'Only Ponting can beat Tendulkar's record'

[akshayxyz]

Tendulkar must throw his wicket away to create a pressure situation (without making it seem so), so that Laxman can come and do the pressure-work. But then.. this is not 4th innings, so it would end up qualifying as Sachin choked under pressure. But then.. this is first innings and Sachin is not out yet, so there is no pressure.. besides series already level at 1-1...So Sachin should just play selfish - show how much of a FTB he is and add another hundred to his meaningless record book.

[apeeman]

narrowing down cricket and match situations to a numbers and statistics game is the refuge of the jobless, the nerdy and the ppl that can never get laid. disappointng to see the large number of such ppl on these forums

Well said. Too many people are number chasers and the thread has completely derailed.

[akshayxyz]

off topic - nerds are more likely to end up in regular jobs and married and settled earlier.. - than struggling sportsman, esp in Indian setup. So where is the problem of joblessness and getting laid ;) - unless of course you are referring to a specific decade in one's lifetime and number/variety of sex partners ;)

[zen]

I just checked the scores, GG 93 and Ten playing on 94. Lax got RO, Che has just arrived at the crease. Now if Ten takes Ind past 400, it would be an exceptional innings!

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[akshayxyz]

:wall:

[zen]

what about the part from 2/28 till now ... phokat mei aaya kya ? :hmmm:

That was good work by both GG and Sachin. No credit taken away from both of them but I hope you realize that we are talking abt outstanding innings and not something you are expected to do. Now if Tendulkar were to help Ind go past 400 that would be something! And you can count that as one of his gems! :D

[zen]

Why don't you do this analysis for year 2003 to 2006. You'll feel even better. These were the years where Ponting was scoring almost at the average of 100 runs and Sachin was going through worst phase of life' date=' crippled with multitude of injuries. Using these numbers you can show sachin to be even more inferior to Ponting.[/quote'] Weren't ppl talking abt the last decade? Though I can understand you feeling sore about this :giggle: You shouldn't come to these threads, if you only expect people to post favorable points abt Tendulkar. There are ppl like you who do that even at the expense of making things up *cough anti log cough* and then there are folks like me who at least try to present the pic more accurately :P

[The Outsider]

Possible - but that requires extensive analysis, as he has played at various situations through out his career at various stages. Besides, many other factors need to be considered e.g. a) Many times may be Laxman did not even get chance to play. As top order already took care of the pressure. So someone with lot of time at hand can do this analysis - just to prove who is better at handling pressure, when I have already said - in terms of temperament/skills/handling-pressure - Dravid,Sachin,Laxman are all about the same skills. Actual number and distribution of instances depends on batting order. All I am saying is this pressure-talk/poll is utter non-sense. And similarly picking a random time period and claiming that xyz is inferior to other.

Point is not whether it requires an extensive analysis or not - I agree with you it does as it is not easy to capture various cricket situations in numbers. Point is that the probability measure you gave above is unfit to draw any conclusion. So, if you don't have a lot of time to do a detailed analysis that is fine at least don't give incorrect and incomplete methods to show something.

[akshayxyz]

Point is not whether it requires an extensive analysis or not - I agree with you it does as it is not easy to capture various cricket situations in numbers. Point is that the probability measure you gave above is unfit to draw any conclusion. So, if you don't have a lot of time to do a detailed analysis that is fine at least don't give incorrect and incomplete methods to show something.

My conclusion was - theoretically - When ... 3 batsman have similar skills and temperament and come in a particular order, and there is a significant gap in terms of skill/temperament - after those three... then...likelihood of a batsman ending up playing with tail is more than that of playing relatively higher up in the order. This is fairly easy to prove above using conditional probability. Much easier to prove than other superficial claims like - xyz player is better equipped to handle pressure.. esp when pressure is a very broad term and is being used a bit too carelessly. And whether this postulate is actually observed in cricket history - just requires relevant data and few SQL queries. More often than not - such probability stuff does not disappoint when applied to big enough data-set. There are exceptions - like MSD's string of 13/14 toss losses. But exceptions are exceptions, and who knows it will even out in next one year :)

[The Outsider]

^ Yes, it's a simple enough concept - that a batsman batting lower down the order will end up batting with the tail more often. However, how will you quantify it? Laxman has batted 133 innings at 5 or lower. Tendulkar has batted 280 odd innings at 4 or lower, out of which 60-70 have been at 5 or lower. So, in effect Laxman has only played 60 odd innings more than Tendulkar at 5 or lower. But at the same time he has played 210 extra innings batting at number 4.

[Raghav_12]

Weren't ppl talking abt the last decade? Though I can understand you feeling sore about this :giggle: You shouldn't come to these threads, if you only expect people to post favorable points abt Tendulkar. There are ppl like you who do that even at the expense of making things up *cough anti log cough* and then there are folks like me who at least try to present the pic more accurately :P

My mistake that in hurry I replied to your post.

[akshayxyz]

^ Yes, it's a simple enough concept - that a batsman batting lower down the order will end up batting with the tail more often. However, how will you quantify it? Laxman has batted 133 innings at 5 or lower. Tendulkar has batted 280 odd innings at 4 or lower, out of which 60-70 have been at 5 or lower. So, in effect Laxman has only played 60 odd innings more than Tendulkar at 5 or lower. But at the same time he has played 210 extra innings batting at number 4.

^ It is tempting to try and establish the likelihood of ending up with tail - starting at various positions. And then try to come up with number of innings they might have ended up with tail. It will require lot of iterations to accurately establish such probablities.. For now I think we can take cue from observations so far - number of innings with tail (from top of people's memories) are in that order for ..Dravid, Sachin, Laxman and these three have played bulk of their matches in that order - in batting position. Since I am tempted - lets consider this ballpark attempt. Assuming #4,5,6 are similar in capabilities someone coming up at #6 will have likelihood of 0.5 to proceed and play with tail at #5 it just halves as either the #5 or the one before him could have gotten out. at#4 it halves even further and so on. So - ballpark likelihood of ending up with tail starting at these three positions are: #6 ->0.5 #5 ->0.25 #4 ->0.125 #3 -> 0.0625 Now for Laxman, no. of predicted innings with tail is = 66*0.5 +57*0.25+6*0.125 =~ 50 for SRT -> 20*0.5 + 0.25*28 +236*0.125 =~ 46.5 For RD -> 21.625 I think these numbers are decent indicators that Laxman and Sachin have played almost similar # of finishing_with_tail knocks, while Dravid is quite far behind. Now in real world, - probability at #6 would be a bit higher than 0.5, for 6th wicket partnership as #7 batsman would be more likely to get out and "miss" the tail. - probability at #3 would be a bit lower than 0.0625 as many times he would walk in very quickly and end up being quick 2nd wicket and #4 would be extra cautious. - We did not have rock solid #3,#4,#5,#6 in bulk of 90s - so due to skill differences actual numbers would be skewed. ..and many more such factors

[The Outsider]

^ So, the bottom line of your crude calculation is that Laxman and Tendulkar should have had about the same number of opportunities to bat with the tail. Isn't that what I guessed earlier?

[akshayxyz]

As is with all the statistical masturbations - probabilities for #6 and #4 need to be adjusted, to prove one point or other ;). For now, bottom line of my crude calculation is that Sachin's huge number of innings does not have big impact on number of opportunities. As in extra 100 or so innings does not translate to extra 50 chances, as probability decreases exponentially. Honestly, IMO, with proper adjustments (taken from actual incidents and not perception) - Laxman would end up having 10-15 extra opportunities, good enough of a number for him to end up having 4-5 extra instances of finishing_with_tail.

[akshayxyz]

e.g. As i said - coming at #6 probability would be slightly higher than 0.5 - may be 0.55 or 0.6 - due to significant skill gap between #6 and #7... and that would mean another 3-6 chances at least. I think thats enough for now. We can enjoy rest of the match for now - and not pray both Laxman and Sachin partner to finish the match - to leave every one in a fix - whom to open a thread for. :P

[The Outsider]

^ Aaah...yes...translated, *I will make the model so inherently complicated, that will we divert into an argument on the weights to assign all these added parameters, and I will end up showing Laxman has had so many more opportunities than Tendulkar*. For starters, the inherent skills and capabilities of Tendulkar and Laxman as batsmen are not the same, so that will cover for the #7 issue. The point is there is no end to making this endlessly complicated. Good luck! As for me, I am pretty happy with the simple, intuitive answer which shows both have had roughly equal chances, as anyone who has followed the game in depth would have guessed without running conditional probabilities.

[Zero_Unit]

People who gives comment like that are arrogant. You never know what the futur holds ... a new player might be born who can beat Sachin's record! And about Pointing, IMHO Pointing is not beating any record in this lifetime anymore ... his flame is fading away with his age!!