Sehwag OWNS Bradman...in the runs in his century.

[Chorazin Reto]

Theres so much wrong with what you said Amit i think the universe is about to collapse in upon itself at the sheer volume of wrongness and falsehoods you have posted. a)Bradman played in England against English averaging more than he did in Australia(in England~102.84 Australia~98.22), exactly how are the ""biased"" Australian umpires going to be helping him out, considering they are thousands of km away one can only guess. b)He played against the best opposition of his time, England, so no he didnt inflate his numbers by wiping the floor with associates like Zimbabwe. c)He played in an era where lbw's were hard to come by, hell even in the time i have watched cricket from the early 80's onwards the ways lbw's are awarded has certainly undergone some change. Umpires seem a lot more lenient on spinners lbw's nowadays. Lets look at another great batsman Stan McCabe, from 1930 thru to 1938 against England he was dismissed 40 times of which 4 of them were lbw's, 1931 to 1936 against SA he was dismissed 11 times none of which were lbw, Dismissed 51 times, 4 lbw's. (compared to say Ricky ""not out lbw"" Ponting who has been dismissed against his main opponents India/England/SA a total of 94 times 19 of which are lbw). d)Sehwag averages 53.90 in tests against Australia from his 1st match on the 4th of December 2003 at Brisbane to 24th of January 2008 at Adelaide, in Australia the average is a little higher at 59.50, here are the figures. http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/35263.html?class=1;opposition=2;template=results;type=batting;view=innings e)Bradman played in an era before protection yes, but this wasnt the main upgrade modern cricketers have, the bats in use today are super bats compared to the old wooden bats of the Bradman era, not to mention the pitches are a lot better in general(they are at least covered and kept out of the weather). f)Bradman played in the same era as Bill O'Reilly, actually Bradman credited him as the finest bowler he had ever seen at the time and it took him just 27 Test matches to accumulate 144 Test Wickets at an average of 22.59. If you are looking at just his 1st class career he took an amazing 774 at an average of 16.60, He certainly belongs alongside the great spinners of all time, the likes of Bedi, Benaud, Warne, Murali, Kumble, Chandrasekhar, etc etc. g)He averaged a phenomenal 99.94, that is beyond amazing into the realms of impossibilities. Statistician Charles Davis argues Bradman was so much an anomaly that he was the greatest ever to have lived sportsman for all ball sports, he was better than Pele, Ty Cobb, Jack Nicklaus, Michael Jordan in his respective sport comparative to what they have achieved against their contemporaries. Hussey averages 68.38 after 25 matches, Bradman averaged 99.94 over 52 matches thats more than double Hussey's 25 matches and only 5 less than Sehwag's 57 Tests and Sehwag averages 51.75. We arent just talking about a guy who had a good/lucky streak of 20 odd games so he has a good average. He played for 20 years batting 300+ times and averaged a boundary short of 100. The achievments of all the other greats in the history of the game fall within a similar range, Hutton, Hobbs, Richards, Lara, Sobers, Border, Chappell, Gavaskar, Tendulkar etc etc....they all average in the 50-60 bracket in test and FC cricket and make a hundred per every 5-9 innings. Bradman in test cricket averaged 99 and made a hundred every 2.75 innings. I swear i will come onto this forum in a couple days time when Irfan Pathan has achieved some milestone and there will be threads comparing him with Sir Garfield Sobers and actually saying he is better than Sobers or some such rubbish. Lets take a deeper look at Sehwag's numbers. Sehwag's Test average is 51.75, his average against Zimbabwe is 58.66, above his Test average by around 7 runs, against the number 1 and 3(India being ranked 2nd) ranked teams it is Aus~53.90, SL~18.66. So against the best ranked team he is averaging 53.90 and against SL ~18.66. He makes 18.66 against the 3rd best ranked side, 58.66 agaisnt Zimbabwe, 91.14 against the hapless Paki's, considering he has only played against them from 2004 onwards in India and Pakistan, and if Jaffer can make 100 on these FT pitches my dead grandfather could probably make 200. The only real surprise is his woeful average against Bangladesh at 11.50, but having only played 2 matches it is conceivable he could of just failed miserably in those 2 Tests, much as he has done against SL. Sehwag can be caught playing away from the body with a gap you could drive a truck through, ive seen several matches where he hasn't picked a cutter or in swinger and it's come through between bat and pad to take his off stump. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAp4lRoqJTE&feature=related]YouTube - Mohammad Asif vs. Virender Sehwag[/ame] And for those who say standards have fallen dramatically since Bradman's day I beg to differ, no doubt fielding, fitness and professionalism have come along in leaps and bounds however the basics of the game I think were already pretty refined in Bradmans day. Tendulkar started his career just as Viv Richards was finishing, and Tendulkar hasnt looked hugely better than Richards did. Richards career overlapped Sunil Gavaskar, and Richards didnt look or do a whole lot better than Gavaskar. Gavaskar's career overlapped with Garry Sobers, and Gavaskar didnt do a whole lot better or seem to have it much harder than Sobers did. Sobers career started just as Len Huttons was finishing, and there was little between those two in terms of achievments and standard of bowling faced. And Len Hutton....played a lot of cricket against Bradman... Not to take anything away from Sehwag, he is an aggressive and skilled batsmen and deserves to open for India(watching Dravid and Jaffer open was painful). Lets not lose logic amid a swarm of nationalistic idiocy.

[Holysmoke]

And for those who say standards have fallen dramatically since Bradman's day I beg to differ, no doubt fielding, fitness and professionalism have come along in leaps and bounds however the basics of the game I think were already pretty refined in Bradmans day. Tendulkar started his career just as Viv Richards was finishing, and Tendulkar hasnt looked hugely better than Richards did. Richards career overlapped Sunil Gavaskar, and Richards didnt look or do a whole lot better than Gavaskar. Gavaskar's career overlapped with Garry Sobers, and Gavaskar didnt do a whole lot better or seem to have it much harder than Sobers did. Sobers career started just as Len Huttons was finishing, and there was little between those two in terms of achievments and standard of bowling faced. And Len Hutton....played a lot of cricket against Bradman...

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Thats just hilarious!!

[Predator_05]

He makes 18.66 against the 3rd best ranked side, 58.66 agaisnt Zimbabwe, 91.14 against the hapless Paki's, considering he has only played against them from 2004 onwards in India and Pakistan, and if Jaffer can make 100 on these FT pitches my dead grandfather could probably make 200. The only real surprise is his woeful average against Bangladesh at 11.50, but having only played 2 matches it is conceivable he could of just failed miserably in those 2 Tests, much as he has done against SL..

Nice of you to explicitly mention that he only played 2 measly tests against SL and Banglastan, but you still milked the Zimbabwe stat for all it was worth despite the fact that he only played 3 tests against them. Anyway, you are taking this thread too seriously

[MundaPakistani]

Not a apples to apples comparison if Bradman is the top layer of his generation and the Hobs and Hammonds were the next best .... which in todays era would be Chanderpauls' date=' the KPs the MoYos the Sangakkara's the Haydens and such ...?[/quote'] I am either not fully understanding your point OR this is just crazy talk. Hobbs's batting average was 43 runs lower than that of Bradman. Matt Hayden and Kumar Sangakkara do NOT average 43 or 40 or 35 or 30 or 25 runs lower than the top batsmen of this generation.

PS : You have not answered my question about the bowling attacks. You think the likes of Akthar, Steyn, Ntini, Morkel can be compared to any of those back in DGB's era ?

I can't confidently say that those bowlers were on par with the likes of Ntini, Akhtar and Steyn but i can confidently that they were NOT on par with the likes of Sehwag, Clarke(not to be confused with Clark), Collingwood, Smith, KP etc

[Lurker]

Theres so much wrong with what you said Amit i think the universe is about to collapse in upon itself at the sheer volume of wrongness and falsehoods you have posted. a)Bradman played in England against English averaging more than he did in Australia(in England~102.84 Australia~98.22), exactly how are the ""biased"" Australian umpires going to be helping him out, considering they are thousands of km away one can only guess. b)He played against the best opposition of his time, England, so no he didnt inflate his numbers by wiping the floor with associates like Zimbabwe. c)He played in an era where lbw's were hard to come by, hell even in the time i have watched cricket from the early 80's onwards the ways lbw's are awarded has certainly undergone some change. Umpires seem a lot more lenient on spinners lbw's nowadays. Lets look at another great batsman Stan McCabe, from 1930 thru to 1938 against England he was dismissed 40 times of which 4 of them were lbw's, 1931 to 1936 against SA he was dismissed 11 times none of which were lbw, Dismissed 51 times, 4 lbw's. (compared to say Ricky ""not out lbw"" Ponting who has been dismissed against his main opponents India/England/SA a total of 94 times 19 of which are lbw). d)Sehwag averages 53.90 in tests against Australia from his 1st match on the 4th of December 2003 at Brisbane to 24th of January 2008 at Adelaide, in Australia the average is a little higher at 59.50, here are the figures. http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/35263.html?class=1;opposition=2;template=results;type=batting;view=innings e)Bradman played in an era before protection yes, but this wasnt the main upgrade modern cricketers have, the bats in use today are super bats compared to the old wooden bats of the Bradman era, not to mention the pitches are a lot better in general(they are at least covered and kept out of the weather). f)Bradman played in the same era as Bill O'Reilly, actually Bradman credited him as the finest bowler he had ever seen at the time and it took him just 27 Test matches to accumulate 144 Test Wickets at an average of 22.59. If you are looking at just his 1st class career he took an amazing 774 at an average of 16.60, He certainly belongs alongside the great spinners of all time, the likes of Bedi, Benaud, Warne, Murali, Kumble, Chandrasekhar, etc etc. g)He averaged a phenomenal 99.94, that is beyond amazing into the realms of impossibilities. Statistician Charles Davis argues Bradman was so much an anomaly that he was the greatest ever to have lived sportsman for all ball sports, he was better than Pele, Ty Cobb, Jack Nicklaus, Michael Jordan in his respective sport comparative to what they have achieved against their contemporaries. Hussey averages 68.38 after 25 matches, Bradman averaged 99.94 over 52 matches thats more than double Hussey's 25 matches and only 5 less than Sehwag's 57 Tests and Sehwag averages 51.75. We arent just talking about a guy who had a good/lucky streak of 20 odd games so he has a good average. He played for 20 years batting 300+ times and averaged a boundary short of 100. The achievments of all the other greats in the history of the game fall within a similar range, Hutton, Hobbs, Richards, Lara, Sobers, Border, Chappell, Gavaskar, Tendulkar etc etc....they all average in the 50-60 bracket in test and FC cricket and make a hundred per every 5-9 innings. Bradman in test cricket averaged 99 and made a hundred every 2.75 innings. I swear i will come onto this forum in a couple days time when Irfan Pathan has achieved some milestone and there will be threads comparing him with Sir Garfield Sobers and actually saying he is better than Sobers or some such rubbish. Lets take a deeper look at Sehwag's numbers. Sehwag's Test average is 51.75, his average against Zimbabwe is 58.66, above his Test average by around 7 runs, against the number 1 and 3(India being ranked 2nd) ranked teams it is Aus~53.90, SL~18.66. So against the best ranked team he is averaging 53.90 and against SL ~18.66. He makes 18.66 against the 3rd best ranked side, 58.66 agaisnt Zimbabwe, 91.14 against the hapless Paki's, considering he has only played against them from 2004 onwards in India and Pakistan, and if Jaffer can make 100 on these FT pitches my dead grandfather could probably make 200. The only real surprise is his woeful average against Bangladesh at 11.50, but having only played 2 matches it is conceivable he could of just failed miserably in those 2 Tests, much as he has done against SL. Sehwag can be caught playing away from the body with a gap you could drive a truck through, ive seen several matches where he hasn't picked a cutter or in swinger and it's come through between bat and pad to take his off stump. YouTube - Mohammad Asif vs. Virender Sehwag And for those who say standards have fallen dramatically since Bradman's day I beg to differ, no doubt fielding, fitness and professionalism have come along in leaps and bounds however the basics of the game I think were already pretty refined in Bradmans day. Tendulkar started his career just as Viv Richards was finishing, and Tendulkar hasnt looked hugely better than Richards did. Richards career overlapped Sunil Gavaskar, and Richards didnt look or do a whole lot better than Gavaskar. Gavaskar's career overlapped with Garry Sobers, and Gavaskar didnt do a whole lot better or seem to have it much harder than Sobers did. Sobers career started just as Len Huttons was finishing, and there was little between those two in terms of achievments and standard of bowling faced. And Len Hutton....played a lot of cricket against Bradman... Not to take anything away from Sehwag, he is an aggressive and skilled batsmen and deserves to open for India(watching Dravid and Jaffer open was painful). Lets not lose logic amid a swarm of nationalistic idiocy.

Good post Chorazin Reto. Appreciate you taking time to go through all the pains. Unfortunately this thread is more a tongue-in-cheek effort and so most likely you wont get good rebuttals on your points. However it is evident you know your game and I would encourage you to keep posting posts like above.

[Chorazin Reto]

Len Hutton mat ~ 79 avg ~ 56.67 Garry Sobers mat ~ 93 avg ~ 57.78 Sunil Gavaskar mat ~ 125 avg ~ 51.12 Viv Richards mat ~ 121 avg ~ 50.23 Sachin Tendulkar mat ~ 147 avg ~ 55.31 You will notice Holysome they all fall within that 50-60 mark, despite the generation differences, despite the new training regimes vs old, despite the modern era bats, despite the pitches and attacks, despite the techniques put forward at the time as the paradigm. The game doesnt advance based on sole constituents, it advances as a whole, sure the fielding is better nowadays, but so are the bats, pitches and protective gear. As for the Zimbabwe stat, sure he has an inflated avg against them, as to be expected, he has failed against Bangladesh and SL(but hasnt played many Tests vs either team) and sits pretty close with his average against Aus, he has smashed the Paki's averaging 91.14, and done poorly vs England at 32.15. Done well vs SA at 51.29 and poorly vs NZ at 27.12. Sewag is a good player have no doubt, but he is not a cut above like a Tendulkar or Sobers or .... Bradman.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Holysmoke]

Len Hutton mat ~ 79 avg ~ 56.67 Garry Sobers mat ~ 93 avg ~ 57.78 Sunil Gavaskar mat ~ 125 avg ~ 51.12 Viv Richards mat ~ 121 avg ~ 50.23 Sachin Tendulkar mat ~ 147 avg ~ 55.31 You will notice Holysome they all fall within that 50-60 mark, despite the generation differences, despite the new training regimes vs old, despite the modern era bats, despite the pitches and attacks, despite the techniques put forward at the time as the paradigm. The game doesnt advance based on sole constituents, it advances as a whole, sure the fielding is better nowadays, but so are the bats, pitches and protective gear. As for the Zimbabwe stat, sure he has an inflated avg against them, as to be expected, he has failed against Bangladesh and SL(but hasnt played many Tests vs either team) and sits pretty close with his average against Aus, he has smashed the Paki's averaging 91.14, and done poorly vs England at 32.15. Done well vs SA at 51.29 and poorly vs NZ at 27.12. Sewag is a good player have no doubt, but he is not a cut above like a Tendulkar or Sobers or .... Bradman.

I agree when you say that Bradman was far and away the best batsman of his generation. But you just cannot compare two batsmen who lived so far away. Cricket as a game advances.. and you dont know how bradman would play reverse swing, how he would react to so many games a year, etc etc. Cricket as a game is constantly changing. Heck, when Tendulkar made his debut, 250 was a winnable score. In less than 20 years, even 434 has been chased. When Tendulkar made his debut, they had a rest day between 2 days of a test. Just putting things in perspective. Bradman was far and away the best batsman of his generation. If you judge a batsman by comparing him to his peers, there is no doubt that he is and probably will remain the best ever. But its unfair to say that he was so good that he would've had that kind of average, say in Pakistan.. with the W's and Shoaib breathing fire and the ball reversing all over the place. Tendulkar averages 56 With reverse swing, with better fielding, etc. Richards doesnt, Sobers doesnt, Gavaskar doesnt, etc.. Do you get what I'm trying to say?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Chorazin Reto]

Ponting averages 58.37 with Reverse swing, with better fielding, with better fitness regimes, Michael Hussey avg 68.38, am i to believe that these players are all as good if not better than Tendulkar? Tendulkar Started Indian version of Aus state cricket at age 14, played for India at 16 or so, that is phenomenal, Tendulkar is the only player to score a century in all three of his Ranji Trophy, Duleep Trophy and Irani Trophy debuts. You are correct, a direct comparison is impossible, but looking at other players across generations you notice that no-one stands out even remotely as Bradman does against their peers. I used the flow of players back to Hutton to demonstrate that across era's good players still stand out despite the changes to the game over time, differing attacks/pitches and techniques, but none have stood out remotely close to Bradman statistically. The weight of how far superior statistically to his closest modern day counterparts is amazing, for every time Tendulkar bats twice he is only just passing what Bradman made if he batted once(on average). It is the same with all the batting greats, they all fall statistically into that 50-60 avg, except Bradman who is an amazing 40 runs(or more) on average better. To say Bradman had it all his own way is another fallacy, they did not cover pitches, the bats in Bradman's era were poor compared to the bats of today, there were decent bowlers(look at Bill O'Reilly's FC stats taking 774 at an average of 16.60 and taking 144 wickets in just 27 matches at Test level). But yes in his favour the attacks were less aggressive, the fielding standards and fitness was generally poorer, Bradman was a professional of his era playing against a lot of players who still viewed it as a gentlemans game. Sewah is not better than Bradman, because we are comparing him to the only thing we can, his peers, of which he is 1 of the better openers in todays game.

[Temujin Khaghan]

Tyson started his career about 6 yrs after DGB retired .... Harvey was in his own side. lol at the comparison with current SAF

lol at your genral knowledge. Harvey was a more than decent fielder. may be not as good as rhodes. u missed my point, i was trying to say that there were bowlers in that era with raw pace and good atheleticism. Bradman scored his runs of pitch conditions definitely not very comparable to the present flat tracks. If a helmet less sehwag faced the bodyline strategy without a helmet, he would have been an omelette.

[Temujin Khaghan]

Reto, that was some kick-ass post. But painful to see this thread extend so long. this topic is beyond stupidity.

[Chorazin Reto]

BossBhai i addressed the lbw discrepancy in my original post by looking at Stan Mcabe another great batsmen of the earlier era. Here it is for those that didnt read it He played in an era where lbw's were hard to come by, hell even in the time i have watched cricket from the early 80's onwards the ways lbw's are awarded has certainly undergone some change. Umpires seem a lot more lenient on spinners lbw's nowadays. Lets look at another great batsman Stan McCabe, from 1930 thru to 1938 against England he was dismissed 40 times of which 4 of them were lbw's, 1931 to 1936 against SA he was dismissed 11 times none of which were lbw, Dismissed 51 times, 4 lbw's, roughlly 8%, Sir Leonard Hutton dismissed 123 times, 12 lbw, roughly 10% http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/14334.html?class=1;orderby=dismissal;template=results;type=batting;view=innings Wally Hammond dismissed 123 times, 12lbw, roughly 10% http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/14022.html?class=1;orderby=dismissal;template=results;type=batting;view=innings (compared to say Ricky ""not out lbw"" Ponting who has been dismissed against his main opponents India/England/SA a total of 94 times 19 of which are lbw), roughly 18%, this for a guy that supposedly gets off on a lot of lbw's. Matthew Hayden dismissed 151 times 22 of Which are lbw's 14-15% Sachin Tendulkar dismissed 213 times, 42 of which are lbw's 19-20% Virender Shewag dismissed 94 times, 15 of which are lbw's 15-16% With these sort of large samples on the sorted data 5-10% is a significant statistical variation which indicates simply that batsmen get out more often to lbw's in the modern era, and this is due to lbw's being awarded more frequently. The next step is probably the implementation of something like Hawkeye, id imagine you will see a slight increase in lbw decisions being awarded to the bowlers if the technology becomes prevalent.

[Whisper]

:hysterical: :hysterical: i'm sorry but ICF has fallen to new depths of stupidity with this topic. u guys should really be ashamed

[Gambit]

:hysterical: :hysterical: i'm sorry but ICF has fallen to new depths of stupidity with this topic. u guys should really be ashamed

I thought Aussies were known for their thick skin and the art of spotting a 'Taking the Michael' situation. You MUST be a Pom or a Saffer. :cantstop:

[amits]

While amits might largely be off his rocker' date=' he is a very knowledgable poster and knows more about domestic cricket than almost everyone here.[/quote'] thanks, but in order to try and become a more respected poster than being just a knowledgable poster, i even gave up on prediction thing. i have stopped making crazy predictions after 2007 wc, but i still cant understand y some ppl have a problem with me supporting players like sehwag, gambhir & dhawan:((

[Whisper]

I thought Aussies were known for their thick skin and the art of spotting a 'Taking the Michael' situation. You MUST be a Pom or a Saffer. :cantstop:

born in J'Burg but lived in Sydney for the last 21 years

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Bumper]

1. Lack of quality strike bowlers (As in sub 25 avg , sub 60 strike rate ) 2. Lack of quality spinners 3. Never played in India, Pak, SL, SAF,WI (n fact he played in a grand total of 10 grounds in his career) 4. Never tested against reverse swing. 5. Advantage of lax fielding standards. 6. Advantage of playing just one format of the game. 7. Advantage of numerous first class tour matches throughout the tour ( compare that to Indias recent tour of Australia where the only practice match was by and large washed out ) 8. No taxing travel schedules.

All valid points Boss. But I think the biggest of them all, is the relatively easy paced cricketing calendar of yester years. This is the biggest diff between modern day players & the oldies. If you play IPL, three ODI tourneys, followed by a test series in humid subcontinental conditions, you are bound to break down. When your fitness is tested, your form, your mental toughness will be automatically tested. Thats when your form runs out. You start doubting yourselves. You runs dry out. You look like a mortal. I am not for a moment suggesting that Sehwag is better than Bradman or vice versa. But I find proclamations such as Bradman is the greatest ever, as unjustifiable as the one that claims Sehwag to be a better bat than Bradman. Besides, Bradman played most of his cricket against ONE team. If Veeru plays all his cricket against Pakistan, he too will end up with Bradmanesque stats & it would be easy to point that his next most successful peer (Dravid or Tendu, all great bats in their own right) have an avg that is a good 20 to 30 point below Veeru's. Bradman is the greatest bat of his era. All other claims, comparing him to players of diff era, when cricket has changed so much, is bull dust. I'd think modern era players can be compared to the players of the 80s & 90s when cricket was somewhat similar. Cricketers of the 30s & 40s should never be compared to players of any other era.

[Chorazin Reto]

Some points are worthwhile some superfluous, let me address each in turn. ""Lack of quality strike bowlers (As in sub 25 avg , sub 60 strike rate )"" Im unsure why this statistic is being presented, it doesnt really matter what the bowling attack was like so long as it was consistent across the board for Bradman's contemporaries. They all faced the same bowling attacks, on the same pitches, with the same gear, lets look at it from a different logic angle, why wasnt every batsman averaging nearly 100, why was Bradman such a huge margin in front of his contemporaries who faced the same players, on the same pitches, with the same gear? "Lack of quality spinners" In that era entirely or specifically against Bradman? Bill O'Reilly and Clarrie Grimmett were not quality spinners? " Never played in India, Pak, SL, SAF,WI (n fact he played in a grand total of 10 grounds in his career)" He played against the best opposition of his time, England. "Never tested against reverse swing." "Advantage of lax fielding standards." Once again superfluous, neither did any of his contemporaries have to play against reverse swing and they also had the benefits of lax fielding standards. "Advantage of playing just one format of the game. 7. Advantage of numerous first class tour matches throughout the tour ( compare that to Indias recent tour of Australia where the only practice match was by and large washed out ) 8. No taxing travel schedules. " These have some merit when talking about modern players vs old school, the schedule was a lot more sedate with but 1 format to focus on, and a lot of FC games were played. One thing that is often overlooked is Donald Bradmans FC statistics, he played an amazing 234 matches in FC cricket and still .... still averaged 95.14 making 28067 runs, that is phenomenal when combined with his Test record of 52 matches with an average of 99.94 making 6996 runs, this is not some good form streak like Hussey had with his 78 average a while ago, this is a guy that played 234 FC matches and 52 Tests. The bottom line is Bradman's contemporaries also had these disadvantages/advantages yet did not average nearly 100 in both FC and Test cricket ... why? It is impossible to do a direct comparison of players but you can look at Sehwag compared to his contemporaries and he is no Donald Bradman, a solid opener yes, 1 of the best aggressive opening bats that plays today(id put Hayden's name in there as well which for comparisons would be a much better benchmark) How would of Donald Bradman done today, who knows, he would of been a different player, with the leaps and bounds made by modern cricket of training regimes, gym sessions, ice baths, net sessions, video tape reviews, batting coaching, better bats, protective gear, better pitches, etc etc.