Baad Indian Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Let's look at Sehwag's hundreds against the 'big teams' : http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35263.html?class=2;filter=advanced;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=7;opposition=8;orderby=default;runsmin1=100;runsval1=runs;template=results;type=batting Can anyone find Australia and South Africa in those 'big teams'? 6 out of his 12 hundreds have been against arguably the worst ODI team of the last decade - New Zealand. With such a lop sided record, is it any surprise that he has a higher percentage of centuries in matches won? Difficult to lower your win percentage when you are not going to score any hundreds against the best ODI teams - Australia and South Africa. Let's come to Yuvraj : http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/36084.html?class=2;filter=advanced;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=7;opposition=8;orderby=default;runsmin1=100;runsval1=runs;template=results;type=batting 11 centuries against 'big teams'. Total of 3 against Australia and South Africa, all in matches lost. 6 centuries against England and West Indies - again teams from bottom rung of the ODI ladder of the past decade. Now here are Tendulkar's centuries since 2000 : http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=default;runsmin1=100;runsval1=runs;spanmin1=01+Jan+2000;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting 8 of them against Australia and South Africa - that's almost 3 times as many as Yuvraj and Sehwag put together. Clearly, if you don't score hundreds against the real top teams at all you are doing better than scoring a few in losses by the vaibhav theory. Unfortunately people here are not making that point in defense of Sachin , its pretty obvious that if there are two Batsmen A and B where A scored all his ten centuries against Windies and B scored all his ten centuries against Australia then B is definately going to have a lower match winning percentage compared to A . Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
gult Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 +1 to the power of 100 LOL it's still +1.. :--D Link to comment
Raghav_12 Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 +1 to the power of 100 LOL it's still +1.. :--D :hysterical::hysterical: Link to comment
vvvslaxman Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 LOL it's still +1.. :--D that is called over-emphasis :icflove: much like "self-suicide" Link to comment
Sachinism Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 No matter how many stats we quote' date=' the underlying premise of Vaibhav's argument is flawed.[/size'] Even if by some sort of cherrypicking stats , he is able to show the winning percentage in Sachin's matches is lower (which it is not), how does that translate to Sachin's fault? And if someone else had scored the same runs at the same strike rate, would the result have been different This........ Link to comment
vaibhav_delhi Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Surely my last post on this topic. 1. In International cricket, one has got to be mentally n physically tuned to give his 110% all the time. If Sachin's Tons affect the performance of rest of the players by even 5% on average, then that is a big enough factor and will convert a good number of potential victories into losses\ties especially since all the bigger teams are so evenly matched these days, which I believe is precisely whats happening. 2. I have taken the last ~11.5 yr period of Sachin for reference in which he has 20 Tons. I believe its a big enough duration and number of TONS to be showing normal results. If you are to compare with others, then compare in a greater or at least an equally long period, with the batsmen having 10+ tons during that period. Link to comment
akshayxyz Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 ^^ I think I should focus my energy to build the tunnel to Mars, using my car batteries and nail-cutter. That sounds much easier than to impart some common sense to this guy. Link to comment
DomainK Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Surely my last post on this topic. 1. In International cricket, one has got to be mentally n physically tuned to give his 110% all the time. If Sachin's Tons affect the performance of rest of the players by even 5% on average, then that is a big enough factor and will convert a good number of potential victories into lossesties especially since all the bigger teams are so evenly matched these days, which I believe is precisely whats happening. 2. I have taken the last ~11.5 yr period of Sachin for reference in which he has 20 Tons. I believe its a big enough duration and number of TONS to be showing normal results. If you are to comparing with others, then compare in an greater or atleast an equally long period, with the batsmen having 10+ tons during that duration. Please stand by that, no matter what. Thank you. Link to comment
gaurav92 Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Please stand by that' date=' no matter what. Thank you.[/quote'] :two_thumbs_up: Link to comment
HowardRoark Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Please stand by that' date=' no matter what. Thank you.[/quote'] :pray: Link to comment
King Tendulkar Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Surely my last post on this topic. . :dance::clap::aha::yess::bhangra::bhangra::bhangra::thrasher::party::party::band: Link to comment
Sachin=GOD Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Surely my last post on this topic. 1. In International cricket, one has got to be mentally n physically tuned to give his 110% all the time. If Sachin's Tons affect the performance of rest of the players by even 5% on average, then that is a big enough factor and will convert a good number of potential victories into lossesties especially since all the bigger teams are so evenly matched these days, which I believe is precisely whats happening. why is it that out of thousands of current/former cricketers, a very large number of reputed cricket journalists and millions of cricket fans, only you have somehow made this observation that Goddy's good performances somehow affect the performance of the rest of the team in a negative manner - either the rest of the cricketing world is a complete fool and they're all blind and do not have any knowledge of the game of cricket and therefore have been unable to see the effects of "Factor #1" OR its just you who does'nt want to see the reality and is hell bent on trying to prove something which is completely and absolutely baseless and false. 2. I have taken the last ~11.5 yr period of Sachin for reference in which he has 20 Tons. I believe its a big enough duration and number of TONS to be showing normal results. If you are to compare with others, then compare in a greater or at least an equally long period, with the batsmen having 10+ tons during that period. How have you come to this conclusion that out of a career spanning 21+ years. only 11.5 were to be used?? If you have to take the figures selectively then why not take India's winning% when Goddy scored a 100 from 1989 to 2000 instead of taking the figures from 2000 to 2011 ??? Is it because from 1989 to 2000 Goddy scored 24 centuries and India won 20 matches (83% winning rate) ??? Link to comment
akshayxyz Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Surely my last post on this topic. 1. In International cricket, one has got to be mentally n physically tuned to give his 110% all the time. If Sachin's Tons affect the performance of rest of the players by even 5% on average, then that is a big enough factor and will convert a good number of potential victories into lossesties especially since all the bigger teams are so evenly matched these days, which I believe is precisely whats happening. You do not seem to learn, do you? Enough of these BS numbers. What is the mathematical/statistical/physical/biological/meta-physical model have you used to come up with these numbers? First of all define 100% performance for each player considering variety of factors - (here is a small sample set) - Individual's physiological parameters - age, height, body weight, fat %, hydration level, amount of glycogen in (blood stream, liver, muscles), diet leading upto the game, diet (and timing) through the game, Fatigue level, minor injuries, Individual Psychological parameters - mood, temperament, stage in particular career, individual psychological effect while chasing/batting first, Weather conditions Pitch conditions, Opposition, ..and so on. After that we can analyze - in the matches Sachin or xyz scored 100 - whether any particular (or all) individual's performance got affected +ively or -ively Btw one more question - if Sachin gets out on 99 (or declares, or retires hurt) will the performance of other members get boosted by 5% or will they guarantee 100% effort ( forget 110%).. If you can conclusively prove this to Sachin, I am zillion% sure that Sachin will make sure that he trade all his future 100s for the sake of WC or even victory in every match. He is the one of the very few persons who would do anything, absolutely anything that helps increase the winning chances by even 1%. If you try doing 50% of effort he puts in practice sessions, you would end up in hospital. Link to comment
vaibhav_delhi Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 and BTW there were a few other questions that I had raised in that post (and in various other posts as well)...............un sab questions ka answer do mujhe :whine: :whine: How have you come to this conclusion that out of a career spanning 21+ years. only 11.5 were to be used?? If you have to take the figures selectively then why not take India's winning% when Goddy scored a 100 from 1989 to 2000 instead of taking the figures from 2000 to 2011 ??? Is it because from 1989 to 2000 Goddy scored 24 centuries and India won 20 matches (83% winning rate) ??? sir, you could take any 11.5 yr career-subset for any cricketer where he has scored 20 TONS, it should not show such low win %age for any such subset. In sachin's case, I have taken period since 1st Jan 2000 bcoz the quality, the competitiveness and the core of the team changed from around about that time (from the weak team that we used to have in the 90's). why is it that out of thousands of current/former cricketers' date=' a very large number of reputed cricket journalists and millions of cricket fans, only you have somehow made this observation that Goddy's good performances somehow affect the performance of the rest of the team in a negative manner - either the rest of the cricketing world is a complete fool and they're all blind and do not have any knowledge of the game of cricket and therefore have been unable to see the effects of "Factor #1".[/quote'] perhaps only a few would have realized till now. A few days back, read one of flamy's posts where he said smhow india doesnt win when sach scores a Ton. So, maybe people are slowly noticing it but aren't sure about the factors. Link to comment
EnterTheVoid Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Vaibhav, find something else to do in your free time man. Try getting laid. Link to comment
Sachin=GOD Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Vaibhav, find something else to do in your free time man. Try getting laid. :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Link to comment
vaibhav_delhi Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Vaibhav, find something else to do in your free time man. Try getting laid. Good idea Sree. This topic is fun too, keeps pulling me back:--D... :icflove: Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now