Bowling Speed Of Curtly Ambrose and Courteny Walsh

[cpct]

What was the bowling Speed of Curtly Ambrose and Courteny Walsh? I have not watch 90 cricket.

[Mariyam]

I hear that they were very fast.

[maniac]

130-140 at best on an average but with a nagging length and a killer short ball. Ambrose might have had 140+ spells.Also tougher pitches so adds to the hype. They played till their late 30s so

towards the end where even mid-late 120s but had enough smarts and also not T20 era so got away with tight bowling with experience even though harmless.

[maniac]

51 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

I hear that they were very fast.

Perception. Ambrose used to be the benchmark for ferocious fast bowler when I was a kid. As I grew up and the cricket acumen multiplied at an incredible rate I realized they would be called trundlers even more so by ICF standards.

[singhvivek141]

Just now, maniac said:

Perception. Ambrose used to be the benchmark for ferocious fast bowler when I was a kid. As I grew up and the cricket acumen multiplied at an incredible rate I realized they would be called trundlers even more so by ICF standards.

Ambrose wasn't a trundler...he was for sure 140+ for quite some time before declining due to age. Tall frame and gets disconcerting bounce. Fantastic Test stats and good stats in ODI's too.

 

Walsh was slower...maybe around 135 at his peak.But he was a workhorse and can bowl long spells in Tests with relentless untiring accuracy..his ODI stats are average.

[Nikhil_cric]

If Ambrose was fast, it was before 1993. 

 

He had a menacing yorker and was a destructive ODI bowler till then.

 

After that , I doubt he clocked even 140 kph more than a handful of times. 

[maniac]

4 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

Ambrose wasn't a trundler...he was for sure 140+ for quite some time before declining due to age. Tall frame and gets disconcerting bounce. Fantastic Test stats and good stats in ODI's too.

 

Walsh was slower...maybe around 135 at his peak.But he was a workhorse and can bowl long spells in Tests with relentless untiring accuracy..his ODI stats are average.

have you watched them bowl? I have.

[maniac]

@singhvivek141 their strength was nagging length and bounce from an akward length. They had killer short balls but they were not express by any means. In fact not  even consistently quick. However at that length and akward bounce they would be impossible to hit and you had to wait for the killer yorker or bouncer. Think of them more or less like a combo of McGrath and Ishant Sharma (in a good way)  

[singhvivek141]

Just now, maniac said:

have you watched them bowl? I have.

I saw Ambrose for the first time on his 74th test, when he crossed Lance Gibbs tally of wickets. Before that he had 307 wickets in 73 tests (remember this number vaguely as a screenshot on TV).

 

By that time I remember the discussions of his retirement were high, as he was getting injured and slowed down too.

[singhvivek141]

2 minutes ago, maniac said:

@singhvivek141 their strength was nagging length and bounce from an akward length. They had killer short balls but they were not express by any means. In fact not  even consistently quick. However at that length and akward bounce they would be impossible to hit and you had to wait for the killer yorker or bouncer. Think of them more or less like a combo of McGrath and Ishant Sharma (in a good way)  

Yup, not saying Ambrose was a 145-150kph bowler...but he must be a 135-143 kph bowler in his prime and maybe a 130-137 bowler in his hey days.

 

Walsh maybe 132-138 in his prime, as he was around 125-132 in his hey days.

[maniac]

Just now, singhvivek141 said:

I saw Ambrose for the first time on his 74th test, when he crossed Lance Gibbs tally of wickets. Before that he had 307 wickets in 73 tests (remember this number vaguely as a screenshot on TV).

 

By that time I remember the discussions of his retirement were high, as he was getting injured and slowed down too.

I saw them from early 90s to their decline in 2000s. They were excellent in the 90s but not fast. Some of the pitches  in WI in 90s where like  the ones we saw in NY so fast bowlers looked even more lethal. As I said they had a great short ball, skills and the ability to generate akward length.

 

look at that Ambrose or Walsh spells where they ran through sides, most are caught in slips or clever slower balls etc, they don’t have videos like Pak fast bowlers rattling stumps etc. they were extremely skillful. That’s about it.

[maniac]

2 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

Yup, not saying Ambrose was a 145-150kph bowler...but he must be a 135-143 kph bowler in his prime and maybe a 130-137 bowler in his hey days.

 

Walsh maybe 132-138 in his prime, as he was around 125-132 in his hey days.

Yes I already said Ambrose at his peak might have hit 145k spells but on an average they were 128-140k bowlers. Nothing wrong with that though. I would pick Ambrose of 1999 over Deshpande any day.

Edited June 26, 2024 by maniac

[singhvivek141]

1 minute ago, maniac said:

I saw them from early 90s to their decline in 2000s. They were excellent in the 90s but not fast. Some of the pitches  in WI in 90s where like  the ones we saw in NY so fast bowlers looked even more lethal. As I said they had a great short ball, skills and the ability to generate akward length.

 

look at that Ambrose or Walsh spells where they ran through sides, most are caught in slips or clever slower balls etc, they don’t have videos like Pak fast bowlers rattling stumps etc. they were extremely skillful. That’s about it.

How quick do you think they both were ?

 

Not hiting stumps is a different thing, even McGrath didn't used to rattle the stumps often, but he was hitting 140's quite frequently till 2001. They both were accurate and relied more on good length bounce and seam deliveries. 

 

To hit the timber you have to pitch the bowl up and rely on movement in the air or beat batter with pure pace. These bowlers didn't have that.

[rkt.india]

Walsh was like McGrath, 135ish. Ambrose bit faster.

[singhvivek141]

3 minutes ago, maniac said:

Yes I already said Ambrose at his peak might have hit 145k spells but on an average they were 128-140k bowlers. Nothing wrong with that though. I would pick Ambrose of 1999 over Deshpande any day.

Criteria for a trundler is 135k for tall bowlers..shorter the bowler is higher the ceiling it will be for trundelism.

 

Ambrose with 6.8 height would cause havoc even at 130k deliveries..at 140k he would have been a night mare.

[Rightarmfast]

Ambrose: 137- 140ish. Somehow I dont think he was a 145+ bowler ever. May have been. 

Walsh: 130- 135ish.. ( Similar to Venky Prasad, I would say)

 

Maniac has already written the fine prints. It was more to do with the bounce and the pitches, which used to be like the surface of moon. 

 

There is something called ' collective memory'. The cricketing world has suffered from collective memory for a long time. Walsh and Ambrose reaped the fruits of collective memory. Everybody thinks if you are a west indian, you will be a 150+ bowler. That's the impression that was created.

Batsmen were scared because of the bounce, and the whole bowling pack together. 

 

I still say, if they played more in the subcontinent, their record may have gone south.

[Rightarmfast]

12 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Walsh was like McGrath, 135ish. Ambrose bit faster.

As a matter of fact, Ambrose was more of Mcgrath's pace... 137ish. Walsh was even slower. 

[Nikhil_cric]

McGrath was quicker than either for much longer.  

 

Distinctly remember 33 year old McGrath clicking upto 143 kph in the 2003 World Cup . He only lost pace after that 

 

33 year old Ambrose (1996) wasnt as quick. 

[singhvivek141]

1 minute ago, Nikhil_cric said:

McGrath was quicker than either for much longer.  

 

Distinctly remember 33 year old McGrath clicking upto 143 kph in the 2003 World Cup . He only lost pace after that 

 

33 year old Ambrose (1996) wasnt as quick. 

2003 ODI WC speedguns were inflated. Everyone was bowling atleast 5-8k faster there.

Bond, Lee, Lawson, Akhtar were bowling 150-160.

Someone like Andy Bichel was hitting 147-148kph, who was generally an early 140 bowler at his peak pace.

 

Bond too was a 143-148 bowler..he was clocked 153-155 easily. 

[Nikhil_cric]

Just now, singhvivek141 said:

2003 ODI WC speedguns were inflated. Everyone was bowling atleast 5-8k faster there.

Bond, Lee, Lawson, Akhtar were bowling 150-160.

Someone like Andy Bichel was hitting 147-148kph, who was generally an early 140 bowler at his peak pace.

 

Bond too was a 143-148 bowler..he was clocked 153-155 easily. 

 

I saw the 2001/02 Australia tour South Africa as a kid and even there McGrath was hitting 140 + and he was only a year younger.  Eddie Smith recorded him having clocked 143.7 kph there too .

 

Shane Bond also clocked 151.2 kph in a triseries in Australia and quite a few in the 148 kph region in the previous year so it's not implausible that he could clock upto 153 kph. 

 

Bond had stress fractures in his back after the 2003 World Cup that reduced his speeds