Batsmen who scored 500+ runs in a test series !!!

[SUMO]

Neglect the extremes to measure consistency. Ignore those anomalies to claculate mean, compare with sachin's 

[Muloghonto]

14 minutes ago, putrevus said:

That is simply not true, he was not good enough to score 500 runs in series.

What i have said, is objective fact. Sachin has played more than 7 innings in a test match far less than almost everyone in that list. The bulk majority of 500+ runs have come in more than 7 innings played. Simple, hard numbers. 

14 minutes ago, putrevus said:

I am tired of hearing excuses on why Sachin could not do this or Sachin couldn't do that, it is simple he was not good enough.

Facts prove that he had the least opportunity of virtually everyone in that list to score 500 runs in a series. 

14 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Nobody stopped him from scoring a triple hundred either.

 

There is a reason why he never crossed 900 rating also.

Triple hundreds are more or less irrelevant and someone with triple hundreds but same average/runs-per innings proves they failed more. Crossing 900 innnigns relies on purple patches more than long term consistency - the math to this is pretty simple. 

 

Sachin is the best test batsman in the last 50 years, if not longer. That is a statistical fact as well as a majority opinion of most of the experts. Ergo, your opinion is meaningless opinion of an unqualified fan, incapable of normative analysis. 

 

[Clarke]

7 hours ago, velu said:

 

as a bambi you shld know the milestones  

 

Not a Bambi 

[putrevus]

13 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

What i have said, is objective fact. Sachin has played more than 7 innings in a test match far less than almost everyone in that list. The bulk majority of 500+ runs have come in more than 7 innings played. Simple, hard numbers. 

Facts prove that he had the least opportunity of virtually everyone in that list to score 500 runs in a series. 

Triple hundreds are more or less irrelevant and someone with triple hundreds but same average/runs-per innings proves they failed more. Crossing 900 innnigns relies on purple patches more than long term consistency - the math to this is pretty simple. 

 

Sachin is the best test batsman in the last 50 years, if not longer. That is a statistical fact as well as a majority opinion of most of the experts. Ergo, your opinion is meaningless opinion of an unqualified fan, incapable of normative analysis. 

 

It is not just 500, he never scored two hundreds in match either, that is the reason why he never could become the match winner he was supposed to become when he was picked up at 16.

 

Sachin was a master compiler of records nothing more than that, just becuase Bradman said he batted like him does make him Bradman.

 

He never learnt art or scoring big test runs or carry the form for whole series and dominate the series like many other great batsmen did and will continue to do so in future.

 

Purple patches of batsmen is what wins teams matches, 900 rating is bench mark of batsmen able to impose himself on great bowlers on his era.Sachin could never do and yet you claim he was somehow imposing himself on great bowlers.

 

Edited December 14, 2018 by putrevus

[Muloghonto]

3 hours ago, putrevus said:

It is not just 500, he never scored two hundreds in match either, that is the reason why he never could become the match winner he was supposed to become when he was picked up at 16.

Batsmen are not matchwinners in tests. The fact that he didnt score 2 100s in a test yet has a higher average than Lara or Viv shows why Tendulkar is more valuable than either in a team - his runs came at a far bigger consistency and frequency - simple math dictates this, buddy. 

3 hours ago, putrevus said:

 

Sachin was a master compiler of records nothing more than that, just becuase Bradman said he batted like him does make him Bradman.

Uh yeah it does. Bradman's opinion on who batted like him counts more than a random internet dude's. 

3 hours ago, putrevus said:

He never learnt art or scoring big test runs or carry the form for whole series and dominate the series like many other great batsmen did and will continue to do so in future.

Good that he didn't. Give me a batsman i can rely on to get 2-3 good scores every test match, any day of the week over the feast or famine guys who will singlehandedly sink their own team for long stretches. 

3 hours ago, putrevus said:

 

Purple patches of batsmen is what wins teams matches, 900 rating is bench mark of batsmen able to impose himself on great bowlers on his era.Sachin could never do and yet you claim he was somehow imposing himself on great bowlers.

 

No, batsmen do not win test matches. The fact that he imposed himself on the bowlers is self-evident from the scorecards of his matches, ergo your assumption that 900 rating = imposing on bowlers is unfounded. All 900 rating means is how good you are stringing together a bunch of good scores. Scoring 200, 150, 66, 75,145,0,0,4,0,0, will have a higher test rating cumulatively than 200,11,14,75,6,120,4,85,15,110.  Yet, the latter sequence is more valuable to the team. You clearly do not know the math behind the ratings, which is why you speak the nonsense you do.

 

[putrevus]

55 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Batsmen are not matchwinners in tests. The fact that he didnt score 2 100s in a test yet has a higher average than Lara or Viv shows why Tendulkar is more valuable than either in a team - his runs came at a far bigger consistency and frequency - simple math dictates this, buddy. 

Uh yeah it does. Bradman's opinion on who batted like him counts more than a random internet dude's. 

Good that he didn't. Give me a batsman i can rely on to get 2-3 good scores every test match, any day of the week over the feast or famine guys who will singlehandedly sink their own team for long stretches. 

No, batsmen do not win test matches. The fact that he imposed himself on the bowlers is self-evident from the scorecards of his matches, ergo your assumption that 900 rating = imposing on bowlers is unfounded. All 900 rating means is how good you are stringing together a bunch of good scores. Scoring 200, 150, 66, 75,145,0,0,4,0,0, will have a higher test rating cumulatively than 200,11,14,75,6,120,4,85,15,110.  Yet, the latter sequence is more valuable to the team. You clearly do not know the math behind the ratings, which is why you speak the nonsense you do.

 

Bradman said he batted like him, it does not make him Bradman. Bradman was head shoulders above his peers. Sachin  was one of the great batsmen of his generation.What is Sachin's greatest attribute he was steady eddy who got his runs in most of the series. I don't call that as domination or Goat.

 

Batsmen don't win matches but they surely setup the win by giving bowlers enough cushion. Sachin failed in that aspect big time by not being able to impose himself on any series.

 

Steady eddies don't win matches for team. Steady eddies are not called GOATS. 

[Muloghonto]

12 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Bradman said he batted like him, it does not make him Bradman. Bradman was head shoulders above his peers. Sachin  was one of the great batsmen of his generation.What is Sachin's greatest attribute he was steady eddy who got his runs in most of the series. I don't call that as domination or Goat.

Don't care what YOU call it. You are a nobody. Bradman was a professional cricketer. His opinion on cricketer > your opinion on cricketer. Simple.

We've already shown you how Tendulkar was not a steady-eddy at his peak, but a dominator & destroyer of attacks and doing it more consistently than any other batsman barring Bradman in test history. 

12 minutes ago, putrevus said:

 

Batsmen don't win matches but they surely setup the win by giving bowlers enough cushion. Sachin failed in that aspect big time by not being able to impose himself on any series.

He succeeded that in more matches more frequently than any other batsman in history. 

12 minutes ago, putrevus said:

 

Steady eddies don't win matches for team. Steady eddies are not called GOATS. 

Except he is not a steady-eddy. Guys who dominate an attack while scoring bulk majority of runs are not steady eddys. Seems like you just learnt a new word and are over-eager to use it, even when its usage is wrong. 

[Global.Baba]

Wanted to respond but Mulo is here. He got this

[velu]

2 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Don't care what YOU call it. You are a nobody. Bradman was a professional cricketer. His opinion on cricketer > your opinion on cricketer. Simple.

"inzamam is million times better batsmen than sachin" - miandad  

[zen]

In a 3 tests series, the following have got 500 runs or more:

 

View series averages [change view]

Qualifications matches played equal to 3

Ordered by runs scored (descending)

Page 1 of 108

Showing 1 - 50 of 5393

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Series averages

Player	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	100	50	0	Start Date		Winner
GA Gooch (ENG)	3	6	0	752	333	125.33	3	2	0	26 Jul 1990		England
India in England Test Series, 1990
BC Lara (WI)	3	6	0	688	221	114.66	3	1	0	13 Nov 2001		Sri Lanka
West Indies in Sri Lanka Test Series, 2001/02
Mohammad Yousuf (PAK)	3	5	0	665	192	133.00	4	1	0	11 Nov 2006		Pakistan
West Indies in Pakistan Test Series, 2006/07
V Kohli (INDIA)	3	5	1	610	243	152.50	3	1	1	16 Nov 2017		India
Sri Lanka in India Test Series, 2017/18
DA Warner (AUS)	3	6	0	592	253	98.66	3	0	0	5 Nov 2015		Australia
Trans-Tasman Trophy [New Zealand in Australia], 2015/16
Zaheer Abbas (PAK)	3	5	2	583	235*	194.33	2	1	0	16 Oct 1978		Pakistan
India in Pakistan Test Series, 1978/79
MJ Clarke (AUS)	3	5	1	576	259*	144.00	2	0	0	9 Nov 2012		South Africa
South Africa in Australia Test Series, 2012/13
SM Nurse (WI)	3	5	0	558	258	111.60	2	1	0	27 Feb 1969		drawn
West Indies in New Zealand Test Series, 1968/69
Saleem Malik (PAK)	3	6	0	557	237	92.83	2	1	0	28 Sep 1994		Pakistan
Australia in Pakistan Test Series, 1994/95
Younis Khan (PAK)	3	5	0	553	199	110.60	2	2	1	13 Jan 2006		Pakistan
India in Pakistan Test Series, 2005/06
ML Hayden (AUS)	3	6	1	549	203	109.80	2	2	0	27 Feb 2001		India
Border-Gavaskar Trophy (Australia in India), 2000/01
V Sehwag (INDIA)	3	6	0	544	201	90.66	2	1	0	8 Mar 2005		drawn
Pakistan in India Test Series, 2004/05
DA Warner (AUS)	3	6	0	543	145	90.50	3	2	0	12 Feb 2014		Australia
Australia in South Africa Test Series, 2013/14
SC Ganguly (INDIA)	3	6	0	534	239	89.00	2	1	0	22 Nov 2007		India
Pakistan in India Test Series, 2007/08
RT Ponting (AUS)	3	5	1	523	206	130.75	3	0	0	10 Apr 2003		Australia
The Frank Worrell Trophy (Australia in West Indies), 2003
JC Adams (WI)	3	6	3	520	174*	173.33	2	2	0	18 Nov 1994		drawn
West Indies in India Test Series, 1994/95
KC Sangakkara (SL)	3	6	0	516	211	86.00	2	2	0	18 Oct 2011		Pakistan
Pakistan v Sri Lanka Test Series (in United Arab Emirates), 2011/12
RT Ponting (AUS)	3	6	1	515	143*	103.00	3	2	0	16 Dec 2005		Australia
South Africa in Australia Test Series, 2005/06
AH Jones (NZ)	3	6	1	513	186	102.60	3	1	0	31 Jan 1991		drawn
Sri Lanka in New Zealand Test Series, 1990/91
MA Taylor (AUS)	3	5	1	513	334*	128.25	1	2	0	1 Oct 1998		Australia
Australia in Pakistan Test Series, 1998/99
Younis Khan (PAK)	3	6	1	508	267	101.60	2	1	1	8 Mar 2005		drawn
Pakistan in India Test Series, 2004/05
Shoaib Mohammad (PAK)	3	5	2	507	203*	169.00	3	0	0	10 Oct 1990		Pakistan
New Zealand in Pakistan Test Series, 1990/91
Javed Miandad (PAK)	3	5	1	504	206	126.00	2	1	0	9 Oct 1976		Pakistan
New Zealand in Pakistan Test Series, 1976/77
VVS Laxman (INDIA)	3	6	0	503	281	83.83	1	3	0	27 Feb 2001		India
Border-Gavaskar Trophy (Australia in India), 2000/01

 

4 Indian batsmen are on the list  

[zen]

Some players have scored 500 or more runs in a 2 tests series too

 

View series averages [change view]

Qualifications matches played equal to 2

Ordered by runs scored (descending)

Page 1 of 122

Showing 1 - 50 of 6097

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Series averages

Player	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	100	50	0	Start Date		Winner
ST Jayasuriya (SL)	2	3	0	571	340	190.33	2	0	0	2 Aug 1997		drawn
India in Sri Lanka Test Series, 1997
WR Hammond (ENG)	2	2	1	563	336*	563.00	2	0	0	24 Mar 1933		drawn
England in New Zealand Test Series, 1932/33
A Flower (ZIM)	2	4	2	540	232*	270.00	2	2	0	18 Nov 2000		India
Zimbabwe in India Test Series, 2000/01
BB McCullum (NZ)	2	4	0	535	302	133.75	2	0	0	6 Feb 2014		New Zealand
India in New Zealand Test Series, 2013/14
DPMD Jayawardene (SL)	2	3	0	510	374	170.00	2	0	0	27 Jul 2006		Sri Lanka
South Africa in Sri Lanka Test Series, 2006
ML Hayden (AUS)	2	3	1	501	380	250.50	2	0	0	9 Oct 2003		Australia
Southern Cross Trophy (Zimbabwe in Australia), 2003/04

[putrevus]

3 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Don't care what YOU call it. You are a nobody. Bradman was a professional cricketer. His opinion on cricketer > your opinion on cricketer. Simple.

We've already shown you how Tendulkar was not a steady-eddy at his peak, but a dominator & destroyer of attacks and doing it more consistently than any other batsman barring Bradman in test history. 

He succeeded that in more matches more frequently than any other batsman in history. 

Except he is not a steady-eddy. Guys who dominate an attack while scoring bulk majority of runs are not steady eddys. Seems like you just learnt a new word and are over-eager to use it, even when its usage is wrong. 

No need to get personal and start throwing abuses.I am just expressing my opinion ,just like Kapil Dev did about Sachin not doing enough with his talent.

[Muloghonto]

28 minutes ago, putrevus said:

No need to get personal and start throwing abuses.I am just expressing my opinion ,just like Kapil Dev did about Sachin not doing enough with his talent.

Sure. But your opinion is inferior to that of experts in the topic, aka the professional, all-time greats and stalwarts of the game.

Just like i don't listen to a creationist over a physicist on formation of universe, similarly, experts override your uneducated opinion on the topic. 

Anyone who thinks Tendulkar was a steady-eddy proves only two things - they are too young to have watched cricket in the 90s and they are too ODI-slanted to understand test cricket.

 

[Muloghonto]

1 hour ago, velu said:

"inzamam is million times better batsmen than sachin" - miandad  

Sure. Which is why i said when several expert opinions converge. Not one-off or two-offs. Especially when they come from the same nation's people.