Jump to content

A list of some utterly Asinine and Hideous statements made by the Bradman Fanatics

Guest BossBhai

By Guest BossBhai
in Cricket Talk

Recommended Posts

zen Grand Master

zen

Posted
Posted
Ohhh paapay ... SRT doesnt just "adjust" to current levels ... he is beating the crap out of Johnny born latelys matching them and beating them more often than not. Go look at his last 5 yrs and compare it with Richards last 5 yrs ... a avg of 58 vs 41 ... lol
Based on SRT being able to not only adjust but beat the crap out of Johnny born lately, we can assume that other ATGs would hv been able to adjust too. Someone like a sobers or Richards would hv been equally successful if they had debuted in 1989 Therefore, the talk that Bradman would not hv been able to adjust is crap as shown by how the batsman hv continued: Bradman - Hutton - sobers - Richards - Tendulkar
Patiala Peg Newbie

Patiala Peg

Posted
Posted
Thanks! For the third version I already have some improved ideas - for example currently minnow:regular weightage is 1:0.5 but in the next version I am thinking of introducing a sliding scale till they turn fully regular so minnow goes from 0.5 to 0.99 and then finally becomes 1. I also thought of introducing a sub-section where within era comparisons are made. So maybe I'll have 4-5 groups...in the first group Hobbs, Bradman, Hammond. In the 70s-80s group there will be Gavva, Viv, Miandad, and Chappal. But that will include lot more work so not decided if I wanna do it....problem is I izz not a good software programmer so dunno how I can automate some of these calculations....currently doing in excel sheets using pivot tables. If there are any other ideas you think that can be incorporated to make it better please feel free to share them with me. Thanks!
Vijay Sharma, Alot of effort and hats off to you for that. I am not a fan of creating new topics randomly, so pardon me for replying to your effort in this jokers thread. Just a fleeting look at your table of parameter indices which is indeed the bottom line for any rankings and one can punch holes into what may be extremely erroneous assumptions. Giving the choker, points way beyond the rest of the field for conditions difficulty index is seriously funny. Tendulkar has played his home tests on such patta wickets ( check any statistic measure ) that have the highest percentage of draws. I do not have an exact number but know for sure that since the 2000's Indian wickets have resulted in highest % of draws. And most of us know that Tendulkar played well over 60 % of his cricket after 2000.In general wickets around the world have flattened considerably in the decade 2000. ( WI and Aussie wickets from the 70;s and 80's and last decade are poles apart ) Ditto for bowlers challenge index...Sunny G @ 0.83 and the choker 1.51 ???? Sorry friend, you can't sell such " virtuoso " facts . The little choker resides many floors below other greats . Hats off for the effort though.:hatsoff:
Guest BossBhai

Guest BossBhai

Posted
Posted

-- Removed on request of the user --

zen Grand Master

zen

Posted
Posted
ehhh ? I just showed you Viv couldnt ( which is why he retired ) ... unless you think averaging 41 is same as 58.
Let's see how many would agree with you on that: I.e. standard of cricket changed from early 80s to late 80s and Viv avg of 41 is because he couldn't adjust
akshayxyz Newbie

akshayxyz

Posted
Posted
Vijay Sharma, Alot of effort and hats off to you for that. I am not a fan of creating new topics randomly, so pardon me for replying to your effort in this jokers thread. Just a fleeting look at your table of parameter indices which is indeed the bottom line for any rankings and one can punch holes into what may be extremely erroneous assumptions. Giving the choker, points way beyond the rest of the field for conditions difficulty index is seriously funny. Tendulkar has played his home tests on such patta wickets ( check any statistic measure ) that have the highest percentage of draws. I do not have an exact number but know for sure that since the 2000's Indian wickets have resulted in highest % of draws. And most of us know that Tendulkar played well over 60 % of his cricket after 2000.In general wickets around the world have flattened considerably in the decade 2000. ( WI and Aussie wickets from the 70;s and 80's and last decade are poles apart ) Ditto for bowlers challenge index...Sunny G @ 0.83 and the choker 1.51 ???? Sorry friend, you can't sell such " virtuoso " facts . The little choker resides many floors below other greats . Hats off for the effort though.:hatsoff:
And this is the reason I keep repeating - comparison across eras - does not make sense, as if within era is easy. Even if you pick 1000 metrics, the problem of assigning weight-age will always be there, and subjective. And some people want to settle it once and forever, just based on one metric (simple arithmetic average OR average relative to peers). why is it hard to stay away from absolute numero-uno evaluation and just enjoy the present. As for Vijay's effort - as I mentioned earlier - there might be 1000 loopholes, but at least it is a sincere attempt and a decent starting point - whoever is sincerely interested can take it from there or "draw a bigger line" - just ridiculing/negative criticism doesn't add any value.
Guest BossBhai

Guest BossBhai

Posted
Posted

-- Removed on request of the user --

zen Grand Master

zen

Posted
Posted
the problem is in your orig statement when you take the whole careers of these players and pretend as though they performed consistently throughout. I just showed you that Vivs last 5 yrs were just ordinary. Infact if we go by the same rectal scanning that you and your tribesmen do on SRT's stats we shouldnt even consider Viv as a ATG because a good 70% of his career is ordinary by your own method. SRT on the other hand is the opposite ... He is matching Viv's prime in his Twilight yrs ... if you dont understand what this means then there is no constructive debate that can be had here.
Nope, we all know that the players who played in early 70s, adjusted to late 80s to early 90s as well but a drop in the performance level was due to factors like age catching up with reflexes. The fitness regime was not what like it is now too. So whether it's Viv or Imran, who debuted in 71 iirc, they had adjusted to late 80s and early 90s This is like suggesting that Ponting is not able to adjust now or SRT or Dravid didn't when he was not in best form :hysterical:
Vijay.Sharma Newbie

Vijay.Sharma

Posted
Posted
Vijay Sharma, Alot of effort and hats off to you for that. I am not a fan of creating new topics randomly, so pardon me for replying to your effort in this jokers thread. Just a fleeting look at your table of parameter indices which is indeed the bottom line for any rankings and one can punch holes into what may be extremely erroneous assumptions. Giving the choker, points way beyond the rest of the field for conditions difficulty index is seriously funny. Tendulkar has played his home tests on such patta wickets ( check any statistic measure ) that have the highest percentage of draws. I do not have an exact number but know for sure that since the 2000's Indian wickets have resulted in highest % of draws. And most of us know that Tendulkar played well over 60 % of his cricket after 2000.In general wickets around the world have flattened considerably in the decade 2000. ( WI and Aussie wickets from the 70;s and 80's and last decade are poles apart ) Ditto for bowlers challenge index...Sunny G @ 0.83 and the choker 1.51 ???? Sorry friend, you can't sell such " virtuoso " facts . The little choker resides many floors below other greats . Hats off for the effort though.:hatsoff:
PP, thanks for your comments but I can't help notice that your comments are totally premature and I understand it is because you have only given the fleeting look so it appears that I have given points randomly. But please read the analysis carefully and you will see that it is just the data speaking. I have even explained exactly why and how weightages are assigned...so maybe when you actually get a chance to read it fully then you can point out where things can be made better. That's the process I have been following - first version was lesser than this and with inputs from others the second version came out. Now with more inputs an even improved version will come out at the end of the season. So I'll look forward to your reading the doc fully (if and when u have the time and inclination to do so) and then point out where things seem illogical - that will be more helpful truly.
Vijay.Sharma Newbie

Vijay.Sharma

Posted
Posted
And this is the reason I keep repeating - comparison across eras - does not make sense, as if within era is easy. Even if you pick 1000 metrics, the problem of assigning weight-age will always be there, and subjective. And some people want to settle it once and forever, just based on one metric (simple arithmetic average OR average relative to peers). why is it hard to stay away from absolute numero-uno evaluation and just enjoy the present. As for Vijay's effort - as I mentioned earlier - there might be 1000 loopholes, but at least it is a sincere attempt and a decent starting point - whoever is sincerely interested can take it from there or "draw a bigger line" - just ridiculing/negative criticism doesn't add any value.
In fact I also agree that comparison across eras is basically impossible. But I just looked at this whole project from a totally different perspective...how many of the subjective things can be included in the analysis...and more importantly how to. And to pick those parameters also I had done it seriously like a proper project, took inputs from others as well. Built hypothesis. Built conceptual functions first and made a theory about what constitutes a virtuoso then from there picked parameters. So it was very systematic and hence it is also easy for an interested reader to tell me where exactly things can be made better. But ya blanket statements just looking at the output just dunn add any value. In fact I have written in the conclusion I, as a fan, do not agree with the outputs in many places. Of course it is not perfect and never will be. But I think doing the two versions of the project itself has given me so much insight into each of those 20 batsmen's performances in such an intimate manner that when I am talking about their performances I am very confident I have facts to back me about them now.
Vijay.Sharma Newbie

Vijay.Sharma

Posted
Posted
Vijay, again, brilliant effort. I do not have the time, but I can assure you your assumptions are utterly flawed. Ask anyone who has watched cricket since the 70's.
PP, you don't even know what the assumptions are yet so readily criticize it. Can you tell me what were the assumptions? If you can at least be specific (and if possible suggest a better way for that specific thing) it will help me make it better. Otherwise your comment looks like you have trashed off the effort just coz you saw the choker midget on top or some other such output you dont agree with. I am telling you I myself do not agree with many of the outputs there, as a fan. But making blanket statements like my assumptions are flawed without even knowing what they are is a little incredulous, don't you think so? I don't want you to agree with the outputs or even the methodology but when you have taken the time and made it a point to say something in it is "utterly flawed", it will only help me a great deal if you can tell me what it is that you are referring to.
Guest BossBhai

Guest BossBhai

Posted
Posted

-- Removed on request of the user --

Guest BossBhai

Guest BossBhai

Posted
Posted

-- Removed on request of the user --

akshayxyz Newbie

akshayxyz

Posted
Posted
Nope, we all know that the players who played in early 70s, adjusted to late 80s to early 90s as well but a drop in the performance level was due to factors like age catching up with reflexes. The fitness regime was not what like it is now too. So whether it's Viv or Imran, who debuted in 71 iirc, they had adjusted to late 80s and early 90s
:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: What about fitness regime of Brian Lara? Ricky Ponting?
Patiala Peg Newbie

Patiala Peg

Posted
Posted
bas.. bahut ho gaya.. insaan ko khelne do ab.. waise pata nahi kitne logon kee rozi roti band ho jaaegi, once he (Tendulkar ) retires for good.
Sahi bola bhidu.. I doubt the choker would pay his PR team after he retires. Last I heard, he sold a gifted car on which he evaded duty and is now asking for a waiver on capital gain tax since it was a " gift". Wah....:two_thumbs_up: In a few years time, Bharat Ratna would also be on sale..you heard it first here.
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...