Who is better Lara or Pointing?

[Predator_05]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing?

Predator' date=' most of Lara's 100s came on dead tracks[/quote'] LOL, keep making your excuses. I repeat - THREE DOUBLE HUNDREDS VS AUSTRALIA. You don't need any more proof of a batsman's class than that !! Dead pitches notwithstanding ! Bowlers like McGrath and Warne take wickets everywhere. PS - 132 AT PERTH, 1997 ! There goes your FTB theory

[Bumper]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing? Predator, Laxman has owned McGrath & Warney in an even bigger way. So should i say mentioning Lara in the same breath as Laxman is a blasphemy ? If Lara is that great, why didnt he manage a ton against a Donald led attack ? Why did he average in the low 30s against Pak, vs Akram & Waqar ? Why does he avg 41 vs NZ (only 36 in NZ) ? Why is he placed at a higher pedestal than a Dravid or a Ponting ? When we grew up, we were always told Sachin & Lara are geniuses. We still believe them as unquestionable truths and refuse to be factual in our observations. I dont think any one batsman in history (perhaps barring Bradman) is simply so good that he is beyond debates. PS: Only thing I'd agree, in what u wrote, is that Lara is peerless when it comes to playing spinners -- Granted.

[Predator_05]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing?

Predator' date=' Laxman has owned McGrath & Warney in an even bigger way. So should i say mentioning Lara in the same breath as Laxman is a blasphemy ?[/quote'] In an even bigger way ? Explain ? AFAIK, he only had 1 good series against McGrath and Warne - the '01 BG Series. He also scored a sensational 167 @ Sydney. That is it. Lara has probably scored a little over 2000 runs against them...i'll have to check on this, but i am certainly not far off the mark with this estimate. Your argument is a fairly simplistic one. The reason why Laxman can't be compared to Lara is because he didn't maintain the same degree of consistency throughout his career. Sure, he has a fantastic record vs AUS, but nothing exceptional against the rest. An average of 42 after 80 odd tests confirms his somewhat erratic nature as a gifted batsman. Conversely, Lara has sustained a 50+ average throughout most of his 130-test-long career. Different type of beast.

[Dhondy]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing? That Dravid had a poor first half to his career, Predator, is a myth, one perpetuated by unfavourable comparisons with boy genius Tendulkar. Dravid, in fact, hit an average of 50 in his 19th Test, and continued to average above that watershed until his 34th Test. There was a brief dip into the territory of mortals, but he had regained the hill by the 39 th Test, and has never relinquished it. Hardly the story of an ugly duckling, is it? OTOH, Ponting didn't get to the chartermark for batsmen until his 66th Test. Further, the myth that the two had similar starts to their careers is exploded by the following table of their averages every 10 Tests, upto the present. ----------Dravid-------Ponting 10 Tests--48.31------41.37 20 Tests--52.68------39.48 30 Tests--55.21------38.62 40 Tests--53.58------45.83 50 Tests--52.34------44.65 60 Tests--51.44------47.86 70 Tests--55.22------50.96 80 Tests--57.36------53.58 90 Tests--58.00------55.60 100 Tests-57.79------57.71 104 Tests-58.75------58.26 Ponting has only just caught up with the most consistent batsman of our era, after being his shadow for most of his life. It's just that cricket connoisseurs suffer from a kind of reverse Alzheimer's- great recent memory, but complete amnesia for anything beyond the last few Tests.

[Bumper]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing? 281 is ONE knock, which very few in the history can match. That 153 pales in significance, if u compare that with his 281. My point is not that Laxman is greater than Lara, rather that u cannot big up a batter because he performed well against two greats in ONE series. U gotta take their ENTIRE career span into account.

[Guest BossBhai]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing? -- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing? -- Removed on request of the user --

[Bumper]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing? Wow, this thread is turning out to be an eye opener for all of us. Great stats Dhondy.

[Predator_05]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing?

That Dravid had a poor first half to his career, Predator, is a myth, one perpetuated by unfavourable comparisons with boy genius Tendulkar. Dravid, in fact, hit an average of 50 in his 19th Test, and continued to average above that watershed until his 34th Test. There was a brief dip into the territory of mortals, but he had regained the hill by the 39 th Test, and has never relinquished it. Further, the myth that the two had similar starts to their careers is exploded by the following table of their averages every 10 Tests, upto the present. ----------Dravid-------Ponting 10 Tests--48.31------41.37 20 Tests--52.68------39.48 30 Tests--55.21------38.62 40 Tests--53.58------45.83 50 Tests--52.34------44.65 60 Tests--51.44------47.86 70 Tests--55.22------50.96 80 Tests--57.36------53.58 90 Tests--58.00------55.60 100 Tests-57.79------57.71 104 Tests-58.75------58.26

But i never claimed that he had a poor start to his career ? My point was that Dravid's first 4 years in Test cricket weren't any different from Ponting's. Niether had a poor start to his career. You can look at it on a test by test basis, but the fact is that collectively - they both had near-identical averages up until their 38th test. In your presentation above, Dravid's 53.58 at his 40th test has been inflated by two knocks of 200* and 160 vs Zimbabwe at home. Take away those two knocks, and you have Dravid averaging 47 and Ponting averaging 46. No disparity whatsoever.

[Predator_05]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing?

U gotta take their ENTIRE career span into account.

...and that is where Laxman falls short of being an all-time great, and where Lara shines a time-less legend. I covered this already in my last post on Lara, BTW but thanks for clarifying my point.

[Dhondy]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing? Why should you take away anything? Take away a couple of Punter's best knocks as well then? Those stats there don't lie. Better average throughout their careers...a 30% superior away average... Learn to accept defeat when you are busted, kid! :hic:

[Predator_05]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing?

Predator .. Perth is one of the flattest tracks out there ... Perths Overall Batting Avg = 40 Perths 4th inngs avg =30

Interesting ! What are stats for it in the last decade - ie; '90's ? It was usually a very underprepared wicket, with a lot of cracks. Ambrose and co. really thrived on it. Not the best place for a batsman to score runs. It certainly wasn't a dead pitch when Lara scored 132 there. In recent times, Australia battered Zimbabwe, SA and England there so that's probably boosted the overall batting average. Prove me wrong !

[Anakin]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing?

Predator' date=' most of Lara's 100s came on dead tracks[/quote'] LOL, keep making your excuses. I repeat - THREE DOUBLE HUNDREDS VS AUSTRALIA. You don't need any more proof of a batsman's class than that !! Dead pitches notwithstanding ! Bowlers like McGrath and Warne take wickets everywhere. PS - 132 AT PERTH, 1997 ! There goes your FTB theory

My FTB theory was proven by Lara himself with that gesture to WI groundsmen. Also Gangulyesque away average just highlights the fact.

[Dhondy]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing? Seriously though, pointing out that they had similar averages around their 38th Test is kinda cherry-picking. It doesn't reveal what happened before and after. We have just laid bare their whole career...and it's quite clear who comes out on top. Nice job in ignoring Punter's failure against Zim in his 28th Test though! Dravid's fault that he cashed in, surely? :hic:

[Predator_05]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing?

Why should you take away anything? Take away a couple of Punter's best knocks as well then? Those stats there don't lie. Better average throughout their careers...a 30% superior away average... Learn to accept defeat when you are busted, kid! :hic:

Dhondy - it's the simple thing in statistics called outliers. They skew your results and don't provide an accurate representation of the actual trends. and the real facts - as i demonstrated - is that Dravid and Ponting collectively, were neck and neck during those first 4 years. You can take it or leave it, m8. A couple of big, undefeated hundreds vs minnow bowling attacks like Zimbabwe is the only difference separating these two, and as far as i am concerned - it's not significant. Cheers :wtg:

[Bumper]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing? Preds, u misunderstand my point. U pointed a couple of knocks of Lara against McG & Warney & claimed since Lara owned these two, he is at a diff pedestal than Dravid & Ponting. My claim is that one or two series of dominance against greats is something most very good batsmen achieve. Laxman in that historic series, Jimmy Adams against Kumble, Veeru against an Akhtar led attack etc If u take their entire career span into account, u'll see that the only great bowler Lara has owned is Murali. McGrath has had the wood over Lara consistently. Against Donald, Akram, Waqar etc, the contest does not even begin. Get my point now ?

Like i give a damn about what he scored on dead pitches in Pakistan. Lara's performances vs Australia are simply legendary. That 153* @ Bridgetown, the THREE (count 'em !) double hundreds and numerous other centuries he has scored against them solidify his position as arguably the greatest batsmen of his era. Any batsman who has repeatedly owned McGrath and Warne has my respect. When it comes to bowling attacks, it's hard to think of a better combination than those two. He has also scored double hundreds in South Africa and in the spear-chucker's backyard in Sri Lanka. The man is genius, simple as that. Mentioning Dravid and Ponting's names in the same breath as Lara's is almost blasphemous.

[Dhondy]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing? Outliers...skew...? OK, now you are in big trouble. Prove to me that the data is skewed. Please show me that their medians are significantly different from the means, as they are wont to be if the skew exists. Show me that the data (of their scores) is not normally distributed and hence the mean cannot be used as a central measure. And as I said, Ponting too played against Zim in that period...and failed. Hardly Dravid's fault that he didn't.

[Bumper]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing? In short, the theory that "Lara has fared much better against quality attacks" doesnt have much merit, to dismiss Punter. Its very much debatable and IMO, Punter has surpassed Lara as a batter in the recent years

[Predator_05]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing?

If u take their entire career span into account' date=' u'll see that the only great bowler Lara has owned is Murali. McGrath has had the wood over Lara consistently. Against Donald, Akram, Waqar etc, the contest does not even begin. Get my point now ?[/quote'] OK, i checked this and found out that Lara averages 48 in tests played against Warne AND McGrath. I'd like to know of any batsmen who have done better ? Preferably someone not named Tendulkar... and actually, come to think of it - he did have some good series against Donald-led attacks. He scored several fifties against him in '00/01 series and a 62 in the one test the two teams played in the post-apartheid era back in '92. So it's not like he has struggled against Donald either ! So basically - Lara has scored runs against bowling attacks consisting of McGrath, Warne, Donald, Muralitharan, Pollock, etc. That, coupled with a solid 50+ average sustained over 130 tests is good enough for me.

[Predator_05]

Re: Who is better Lara or Pointing?

Outliers...skew...? OK, now you are in big trouble. Prove to me that the data is skewed. Please show me that their medians are significantly different from the means, as they are wont to be if the skew exists. Show me that the data (of their scores) is not normally distributed and hence the mean cannot be used as a central measure. And as I said, Ponting too played against Zim in that period...and failed. Hardly Dravid's fault that he didn't.

haha, that brings back some memories. I haven't touched that stuff in years. No need for it though. All i know is that when counting their performances against quality opposition - there is almost no difference between Dravid and Ponting's averages. I think it's a fact reasonable enough to illustrate that there was not much difference in their progression within those first 4 years. Take it or leave it, m8. Good debate BTW. I enjoyed it.