Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17

Thread: The Pat Symcox theory

  1. #1
    Cricketer Of The Year Arjun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Posts
    8,598

    The Pat Symcox theory

    Fans who have been watching matches involving South Africa have heard the Pat Symcox theory of Three Test Sessions. He says that any team that wins three Test sessions on the trot, wins the Test.

    We don't often see that happen, and not surprisingly, there is a correlation. However, we've seen that backfire a few times. Both of these happened in the Ind/Pak Test series going on now.

    Somewhere, the Indians won a third consecutive session, and they won the Test. However, in Kolkata, they had secured not three, not four, but seven sessions on the trot, and yet, the match ended in a draw.

    Would you agree with this theory?
    "Talent is nothing without opportunity"
    "You're not remembered for aiming at the target, but hitting it"

    Twenty20 used to be boring.

    Sponsored...by...nothing!!!

  2. #2
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    If the theory was only to give a result to a draw I'd sort of see some merit in the idea, but really, it's a bit too gimmicky for me. The draw has always been part of the game when it's not a limited-over one, and to take it out seems, well, the perennial "not cricket" TBH.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  3. #3
    Hall of Fame Member Jamee999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Leicestershire, UK
    Posts
    15,094
    A team that wins 3 sessions in a row more often than not does win a match, but it is 1/5 or maybe even 1/4 of a match, so it makes sense, unless they play direly for the rest...
    Or something.

    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990 - 15/4/2006

  4. #4
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    24,685
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamee999 View Post
    A team that wins 3 sessions in a row more often than not does win a match, but it is 1/5 or maybe even 1/4 of a match, so it makes sense, unless they play direly for the rest...
    Yeah, which would mean that the other team would most likely win 3 sessions in a row.

    It's a stupid theory really. It's just like saying the team who dominates most often wins..


  5. #5
    International Coach
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    10,281
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    If the theory was only to give a result to a draw I'd sort of see some merit in the idea, but really, it's a bit too gimmicky for me. The draw has always been part of the game when it's not a limited-over one, and to take it out seems, well, the perennial "not cricket" TBH.
    I don't think he's putting it forward as an idea for changing the result of a drawn match. He's merely saying that more often than not if a team wins three consecutive sessions they'll go on to win the match.

  6. #6
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Gone too soon
    Posts
    46,970
    There's truth in it, obviously. But there are obvious exceptions. We took the first three sessions in Adelaide in 06/07 for instance...
    Cricket Web's current Premier League Tipping Champion

    - As featured in The Independent.

    "Ben Stokes, that most unlikely saint, worked the second of the two miracles he needs for his canonisation." - The Guardian's Andy Bell on the England all-rounder's Headingley ton

  7. #7
    International Coach
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    10,281
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    There's truth in it, obviously. But there are obvious exceptions. We took the first three sessions in Adelaide in 06/07 for instance...

    That's open to debate, at Lunch on the First Day we were only 50(something) for 2.

  8. #8
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,676
    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    It's a stupid theory really. It's just like saying the team who dominates most often wins..
    "Think Global, Act Local."

    Its a perfect way for players to approach games. Symcox will be using something they applied as players.

    You cant win a Test straight away so breaking it down and aiming to win a session, followed by another and followed by another to bring victory breaks a big thing into small managable pieces.
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there will be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

  9. #9
    International Coach tooextracool's Avatar
    Dick Quicks Island Adventure Champion!
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    not far away from you
    Posts
    14,433
    I agree with his reasoning for the idea but not for the idea itself. I personally feel that the toss has too much of an influence in a test match. There have been far too many occasions when teams have been at a disadvantage of batting last on a crumbling pitch or facing overcast conditions on the first day only for the opposing side to bask in bright sunshine on days 2 and 3. One example was the trent bridge test over the summer. However, i realise that such inconsistencies cannot be eliminated, therefore it is probably best to leave as is.
    Tendulkar = the most overated player EVER!!
    Beckham = the most overated footballer EVER!!
    Vassell = the biggest disgrace since rikki clarke!!

  10. #10
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,127
    Steve Waugh used to say, win the first hour and you win the first session and then you probably win the first day and then win the first Test and probably the series.
    Beware the lollipop of mediocrity. Lick once and you suck forever...

    RIP Fardin Qayyumi, a true legend of CW

    Quote Originally Posted by Boobidy View Post
    Bradman never had to face quicks like Sharma and Irfan Pathan. He wouldn't of lasted a ball against those 2, not to mention a spinner like Sehwag.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New York, New York
    Posts
    953
    yea or you could just win every session like we do, that works.

  12. #12
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    24,685
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    "Think Global, Act Local."

    Its a perfect way for players to approach games. Symcox will be using something they applied as players.

    You cant win a Test straight away so breaking it down and aiming to win a session, followed by another and followed by another to bring victory breaks a big thing into small managable pieces.
    Yeah I understand that breaking down the sessions makes it a manageable process.

    I haven't heard Symcox talk about it, but if it does have this theory it's hardly an amazing idea or anything. Pretty common sense that winning sessions helps you win the game.

  13. #13
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Sexcellent, as the FRAZmeister would say. Will follow-suit.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Whangaparaoa, Auckland
    Posts
    10,872
    Quote Originally Posted by bond21 View Post
    yea or you could just win every session like we do, that works.
    You have an excellent sense of humour

  15. #15
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    66,669
    iirc, Australia won at least 3 sessions in a row in the Test in 01 when they made India follow-on. Unfortunatel, India won 4 or more in a row on days 4 and 5.
    WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie

    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
    - JK Galbraith
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    You need to clap a cows c**** over your head and get a woolly bull to f**** some sense into you.

    "Do you know why I have credibility? Because I don't exude morality." - Bob Hawke

    #408. Sixty three not out forever.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Anyone have a theory on why.....
    By ttm in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 22-11-2007, 06:39 AM
  2. A theory
    By cover drive man in forum Twenty20 World Cup
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 26-07-2007, 10:39 AM
  3. Favorite Conspiracy Theory
    By Sanz in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 02-02-2006, 10:32 PM
  4. Nelsons ? What a theory !!!
    By FRAZ in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 30-09-2004, 01:57 AM
  5. My Theory
    By Paid The Umpire in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 29-07-2002, 02:42 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •