Sachin & Bradman - Stats Jugalbandhi

[thevortex]

This actually is part of a PM I sent to Bossbhai a long time back - read when the Bradman-Sachin thread was getting kicked off . The word 'Jugalbandhi' is used for a reason. In true classical tradition I still think there is a way to compare these legends without bringing down each of them. Difficult yes, but not impossible. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There are three ways we can go about this. 1) Apply weights to individual aspects of Bradman's batting and thereby balance his average out 2) Apply weights to individual aspects of Tendulkar's batting and thereby balance his average out. 3) Take the averages of both the batsmen on a scale and start applying factors to both of them correspondingly and see how it affects their averages. Methodology: I dont know if this warrants as scientific a term as methodology but I guess, lets aim high . We need to work out a set of factors which affect batting. These factors would be: 1) Quality of opposition bowlers - measured by taking a mean of bowilng averages and strike rates of the bowlers in each of these batsmen's times. We could restrict this mean to include just the top 15 or 20 bowlers. We ought to maintain a different scale for fast and spin bowlers. In the case of spin bowlers we could even restrict this sample size to, say, 5. I dont know if you would want to include the total number of wickets taken as well among these bowlers. When we work this out in Bradman's time as well as Tendulkar's time we will come up with necessarily different numbers which we can then convert to ratios and apply against the batting averages. 2) Diversity of conditions faced - This could be slightly more difficult. We ought to factor in the pitches that these two played in and find out the average score in the first and second innings. And then we balance this out against the individual players' averages. We could theoretically limit this to countries rather than individual pitches to make it slightly easier. For example in England the averages first innings score is x and the second innings score is y. Out of which Bradman scores this much and Tendulkar scores this much. In the areas where Tendulkar has played and Bradman has not, this could mean that we ought to use some rule of thumb. I am stumped as to what that might be. 3) Uncovered pitches and safety equipment - I am also unclear on how we could reduce this to scale and use this for comparison between these two. At best we could reduce this to a scale of 1 to 10 and assign arbitrary points. Dont know that would be a great idea. 4) Quality of fielding - Theoretically this ought to take out points from Bradman's average. We will have to work out a 'runs saved per Test match' number in the modern times and balance that out in the case of Bradman. I dont know if such a figure is readily available. 5) Intensity of competition - A lot of the games played in those times lacked the all-conquering intensity and the will to win that is seen today. Not to demean those days but gentlemanliness was all pervading and players would be allowed to get to their century and applauded rather than try and not let them get there. I dont know how we might compare using this statistic. But rest assured this did exist. 6) Cricket frequency and variants - Tendulkar is a product of times where Tests were played alongside ODIs and now T20s. This cannot but have an effect on his game and his approach - not to mention its accelerated effect on bodily aging. Bradman played fewer matches and had more time in between matches. I have heard more relaxed travel schedules too being mentioned. 7) Mode of dismissal - The biggest victories for bowlers would probably be to get batsmen bowled or leg before although I have nothing against catches. It would be interesting to find out how many times Bradman was dismissed bowled and leg before and compare this to Tendulkar - of course with respect to number of matches played. This would give us some idea of the opposition bowlers' domination over the batsmen. Number of times stumped might also be interesting. Apart from this, Tendulkar plays in an era where direct hits are rampant and the TV umpire is all powerful (well, almost, considering that Hawkeye is actually an impediment ). From the number of times Tendulkar has been run out or ruled run out through the TV umpire we should deduce a number or a percentage to be applied to Bradman - in an attempt to simulate such conditions then. 8) Manner and rate of scoring - A comparison of ratio of boundaries and sixers involved in the total tally of runs scored might also be an indication of batting mastery and rate of scoring. We could then attach a scale of importance to this statistic and apply it against the corresponding batsman. Not necessarily to his average but on a separate weighted scale. 9) Significance of player in the team - One last interesting piece of statistical reference might be to find out how many times the teams won when these two batsmen failed. We could define failure as a score less than 50 in the whole Test match for example. This has the potential to show how much the teams depended on the batsmen for their score. In this respect an index of the individual score over the team score over a period also could give an indication. As in a percentage figure of the individual score over the total team score. So to summarize we have two kinds of factors - ones that can directly impinge on the batsmen's averages such as quality of bowlers faced, quality of fielding, diversity of conditions etc. and ones that probably need to figure on a separate weighted scale such as manner and rate of scoring, mode of dismissal etc. A combined interpretation of these two could reveal more vis a vis the numbers.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[mhr123]

Bala u can even add.. the amount of clips the bowlers watch to prepare for SRT before the series to spot the areas to attack . It was unavailable during DON's time , so any glitch in his batting was difficult to spot. Now Videos of old matchs are easily available for the opponent teams well in advance to prepare themselves. Over all beautifully written ... well done mate :cheers:

[Rajiv]

err. do we need to take notes here

[Sooda]

Can I just say, for what its worth, that I have actually quite enjoyed reading most of this raging debate (all 5 threads of it) as for the most part it has been very informed and insightful. (Looking forward to seeing the rest of the response to the bradmans thread post 1058 for egs Boss..) I am not sure if I sit on any one side of it, which makes it all the more good to read This is what this board is for and its a refreshing change -particularly now as theres no real cricket being played-from the banal threads that seem to make up a lot of ICF. So...to the likes vortex, Boss, Lurker, Shewtabh etc ...:hatsoff: and long may it continue :nervous:

[thevortex]

This is really a fantasy. I am not really sure we can put together the numbers, let alone crunch them and derive some meaning out of that. But I am convinced that if we we are able to do that we should be able to send this on to Cricinfo. It is bound to make for interesting read or at the very least a good belly laugh. :) Glad Bossbhai that you would help. Me and numbers dont really get along well with each other. mhr123 - that is one of the things covered in point 5 - Intensity of competition. Glad you liked it. Rajiv - why would you need to take notes? Shwetabh is the professor here as far as I know :) Sooda - the reason I started this thread is because I did not like the direction those Bradman threads were taking. I could not stand the bad-mouthing of Tendulkar by the Bradman fans and vice versa by the Tendulkar fans. I did make a similar appeal to sort of maintain respect for both those legends in that Bradman thread earlier. But I guess it went unnoticed, not to mention unheeded. I am hoping here we can have a slightly different sort of discussion.

[Roshanrocks]

you are so very right Mr. Vortex. the badmouthing of the two greats by fans sitting on the opposite sides was gettin too much for me too. the attempt that you are going to make will also be booed at by oppostiion fans, example if a certain criteria is given a certain value and one of the greats is shown in poor light, the fans of that batmsan will shoot the value assigned down. Any kind of comparison between the two greats will only end up in smiley attacks, "clever" insults and finally you will be insullted too. all the best in this venture p.s---- you have to factor in evolution also :) Darwin's theory of evolution, as rabinjackman had given an anology of the two , i will post it here :) now who is going to benefit from evolution theory? bradman - who had an advantage/disadvantage of not havin video feeds to assess his weaknesses/bowler's trengths or tendulkar - who is now in a genreation where batsman n bowlers are both disected in front of videos and laptops?

i would try to come up with an analogy in this regard. u have seen the battle between virus and medicine havent you? you would have noticed that whenever humans have invented a medicine for a virus, the virus mutates and becomes immune to that medicine. then humans have to work harder to find another medicine, by that time another disease has come forth and humans have to work hard yet again to come up with better medicine, so here we see both, diseases as well as medicine evolving with time, both becoming stronger and better, so couldnt cricket evolve the same way? as the bowler became stronger new strokes were invented by batmsen to counter this top class bowling. SImilarly when the batsman became stronger, new kinds of bowling emerged. what i am trying to say is , with time the standards or the toughness of the cricket played will always increase. so comparing a batmsna like bradman of the past with a present batsman is ridiculos as batsmen have evolved with time. if u equate batsmen to viruses and bowlers to medicine, you will know that comparing a virus of 1800's to a virus of now will be nonsensical. a dangerous virus then, which had no cure will have lots n lots of medicines now to counter it. but you would still remember the dangerous virus called small pox which killed lots of people in olden days, which wouldnt be so dangerous now. SImilarily if u put bradman in a time machine , i am sure he wont play as well as the present batmsen would. as he wont be able to suddenly play against the new "evolved" bowlers. also the present bowlers would surely be better than the bowlers at that time. @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ am very sorry i am not very good at pouring out my thoughts and coming out with an article, i hope this doesnt sound like some mumbo jumbo and people can make some sense out of it. I tried to explain something and i tried by best. i know its not good enough but still... @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ########################################################

[thevortex]

So, when are we starting this endeavour, Bossbhai?

[Roshanrocks]

yes BB, kab shuru karei?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Roshanrocks]

looks like umpires did not like to give DGB lbw eh? must have been un-gentlemanly in those days

[Roshanrocks]

ye baat bhi sahi hi hai

[Mr Eintstein]

looks like umpires did not like to give DGB lbw eh? must have been un-gentlemanly in those days

wasn't bowled out much either. the very low amount of bowleds and lbws in bradmans stats indicate that he very rarely missed full balls outright- just think that ought to count for something.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thevortex]

Mods - I had made a post here regarding how I visualized the debate taking shape. First the parameters and only then the discussion. Could that be 'undeleted' please? I think that was essential and not really a rant.

[thevortex]

Oh OK. I got it in the other thread. Posting it here again for reference: Please guys - with all due respects, can we not use this thread as well to sling mud on past and present greats as well as each other? Consider this my sincere request. Lets use this thread only to provide numbers on the parameters listed above. And any new parameters - if valid - can be inducted. No discussion whatsoever on the numbers until all the parameters are tackled and numbers are produced and ratified. Then we can sit back and discuss comparison. Right now we dont have all the parameters for comparison.

[Sachinism]

I will start with the easy ones ... the lbw/bowled and 4s/6s stat

        [B]       Inngs   lbw   bowled   fours   sixes[/B]
DG Bradman	80	6	23     436     9
SR Tendulkar	271	48	43     170     1

Does this say Tendulkar hit 170 boundaries and 1 6 in his test career? :hmmmm:

[Roshanrocks]

how to crunch this i wonder? sachin in the matches mcgrath,Akhtar played, minus the innings he got run out, minus the innings he was wrongly adjusted out, minus the innings he was not dismissed by the bowlers mentioned, and to factor in innings where he was not out and where he could have gone on n on......and how do we factor in the present advantage bowlers have of studying the opposition batsman endlessly in front of avideo? another thing i was wondering is... y do people say that having the extra equipment was ONLY advantageous to the modern batsmen? there are advantages too, your reflexes are faster, u can run faster, run longer, even though these advantages are not comparable to the disadvantages how unfair would it be to say that the modern batsmen would have adjusted to not having the protective arsenal? Dont we humans adapt to everything that happens in our life? .....

[thevortex]

Roshanrocks - about the equipment or lack thereof, that is a different perspective. For sure batsmen would have been lighter and as they say necessity is the mother of invention. They had no choice but to have quick reflexes. Otherwise they get hit by cricket balls hurtling at speed!

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --