the ball. We are talking about high end human beings able to tell how fast two balls are travelling, relative to each other.You may be surprised, but top end professional athletes in many,if not most ball-oriented sports, are exceptionally good at telling that aspect of the game. I have no reason to doubt, that expert level players are expert level guagers of speed themselves. To suggest otherwise, is to suggest that someone like Agassi cant tell straight up, without ever seeing a speed gun, if Pete Sampras has a faster 1st serve or Andy Roddick. 

 

How did they know what is 80 mph, what is 90 mph, what's 100 mph. There is no way anyone gauge speeds without proper speed guns. Pace depends batsmen to batsmen. For some one Rohit sharma or Sachin Tendulkar who can hit fastest of the bowlers out of the park, pace is different than someone like dravid or gavaskar who were mostly defensive and their first instinct against pace was defense and survival. Some batsmen can see and react to the ball early and they become good striker of the ball and can bat aggressively like SRT, Rohit, Kohli. Some don't like dravid or gavaskar. 

[express bowling]

3 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

How did they know what is 80 mph, what is 90 mph, what's 100 mph. There is no way anyone gauge speeds without proper speed guns. Pace depends batsmen to batsmen. For some one Rohit sharma or Sachin Tendulkar who can hit fastest of the bowlers out of the park, pace is different than someone like dravid or gavaskar who were mostly defensive and their first instinct against pace was defense and survival. Some batsmen can see and react to the ball early and they become good striker of the ball and can bat aggressively like SRT, Rohit, Kohli. Some don't like dravid or gavaskar. 

 

Very good points.