Stats: most inngs with avg Above 50

[SachDan]

Baah we did this before .... http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showpost.php?p=463386&postcount=33 Pick one list from that ... :eyedance:

BossBhai, two notable omissions from List-2 ... McDermott n Merv Hughes with over 200 wickets@ an average below 30! They both were integral part of Aussie bowling when Sachin scored two cracking centuries at Perth n Sydney as a teenager!!

[novpj]

Baah we did this before .... http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showpost.php?p=463386&postcount=33 Pick one list from that ... :eyedance:

Why dont you look at how many SDs was Bradman;s avg above contemporary batsmen and then do the same for SRT. I bet you that Bradman beats SRT by a big margin which means that compared to contemporary bastmen who played the same bowling and in similar conditions Bradman was more of an outlier in the distribution than SRT and that to me is the genius of the man.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lord]

the question is not of outperforming your contemporaries. The question is about standards and whether DGB would do well in modern day cricket which is played at a far higher standard. Even so DGB had about say 2 dozen top order batsmen as his contemporaries SRT has about 200 . Anyhow I take it that you are picking LIST-1 ... Right ? :--D @SachDan Good catch ... I wanted to keep both lists to same no.of entries ... and if you notice even Mendis isnt there . Who do you think I should replace these 3 with .

gul,kallis,and one of morkel or harmison

[goose]

Massive outperformance of peers does not in itself make Bradman a better batsman than Tendulkar. That he only ever played aginst one side on the same wickets could still explain that gulf. Just look at Ponting, hailed as the greatest Aussie bat since Bradman, yet we all know his record in India. Take another sport like snooker. Both Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry were legends of their era, both having about 7 world titles. Ronnie O'Sullivan, will probably never match that yet is recognised as the most talented man ever to pick up a snooker cue.

[SachDan]

the question is not of outperforming your contemporaries. The question is about standards and whether DGB would do well in modern day cricket which is played at a far higher standard. Even so DGB had about say 2 dozen top order batsmen as his contemporaries SRT has about 200 . Anyhow I take it that you are picking LIST-1 ... Right ? :--D @SachDan Good catch ... I wanted to keep both lists to same no.of entries ... and if you notice even Mendis isnt there . Who do you think I should replace these 3 with .

BossBhai,McDermot can be included in place of Morkel..There's double entry for Gillespie in that list,may be my mistake.So Hughes' selection makes it all the more easy.Mendis can wait a bit ?? he hasn't even scalped 50 test wickets.

[Lord]

BossBhai' date='McDermot can be included in place of Morkel.[b'].There's double entry for Gillespie in that list,may be my mistake.So Hughes' selection makes it all the more easy.Mendis can wait a bit ?? he hasn't even scalped 50 test wickets.

one is mark gillespie:cantstop:

[SachDan]

one is mark gillespie:cantstop:

Mark Gillespie ?? :haha::haha: A bowler with just 11 test wickets @ an average of 35 !! and yet to play a test against India ?? :giggle: I don't think BossBhai will make such a mistake! damn sure it's a double entry.

[graphic23]

Massive outperformance of peers does not in itself make Bradman a better batsman than Tendulkar. That he only ever played aginst one side on the same wickets could still explain that gulf. Just look at Ponting' date=' hailed as the greatest Aussie bat since Bradman, yet we all know his record in India. Take another sport like snooker. Both Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry were legends of their era, both having about 7 world titles. Ronnie O'Sullivan, will probably never match that yet is recognised as the most talented man ever to pick up a snooker cue.[/quote'] 29 Test Centuries with many double and triple centuries in just 52 matches during which he scored over 7000 runs at that average. He came out of the Bodyline series averaging an "unhealthy" 56 (or somewhere close to that). His team is still the only one to come back from being 2-0 in a 5 match test series to win it 3-2. That he decimated every attack that he faced during his time is alone enough to say that he's the greatest batsman ever. I am not belittling Sachin in any way. He's a true gem for having been through 400+ ODis and 150+ Test matches and being the highest run getter in both the formats and in ODIs, about 4000+ more than his next competitor at a S/R of 85+ and at an average of ~44 at the top of the order is sheer genius, brilliance. No praise is enough. His records in test matches are also very very good. It is extremely hard to compare them because Sachin's exploits could be considered a lot greater because of the two different formats and the higher level of fielding, etc. He has outperformed his peers by a HUGE margin in one form of the game and has outperformed them marginally in another form of the game. But Bradman takes the cake over Sachin as the greatest batsman ever I'd still say because he is unanimously regarded as the finest batsman of his era by EVERYONE. Sachin has several competitors and is still shunned [rather inexplicably] by a few.

[Lord]

29 Test Centuries with many double and triple centuries in just 52 matches during which he scored over 7000 runs at that average. He came out of the Bodyline series averaging an "unhealthy" 56 (or somewhere close to that). His team is still the only one to come back from being 2-0 in a 5 match test series to win it 3-2. That he decimated every attack that he faced during his time is alone enough to say that he's the greatest batsman ever. I am not belittling Sachin in any way. He's a true gem for having been through 400+ ODis and 150+ Test matches and being the highest run getter in both the formats and in ODIs, about 4000+ more than his next competitor at a S/R of 85+ and at an average of ~44 at the top of the order is sheer genius, brilliance. No praise is enough. His records in test matches are also very very good. It is extremely hard to compare them because Sachin's exploits could be considered a lot greater because of the two different formats and the higher level of fielding, etc. He has outperformed his peers by a HUGE margin in one form of the game and has outperformed them marginally in another form of the game. But Bradman takes the cake over Sachin as the greatest batsman ever I'd still say because he is unanimously regarded as the finest batsman of his era by EVERYONE. Sachin has several competitors and is still shunned [rather inexplicably] by a few.

i dont buy that necessarily,bradman played only 52 matches.its a lot easier to have a high ave in less matches(ask mike hussey).the quality of bowling was also lesser,read BB's post. i'm not saying sachin is better than don,but purely on ave, u cant call somebody the greatest

[CSK Fan]

29 Test Centuries with many double and triple centuries in just 52 matches during which he scored over 7000 runs at that average. He came out of the Bodyline series averaging an "unhealthy" 56 (or somewhere close to that). His team is still the only one to come back from being 2-0 in a 5 match test series to win it 3-2. That he decimated every attack that he faced during his time is alone enough to say that he's the greatest batsman ever. I am not belittling Sachin in any way. He's a true gem for having been through 400+ ODis and 150+ Test matches and being the highest run getter in both the formats and in ODIs, about 4000+ more than his next competitor at a S/R of 85+ and at an average of ~44 at the top of the order is sheer genius, brilliance. No praise is enough. His records in test matches are also very very good. It is extremely hard to compare them because Sachin's exploits could be considered a lot greater because of the two different formats and the higher level of fielding, etc. He has outperformed his peers by a HUGE margin in one form of the game and has outperformed them marginally in another form of the game. But Bradman takes the cake over Sachin as the greatest batsman ever I'd still say because he is unanimously regarded as the finest batsman of his era by EVERYONE. Sachin has several competitors and is still shunned [rather inexplicably] by a few.

My two cnets A batsman who has retired or played in a different era is always respected over one who is still playing. The current batsman will get all kind of media attention, his weak points will be stressed, etc while the older one will be fondly regarded only for his prowess. Bradman would also hav been crucified by the media and his contemporeries if he had been playing now regardless of his performances

[bunny]

Happy New Year, Boss. That's very good work. Can't really argue with the SD, although it can be adjusted for the number of innings played by dividing by sq root n to get the standard error. But Kallis emerges as the most consistent bat of this generation, no question.

Another measure of consistency would be the % of N+ scores. Just looking at 30+ scores Richards: 53.2% Hayden: 52.8% Ponting: 52.6% Lara: 52.6% Dravid: 52.4% Kallis : 52.3% Miandad: 51.8% Border: 51.3% Tendulkar: 50.7% Gavaskar: 49.5% S Waugh: 45.3% Not too much to distinguish between all these batsmen. Steve Waugh had a bad initial period when he was really not a batsman. His rise as a frontline batsman is astounding though. Gavaskar had his struggles against Marshall and Imran, but he was an opening batsman and as much prone to more failures. I'd say consistency is a hard thing to judge though. RD is consistent in the sense that he used to have really few 20- scores, but SRT was consistent in the sense that he had a very high percentage of 70-100+ scores. I am stating the obvious here, but opposition, pressure and pitches also play a crucial role in determining the consistency of a player. Personally, I was impressed by RD's consistency (statistically or otherwise) but in the last 2 years the numbers have dropped dramatically for him.

[Lord]

Another measure of consistency would be the % of N+ scores. Just looking at 30+ scores Richards: 53.2% Hayden: 52.8% Ponting: 52.6% Lara: 52.6% Dravid: 52.4% Kallis : 52.3% Miandad: 51.8% Border: 51.3% Tendulkar: 50.7% Gavaskar: 49.5% S Waugh: 45.3% Not too much to distinguish between all these batsmen. Steve Waugh had a bad initial period when he was really not a batsman. His rise as a frontline batsman is astounding though. Gavaskar had his struggles against Marshall and Imran, but he was an opening batsman and as much prone to more failures. I'd say consistency is a hard thing to judge though. RD is consistent in the sense that he used to have really few 20- scores, but SRT was consistent in the sense that he had a very high percentage of 70-100+ scores. I am stating the obvious here, but opposition, pressure and pitches also play a crucial role in determining the consistency of a player. Personally, I was impressed by RD's consistency (statistically or otherwise) but in the last 2 years the numbers have dropped dramatically for him.

what is bradman's % of 30+ scores?

[Chorazin Reto]

I think something thats overlooked a lot with Bradman is he played a massive 234 FC matches and *still* averaged 95.14, but its virtually impossible to compare players of varying eras i find. Theres no doubt Tendulkar is a modern great and will be sorely missed by India when he retires, a once in a generation player.

[umpire]

During Bradman's time, the Australia team used to play 2-3 first class games before actual test match. Now if you are out of form or struggling or little low on confidence, those are the games you want to play and get going. Unfortunately, modern batsman do not have such luxury

[SachDan]

Only disadvantage batsmen of Don's era had was pitches were under prepared and not covered that time(if what one read was true)..but then again it won't take much time for a relatively 'good' batsman to get the measure of some dibbly-dobly bowlers !

[umpire]

Imagine Hayden playing first class cricket right now before the 3rd Test and ironing out his deficiencies. Won't he score hundred in Sydney?? Same goes with Hussey.

[The Outsider]

Imagine Hayden playing first class cricket right now before the 3rd Test and ironing out his deficiencies. Won't he score hundred in Sydney?? Same goes with Hussey.

First class matches before tests these days are played solely for practice and at times the opposition does not even field it's best FC side. In those days, FC matches were played with a lot more seriousness and competitiveness before tests. Some fixtures also had a lot of traditional value to it. Oh...and not sure how home team players would get a FC match in before a test unless their state side was slated to play.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --