Bradman is the greatest, Sachin comes only second: Waugh, Benaud

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Tapioca]

Sirs, there are so many variations that I don't know whether you'll ever converge anywhere on this. For the 20s & 30s, you could include only Aus and Eng to get a more realistic number. Or could also exclude England's away Tests against minor teams because they usually sent second XIs. Or you include only the matches that Bradman played. Similarly you can consider only the matches that major teams played in the 1990s and 2000s. Or only the matches that SRT played. The batting average is 36.39 in matches that SRT played. 37.something if you consider only the 2000s. Does this mean that the wickets where SRT played are some 6 points flatter than the 30s. And so Tamim is possibly not better than Bradman ? But it is fun. Do continue.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[vvvslaxman]

Iam looking at the avg itself ... what Iam saying is that it takes substantial effort to move those avgs one way or the other. Its not as inconsequential as batsman scoring one run extra every innings. Infact every single batsman has to score one run extra for every innings. Just because the difference is about 1 run at the high level doesnt mean it is as insignificant as one run usually is in cricket. .

If that is difficult, imagine one batsman scoring 44 runs more every innings :winky:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[vvvslaxman]

except that it is 599 batsman over nearly 16968 inngs ... hehehe

multiply 44 x 80 innings of Bradman.. you have to do it over 3720 innings if we directly translate that.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[The Outsider]

that measure is for pitches overall for the timeperiod. It is a measure used to rank the difficulty of batting. You cant use the diif as is to arrive at what the batsmen would do in a different period given his avg in a particular period. Let me know if you want me to elaborate

I'll try to explain this one last time : 1. The average per wicket in 90s/00s was 30.85, in 30s/40s it was 31.95. This implies that in a completed test innings in 90s/00s a team would score 309 runs and 320 runs in 30s/40s. 2. This comes to a difference of 11 runs per test innings, leads to an extra 1.1 runs being made by a batsman per dismissal. 3. Bradman averaged 99.4, so today he would make 99.4-1.1 = 98.3 runs per dismissal. Of course change that 1.1 to 0.2 and you get 99.2. It is as simple as that. All the statistical manipulations you are doing are irrelevant and frankly, nonsensical. You can get the above verified with anyone you consider an authority in Math or Statistics.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[vvvslaxman]

Proff' date=' I did run it by someone else ... but let me use your own point (#7) in the Absurdity thread for Ponting. The difference between 90s overall avg(29.37) and 00s overall avg(31.93) is "ONLY" 2.56 [b']but we all know what that meant to most good batsmen and in case of Ponting a staggering 14 point difference in personal avg.

Can you do that for Tendulkar :winky: . If he averages 58 in 1990s shouldn't he average more in the 2000s according to your argument?

[The Outsider]

Proff' date=' I did run it by someone else ... but let me use your own point (#7) in the Absurdity thread for Ponting. The difference between 90s overall avg(29.37) and 00s overall avg(31.93) is "ONLY" 2.56 but we all know what that meant to most good batsmen and in case of Ponting a staggering 14 point difference in personal avg.[/quote'] What did it mean for Tendulkar? His numbers actually went down. In fact, Bradman's numbers are similar to Tendulkar in that respect. He averaged higher in the 30s when the runs per wicket was lower, than in the 40s. There is absolutely no evidence that Bradman benefited from easier batting conditions, the numbers are in fact contrary.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[patriot]

Something that might help fine tune Bossbhai's thoughts. Dhyanchand was a short statured hockey wizard who stood head and shoulders above anyone who ever picked up a hockey stick. None of the legends of the game in the last 30-40 years of field hockey even stand a comparison with him, just like Bradman and the rest of the crowd. Hockey Legend Dhyanchand was from exactly the same era as Bradman. Dhyanchand's dominance in the game was so legendary, that he averaged about 3 goals per game. The best of players then and even know average less than a goal per game. . That is a level of domination that compares with Bradman's legendary average , that stands heads and shoulders above that of any other player in the entire history of the game. Hockey, unfortunately, does not get that much coverage, but anyone who knows a bit about field hockey know that Dhayanchand was incomparable like Bradman. Dhyanchand's dominance in hockey is perhaps even more than Bradman's in cricket. Holland and Germany, I think have statues of Dhyan Chand in their academies. India's national stadium is also named after DhyanChand. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sportacademy/hi/sa/hockey/features/newsid_3490000/3490504.stm

Imagine a hockey player with such skill awestruck spectators thought he was a magician! Well, that was the case with Indian legend Dhyan Chand, who wowed the world with his wonderful hockey wizardry. He was the Pele of his age, hockey's equivalent of Muhammad Ali. Quite simply, the best in the business. Read on to find out more about the best hockey player the world has ever seen. So, who was Dhyan Chand? He was a hockey genius and an all-time sporting great. Did he really have magical powers? His nickname was the hockey wizard, but there was no abracadabra about it! Just pure skill and talent. Still, some people were convinced he must be cheating because they had never seen such amazing stickwork. They even reckoned he had a magnet in the hook of his stick to attract the ball. Of course, it wasn't true. Even when he played with a walking stick, Chand could find the back of the net. Find out why hockey's the sport for you! Wow, he must have been really good! The best. He scored over 1,000 goals in a career spanning 22 years from 1926-1948. During that time he won three Olympic gold medals. What set him apart then? Over 50 years on, and few players have ever lived up to the legend of Dhyan Chand. He had brilliant ball control and would often weave the length of the pitch to score, leaving defenders trailing in his wake. But that's not all. As well as being a prolific goalscorer, Chand also had excellent timing and awareness. He always knew where his team-mates were and the right time to pass to them. And he knew you didn't always have to smash the ball to score. He could find the back of the net just as easily by clever placing and pushing of the ball.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhyan_Chand 1936 Berlin Olympics

India easily defeated Germany 8-1 in the finals, incidentally the only goal scored against India in that Olympic tournament. Dhyanchand top-scored with 3 goals.

http://www.bharatiyahockey.org/granthalaya/legend/encounters/page1.htm

he 1936 Berlin Olympics final was watched by a crowd of 40,000 that included top Nazi officials like Hermann Goering, Joseph Goebbels, Joachim Ribbentrop and the Fuehrer, Adolf Hitler. When the match ended with India defeating Germany 8-1, there was complete silence over the vast stadium. Hitler was to have presented the gold medals to the Indian team, but Hitler had left earlier, in frustration and in anger. The next day, Hitler asked to see Dhyan Chand. When he received this message, Dhyan Chand became very worried. He had heard stories of how Hitler used to get people shot as he was a dictator. Dhyan Chand could not eat properly and spent a sleepless night. In the morning Dhyan Chand went to meet Hitler. The German dictator welcomed Dhyan Chand warmly in his private box and showed him his view of the stadium. Hitler asked Dhyan Chand what he did in India. Dhyan Chand replied that he was a soldier in the Indian army. Hitler offered him a high post in the German army and requested him to come and live in Germany. Dhyan Chand politely refused, saying that his family is settled in India, and it will be difficult for him to relocate to Germany. Hitler said he understood his position and ended the meeting. Dhyan Chand is probably the first position to meet Hitler personally. There are many accounts of Dhyan Chand's famous meeting with Hitler, but this is what he had recounted to his family and close friends.

[bunny]

For those who havent seen Bradman bat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeG8hqQw1U8

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Serani]

This thread.....This forum is really suffering whilst there is a distinct lack of real cricket around.

[Sooda]

Even if youre probably right re: the quality of bowlers, the sheer scale of his superiority over all of them is quite remarkable. Partiots point Is Dhyan Chands quite amazing record which no modern player come near to equalling and hes hailed as the greatest hockey player ever. Theres a parralel there between him and Bradman.

[Sooda]

This thread.....This forum is really suffering whilst there is a distinct lack of real cricket around.

Hardly- Id say the opposite. This is a great thread.

[Serani]

Hardly- Id say the opposite. This is a great thread.

This thread could be never ending.