My top 30 FIRST CLASS batsmen of all time

[vic_orthdox]

Was this list constructed using only runs in FC cricket (ie FC runs - Test runs = Domestic Runs)?

 

[Days of Grace]

yes. Test runs are included.

 

[Harry Harrison]

Was this list constructed using only runs in FC cricket (ie FC runs - Test runs = Domestic Runs)?

First class runs include both test and 3+4 days matches.

 

[chasingthedon]

Fry and Woodfull must have been tremendous players.

Fry didn't shine in Tests, but was a star in FC, Gents v Players and for Sussex - six consecutive FC centuries at one point!

Of course, he was so much more than a cricketer.

Very interesting stuff, DoG!

 

[The Sean]

Fry didn't shine in Tests, but was a star in FC, Gents v Players and for Sussex - six consecutive FC centuries at one point!

Of course, he was so much more than a cricketer.

Very interesting stuff, DoG!

Fry was so good at everything he was sickening. Vic Marks once wrote that his CV would either utterly scare and intimidate any potential employer or be written off as a complete lie. No one can be that accomplished in so many fields.

But he was.

 

[sammy2]

Nobody cares about your list because it's garbage.

 

[fredfertang]

Such finely honed debating skills

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Nobody cares about your list because it's garbage.

Slightly refined.

Nobody cares about your list because it's you're garbage.

 

[The Sean]

Nobody cares about your list because it's garbage.

DoG on suicide watch after that pwning I believe. I hope he pulls through ok.

 

[Langeveldt]

Nobody cares about your list because it's garbage.

Richard with a dual account?

 

[bagapath]

Nobody cares about your list because it's garbage.

I think quite a few people do. I certainly enjoy these lists. Keep them coming D.O.G.

 

[Days of Grace]

DoG on suicide watch after that pwning I believe. I hope he pulls through ok.

ha ha, tbh, the fc list is a bit like garbage because like i said before it doesn't take into account strength of bowling opposition.

My test ratings are much more clearly defined.

 

[a massive zebra]

Saying that, it would be impossible to do a comprehensive rating for first-class batsmen because of a lack of stats on statsguru (e.g. record vs. each opponent). And it would probably take me months and months. Some batsmen played over 500 games.

Stats showing the first class record of each player vs. each opponent are available from cricketarchive.

 

[chasingthedon]

Nobody cares about your list because it's garbage.

Clearly this takes a long time to compile, so saying something like that is just mean.

 

[chasingthedon]

If batting averages could be adjusted based on the bowling RPW of each opponent during each era, I have no doubt that W.G. would be near the top, maybe only behind Bradman and Hobbs.

What's stopping you - lack of time?

 

[Days of Grace]

Yes, lack of time right now.

Plus do they have the bowling and batting RPW for each side in county cricket in each decade? Without that, the ratings would not that good.

 

[chasingthedon]

Yes, lack of time right now.

Plus do they have the bowling and batting RPW for each side in county cricket in each decade? Without that, the ratings would not that good.

See attached - I have this format for each season since 1890, easily sortable for whatever you need to feed into your calculations. I can zip it up for you if you like. Email me at davewilson_us@yahoo.com

 

[PhoenixFire]

Nobody cares about your list because it's garbage.

Jog on son, I don't think that many people care about reading your posts.