Tendulkar at his peak

[putrevus]

Thats a silly argument. You are 16, you get selected to a national team...you are gonna say ' no, I am bot atg level yet, so sorry, select me in 5 years ?' And you dont expect a 16 year old boy to not have the kind of numbera a 21 year old man ? Which planet are you from ? Similarly, I exclude his last couple of years from statistical discussions necause it wasnt a long protracted slump, he suddenly lost it coz he got old. You mean to say that if I play for 15 years as #1, then another 15 years as an old man scoring 20s, coz I dont wanna quit, it makes me a lesser player overall ? Thats again, illogical. As for not scpring 500 runs in a series, very few people scored 500 runs in less than 8 innings and because india rarely played a 5 test series, tendy rarely batted more than 6 or 7 times a series. As opposed to lara, who batted 9 or 10 times a series for almost all the series he played vs england, australia and saffies. Sent from my GT-S5830D using Tapatalk 2

How is it silly just because he was sixteen , his wicket counted as half to the bowlers, He was selected to play at 16 because they thought he was good enough to play for weak and rebuilding team.He justified his selection and faith. Similar in last few year from 2011 till his retirement he was just awful. We don't know what motivated him to continue. He is an ATG batsman but he is no Bradman who stood above and beyond his peers especially in tests. From 1994 to 2000 he was the best batsman who played for a very weak team especially when playing overseas but at no point in those overseas series even at his peak he produced Bradmanesque series or innings Yes he had very high average and he was utterly consistent while never being dominant in any one single series where he produced ton of runs even for weak team. Lara in 2001 series against Srilanka scored more than 600 runs in 3 match series with three hundreds where WI lost series 0-3 . Tendulkar never had those type of series. Didn't Kohli scored four hundreds in recent series and scored more than 600 runs in 4 match series. At some point in a career of great batsman they just need to be more than being consistent, they just have to produce extraordinary. Tendulkar was a great batsmen who was ultra consistent. For latter half his career he had one of the most formidable batting lineups backing him.Indian batting lineups always were good at home for most part of his career.

[velu]

There is a difference between 157 matches and 34 matches.

its over a 6-7 years period .. in tests sachin's performance is constant for that 16 years period , never had a peak 3 or 4 years like Ponting or others

[Roshanrocks]

its over a 6-7 years period .. in tests sachin's performance is constant for that 16 years period , never had a peak 3 or 4 years like Ponting or others

Ponting is better, He had a better peak

[Precambrian]

if we keep nitpicking the stats to prove sachin is the best , we can do it for other players too.. like in a 34 match streak , king viv averages 70++ .. i really dont think sachin had such stat..

There is hardly nitpicking here. We are taking a continuous batch of 157 tests, from an age when a good player makes his debut to when he retires. How many players have played 157 tests?

[Sachin=GOD]

its over a 6-7 years period .. in tests sachin's performance is constant for that 16 years period , never had a peak 3 or 4 years like Ponting or others

What would you rather have - someone who was at his peak for 3-4 years and was mediocre before/after that period or one who consistently played at a very high level for 18 years?

[velu]

Rahul Dravid between 16 Jan 1997 and 17 Mar 2006 Matches : 91 Average : 60.46 http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/28114.html?class=1;spanmax1=17+Mar+2006;spanmin1=16+Jan+1997;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting;view=cumulative

[Captain]

its over a 6-7 years period .. in tests sachin's performance is constant for that 16 years period , never had a peak 3 or 4 years like Ponting or others

The logic in this post is on par with padosis logic. :hysterical:

[velu]

What would you rather have - someone who was at his peak for 3-4 years and was mediocre before/after that period or one who consistently played at a very high level for 18 years?

as a fan i would pick 1st player as a captain i would pick the 2nd one

[sensible-indian]

its over a 6-7 years period .. in tests sachin's performance is constant for that 16 years period , never had a peak 3 or 4 years like Ponting or others

SRT did have a peak from 93-99 where he averaged 64. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;spanmax1=31+Dec+1999;spanmin1=01+Jan+1993;spanval1=span;template=results;type=allround

[velu]

The logic in this post is on par with padosis logic. :hysterical:

its obvious fact .. there is no logic in it .. are you looking for logic in the fact ?? :rofl:

[Precambrian]

its over a 6-7 years period .. in tests sachin's performance is constant for that 16 years period , never had a peak 3 or 4 years like Ponting or others

That's the problem with peaks, you can reduce it to stupid levels like even a single series. 157 tests are an average very good player's career plus another half. To put things into perspective only six players ha e played more than 157 matches ever, and only on who had played more than 168 matches.

[Number]

How is it silly just because he was sixteen , his wicket counted as half to the bowlers, He was selected to play at 16 because they thought he was good enough to play for weak and rebuilding team.He justified his selection and faith. Similar in last few year from 2011 till his retirement he was just awful. We don't know what motivated him to continue. He is an ATG batsman but he is no Bradman who stood above and beyond his peers especially in tests. From 1994 to 2000 he was the best batsman who played for a very weak team especially when playing overseas but at no point in those overseas series even at his peak he produced Bradmanesque series or innings Yes he had very high average and he was utterly consistent while never being dominant in any one single series where he produced ton of runs even for weak team. Lara in 2001 series against Srilanka where WI lost series 0-3 but he scored more than 600 runs in 3 match series with three hundreds. Tendulkar never had those type of series. Didn't Kohli scored four hundreds in recent series and scored more than 600 runs in 4 match series. At some point in a career of great batsman they just need to be more than being consistent, they just have to produce extraordinary. Tendulkar was a great batsmen who was ultra consistent. For latter half his career he had one of the most formidable batting lineups backing him.Indian batting lineups always were good at home for most part of his career.

Works both ways. Lara had some very long absolute lean patches in which he was a tailender and was on the verge of getting dropped.

[Captain]

its obvious fact .. there is no logic in it .. are you looking for logic in the fact ?? :rofl:

Your post suggests that you value peak performance for a very short period of time aka 34 tests above/on par with a high level performance over 18 years.

[Roshanrocks]

Velu :hatsoff: The lone fighter... reminds me of Kejriwal taking on the BJP in delhi

[velu]

SRT did have a peak from 93-99 where he averaged 64. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;spanmax1=31+Dec+1999;spanmin1=01+Jan+1993;spanval1=span;template=results;type=allround

so his peak is more or less same as pontings peak :hmmm: we can easily conclude this, 1) there are many players who peak is more or less same as sachins 2) unlike other players , sachin never had worst run

[Number]

I think SRT is bowling equivalent of McGrath. Not many ups and down right from young age very consistent. Lara was Akram.

[velu]

Your post suggests that you value peak performance for a very short period of time aka 34 tests above/on par with a high level performance over 18 years.

this thread is about peak performance right ? :giggle: if you want to claim that sachin is the best player ever at his peak then prove it

[sensible-indian]

so his peak is more or less same as pontings peak :hmmm: we can easily conclude this, 1) there are many players who peak is more or less same as sachins 2) unlike other players , sachin never had worst run

1. Ponting peak is better than SRT (70s for 4 years I think). 2. SRT's peak came in 90s where Ponting and Kallis averaged 44 and 41 respectively (in 30-35 tests each). 3. Overall 18 year consistency of SRT with 59 average is unparalleled.

[velu]

Velu :hatsoff: The lone fighter... reminds me of Kejriwal taking on the BJP in delhi

:weights: last 6 or 7 months i was not involved in any sachin related discussion anywhere .. but these sachinsats :headshake:

[Captain]

this thread is about peak performance right ? :giggle: if you want to claim that sachin is the best player ever at his peak then prove it

Tendulkar's peak over 157 tests.While you come in arguing that Viv would have 70+ over 34 tests. There were a handful number of players who had a better peak than Sachin's over a short period of time.I'm not denying that.