The Cosmic Distance Ladder applied to Cricket

[The Outsider]

I posted this on my blog, but since it's relevant to cricket am cross posting it here as well : http://www.indiancricketfans.com/Blog/outsider/2009/11/22/cosmic-distance-ladder-applied-cricket

There is a concept in Cosmology used to measure distances to far, really far away objects like other galaxies. It goes by the name of the Cosmic distance ladder. There is constant debate in cricket, in fact all sports, about comparing modern day greats and achievements to the ones from the years gone by. It's a tough one in the absence of good video footage and possibly affected writings. I'll attempt to bring about an argument in this blog to look at the debate from a different perspective. Measuring distances is a crucial aspect of Cosmology - for one of the basic questions that Cosmology aims to answer is how big is the universe? There is only a certain extent that regular physical measurements will help out. We possibly cannot construct a measuring tape for the exercise and we cannot possibly travel around freely in the universe. The oldest and one of the most robust methods to measure distances is parallax - the simple idea that if you close your eyes one by one and focus on an object it appears at a different distance. The earth moves around the sun, so a star that you see on Dec. 21 in the sky is going to be at a slightly different place than when you see it on Jun. 21. This induces a parallax and from some basic observations and trignometry one can calculate the exact distance to the star. But, one runs into problems very soon. There is only objects up to a certain distance which will show any measurable parallax, so we need to come up with something new to measure objects further away. At this point, Cosmology introduces the concept of a "standard candle". There are certain objects in the universe which seem to have the same inherent brightness whether they are found very close to our sun, or millions of light years away. The trick is then to locate a "standard candle" in the region you can physically measure the distance and then search for that "standard candle" further away. Since you know the inherent brightness, a pretty straightforward calculation can give you the distance of that second object. So, that's how distances are measure in Cosmology - a standard candle is located in our immediate neighborhood where we can also get the physical distance, then we move on to the next rung in the ladder and find another standard candle to take us to the next rung. If I've lost you that's okay, hopefully when I move to cricket in the next paragraph things might be more apparent. We have Tendulkar, who has just completed 20 years of international cricket and there have been scores of articles written about it, many trying to compare and contrast him with a lot of past day greats. Is that a valid comparison? Perhaps, the cosmic ladder argument can shed some light on it. Many things have changed in cricket over the last 20 years - there is state of the art computer analysis, international schedules are going through the roof, the bouncer limiting rule has been introduced, pads have changed, pitches have changed, the manner in which test cricket is played itself has changed. But Tendulkar was amongst the best then and is amongst the best now. So he can be our cricketing "standard candle" for this time. Now, let's look at some of the players Tendulkar played with in his early years - Imran Khan, Akram, Crowe, McDermott, Kapil Dev - they date back to quite a few years back and all were performing quite well when Tendulkar debuted and started scoring good runs at the international level. Let's make Imran Khan as our next "standard candle" - he debuted in '71. Granted, he did not have a particularly hot start to his career, but most would agree that his success a few years later had nothing to do with any changes in the rules of the game, but rather his improvement as a bowler. Sobers, another all time great retired in '74, well into Imran Khan's debut, so he can quite easily serve as our next "standard candle". He played some scintillating innings in the early 70s like the 150* at Lords' in '73 which had Wisden writing platitudes on his stroke play yet again. But, it's instructive to remember that Sobers made his debut in '54 and was a superb all rounder even then. He easily qualifies as our next "standard candle". The change in rules, strategies, bowling etc. etc. did not seem to make any difference to the performance of these three players whose individual careers spanned 2 decades - they were earmarked for greatness at the start and retired as greats. From hereon, it's just a matter of picking Len Hutton who featured in Sobers' debut test (and scored a double hundred) and tracing him back to '37. He is easily our next "standard candle". Hutton was acknowledged as a great cricketer soon after debut and retired as a great, albeit hampered by a few injuries in the war. Hutton was comfortably Bradman's contemporary, and Bradman was in a league of his own at that time. If Hutton was an acceptable standard candle then so was Bradman. He was a great towering above his contemporaries. Would he have averaged 99.94 today? Probably not, but he would still have been distinctly better than anyone today. There are the average and very good cricketers who fade away if playing conditions and rules are tweaked slightly, but the true greats of an era have the sporting ability to transcend and adapt to these changes. Bradman would have been great today, so would Hutton, Sobers, and Imran as Tendulkar would have been a great in the 30s. A comparison can be made across eras by using a ladder and standard candles - not a perfect one, but enough to say and conclude that great sportsmen have something in them which can cut across time and imprint their genius on anyone following the game.

[Anakin]

Totally agree with the last sentence.

[Sooda]

Good way of looking at it, nicely written man.

[EnterTheVoid]

Fantastic stuff - Deserves more than just 90 views. I know nothing about astro physics so I will leave it at that

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[The Outsider]

BUMP Ladies and Gents ... this deserves more than 3 replies ... it prolly would get you a Doctorate in LMU in the great province of Punjab as it breaches new ground in the porting of Vigyaan to khel-khud

Let's see who is laughing at the end when your supposed attempt to "rape my online existence" falls flat yet again.:winky:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[bulbul]

why digging old threads :giggle:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[pensionplan]

Let's see who is laughing at the end when your supposed attempt to "rape my online existence" falls flat yet again.:winky:

LOL....

[pensionplan]

for the uninitiated read from post # 21 onwards : http://indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=274728

Below is the quote taken from the above link of a post.(Post#35)

with a grand total of ONE hundred and a avg of 35 and just 561 runs at a breath taking SR of 57% lol Sunny himself acknowledges that he is no great shake in ODI's absolutely nothing like what he was in Tests. He would never walk into a All time Indian ODI lineup never mind a World XI. So much for being a ATG that could adapt.

Good point just as Tendulkar acknowledged that he is no great for the 20-20 game and rightly stayed away from the Indian team(saying that he does not want to be considered) and bingo we win the 20-20 WC in 2007. Apples to apples SRT is right on the money when one looks at the IPL data in the 20-20 game where S/R is the single most important metric and he holds no candle against batsman like Gayle, Sehwag, Symonds, Gilchrist etc all with more than 20 points better S/R which can be the difference between winning and losing. I want to see 10-15 years from now when 20-20 game would have long replaced the 50 over game even if a passing reference is made of Tendulkar when great players are picked for the short format of the game (20-20) the future of the shorter version to go along with Test cricket.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[pensionplan]

when did this seminal event transpire .... as in outside of you mind ?

Heard of reading between the lines? Besides you should not be questioning others on stuff like that.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[pensionplan]

but here suck on this : http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/399162.html

I have watched that live so I do not need to suck on to anything. However you should since that is all you know of cricket in your singular obsession of an individual player.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[pensionplan]

pretty rich comming from someone who considers Waz below Toshack and FC runs > ODI runs amongst many other gems :hysterical:

Even if I said all that I cannot keep up with the stuff you can come up with the ease of a Gilly or Viv getting a boundary in a WC final. (Do not get mad at me if SRT had a WC Final century I would have used his name).

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[pensionplan]

so you are denying you said or even implied those things ?

You should be worried about some of the things I noted on SRT regarding the 20-20. As a true SRT fan I am worried 20 years from now when people discuss cricket they will say that Viv would have made a better 20-20 player than Sachin and based on what I have seen of the two I may have no choice but to sallow the bitter pill.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --