Guest HariSampath Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 1. Bradman played most of his cricket in Australia and never scored a triple. Thats a fact. 2. if he was not able to score a Triple in his own backyard the odds of him doing that IN INDIA where batting conditions are vastly different is that much lower. 3. Add to that we have further evidence that no one has ever managed to score a triple 100 in India... which makes my case that much stronger. Its another thing if we are talking SL or Eng where a lot of big scores have been made. 4. 75 yrs of absense is not a coincidence or fluke. Thats just way too big a time period. You have not understood. In order to predict an event for 1948, why are you positioning yourself today i n 2007 ? Go back to my earlier post.... you and I are now in 1948, and the Don's team is expected in India next month. This is what I had said, now, if he had come to India in 1948 ( NOT 2007)..... what are the factors you will consider today ( 1948) for next minth's series ? Clarify this NOTE, since we both are talking about projection and prediction, I am simply pointing out restrict yourself to that series at that time Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 A sub question, : If you had been in England in 1930, and if Bradman was coming, would you have projected that he would score 900 runs in a series or 300 in one single day, and on what will you have based your prediction in 1930. Just to see how you say this is logical Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Because if anything one of your views is that things were tougher back in Good old days isnt it ? I dont understand the highlighted part ... please explain. Forget about everything else, since we are talking pf projections and predictions. If you and I were having this debate in 1948, which is what I mean when I say : if Bradman comes to India next month for a series, he will score very highly including a 300, that is if we both are now in 1948. In this case what will your response to me be ? Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 my answer : No he wont .... simply because he was venturing into unknown territory i.e subcontinent. Ok, we are getting somewhere, meaning that the only reason for you to say he won't get a 300 is because he is venturing into unknown territory, right ? good. I ask you now, if 5-6 members batsman of the team coming next month(1948) all are coming for first time, what will be the probablity of any one of them getting 300 in India Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 To elaborate on my question, would you say that irrespective of the batsman who comes to India, irrespective of his track record and irrespective of anything before, NO batsmen who comes to India in 1948 can be expected to get 300 if it is his first time ? Is this what you say Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 That is correct. Just dont ask me to prove it as I am not Brahma dev to turn back the clock ... :D ... All I have is about 70 yrs of data since then and 15 yrs prior to that date ... Its called probability or heuristics or some such thing ... I have repeatedly said that you can use data only TILL 1948 to predict events for that year.... sint that common sense ? or you disgree ? You have already replied, yes, and that it is because of unknown conditions, right ? and NOT because of anything else ? Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 I have repeatedly said that you can use data only TILL 1948 to predict events for that year.... sint that common sense ? or you disgree ? You have already replied, yes, and that it is because of unknown conditions, right ? and NOT because of anything else ? Already your argument is absurd and sweeping. How can you say that all batsmen coming to India to play in these conditions will find it EQUALLY difficult ? Obviously they all will have varying levels of ability, experience, record and form Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 ok, in effect to quote yourself , what you are saying is that for ANY set of batsmen to come to India first time around, will find it difficult Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Are you aware that almost all the teams coming to India for the FIRST time in those years, like England in 1930s, Aus in 1940s, WI also, almost each time they played , they were getting big innings totals like 400, 500, 600 etc ?? and their batsmen were getting big big hundreds against India touring India first time ? Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Lets cut to the chase ... neither can you predict future nor can I ... but we can most definitely see the past ... heres the gist of my point : No one has ever made a triple 100 in 75 yrs of cricket during and after DGB ... Could he still have scored a triple ? Maybe ? what are the Odds : Very very slim. Fair ? Not fair.. but my question unanswered still... What about my response to players playing first time, teams playing first time in Indian conditions. Because you had said earlier in your post this was the ONLY reason you had for predicting Bradman cannot score 300, and remember we both are now NOT in 2007, and you cannot quote what happened after Bradman retired to predict what he may not have done. Stiick to my question first answer it, and don't beat about the bush. Are you willing to concede that the Indians conditions did nothing to prevent teams like England, Aus, and West Indies piling on huge scores and individual players getting big hundreds on their very first time ? Yes or NO, accept, because the facts prove your point about conditions absolutely wrong. Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 not One single Test match IN India ranks in the High scoring games EVER never mind the 30's or 40s ..... England got 400+ in both the first 2 tests in the 1st innings, Windies got 600 + in the first innings of the first2-3 tests they played here, Weekes Got 3 big hundreds in the first 3 tests he played in India etc etc... enough to conclusively prove you wrong that the Indian conditions are by themselves a factor to hamper teams/players from scoring big when they play new in Indian conditions Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 All of the above are in the 1930s and 1940s period only Link to comment
Guest HariSampath Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Windies scored 600 plus in their very first innings in India with FOUR players getting hundreds You got anything to say about "difficult conditions for first timers in India " ??? Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- Link to comment
Guest BossBhai Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 -- Removed on request of the user -- 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