New Feature: Bowler Test Win-Loss Records

[chasingthedon]

Last month I looked at ODI Win-Loss records for bowlers - here is the same investigation applied to Test bowlers.

Cricket Web - Features: Bowler Test Win-Loss Records

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Good analysis

 

[social]

Tbh, I think that the mode of analysis distorts the picture somewhat.

If you take Kumble for example (not picking on Indians but he was 3rd name on the list), for much of his career he was a great bowler at home and pretty ordinary away.

Given that his team relied on him a lot on the bowling front, the differences between India's home and away winning % was naturally quite stark. Furthermore, they also drew many matches away that they would've won in a cakewalk at home.

As such, a fair % of his "no results" could easily be classified as losses.

I'm sure that there are many other examples of anomalies, e.g. bowlers taking the required number of wickets but failing to make the most use of conditions thereby forcing their team-mates to pick up the slack or 2 wickets being the equivalent of 6 in the circumstances

 

[Ikki]

Considering their teammates, Warne, McGrath and Marshall are stand-outs IMO.

Still, there are flaws in the analysis. It's biased towards spinners and bowlers who bowl more in general.

A question, does 3 wickets or more in each innings constitute as a "win" even if they don't win the match?

 

[chasingthedon]

Tbh, I think that the mode of analysis distorts the picture somewhat.

If you take Kumble for example (not picking on Indians but he was 3rd name on the list), for much of his career he was a great bowler at home and pretty ordinary away.

Given that his team relied on him a lot on the bowling front, the differences between India's home and away winning % was naturally quite stark. Furthermore, they also drew many matches away that they would've won in a cakewalk at home.

As such, a fair % of his "no results" could easily be classified as losses.

I'm sure that there are many other examples of anomalies, e.g. bowlers taking the required number of wickets but failing to make the most use of conditions thereby forcing their team-mates to pick up the slack or 2 wickets being the equivalent of 6 in the circumstances

Fair comment - obviously this is a first attempt at something like this and the choice of what constitutes a win or loss is open to question. In Kumble's case though, he does have a significantly worse win-loss ratio than his e.g. Murali and Warne. The final comment, while pertintent, would be difficult to objectify.

 

[chasingthedon]

Considering their teammates, Warne, McGrath and Marshall are stand-outs IMO.

Still, there are flaws in the analysis. It's biased towards spinners and bowlers who bowl more in general.

A question, does 3 wickets or more in each innings constitute as a "win" even if they don't win the match?

No, only if the bowler's team won.

 

[chasingthedon]

Considering their teammates, Warne, McGrath and Marshall are stand-outs IMO.

Still, there are flaws in the analysis. It's biased towards spinners and bowlers who bowl more in general.

A question, does 3 wickets or more in each innings constitute as a "win" even if they don't win the match?

I don't think it's biased towards spinners - for example, if you look at the wins/game list, the top 8 has Richardson, Barnes, Lohmann, Steyn and Tyson.

As far as being biased towards players who bowl more, that's true by virtue of what we're looking at, i.e. numbers of wickets taken - players who bowl more tend to take more wickets. Have I missed your point?