• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Ranking System - Batsman with over 5000 Test Runs

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
With a bit of spare time recently I have come up with my own Test batsman ranking system.

The criteria I have set is a minimum of 5000 runs. I have made a list of retired players and a separate list for the current players.

For the record, I consider anyone who has had a longish career who scores above 0.000 to be a very good Test batsman.

Enjoy/rubbish the list.

Code:
Don Bradman 5.813
Wally Hammond 2.860
Jack Hobbs 2.824
Ken Barrington 2.105
Len Hutton 1.814
Javed Miandad 1.802
Greg Chappell 1.648
Garry Sobers 1.574
Sunil Gavaskar 1.550
Rohan Kanhai 1.500
Matthew Hayden 1.445
Neil Harvey 1.420
Viv Richards 1.398
Brian Lara 1.390
Clive Lloyd 1.311
Dennis Compton 1.152
Mohammad Azharuddin 1.098
Doug Walters 1.082
Bill Lawry 1.011
Allan Border 0.952
Justin Langer 0.883
Richie Richardson 0.857
Inzamam ul Haq 0.838
David Gower 0.769
Geoff Boycott 0.743
Mark Taylor 0.638
Steve Waugh 0.613
Gordon Greenidge 0.535
Colin Cowdrey 0.473
Marcus Trescothick 0.463
Martin Crowe 0.455
Aravinda de Silva 0.450
Gary Kirsten 0.448
John Edrich 0.400
Michael Slater 0.345
Michael Vaughan 0.306
Andrew Strauss 0.277
Desmond Haynes 0.254
Adam Gilchrist 0.232
Gundappa Viswanth 0.216
Saleem Malik 0.196
Graham Thorpe 0.189
Ian Chappell 0.168
David Boon 0.135
Graham Gooch 0.065
Mark Waugh 0.011
Herschelle Gibbs -0.019
Zaheer Abbas -0.022
Sourav Ganguly -0.033
Dilip Vengsarkar -0.111
Stephen Fleming -0.326
Nasser Hussain -0.391
Sanath Jayasuriya -0.403
John Wright -0.426
Alec Stewart -0.447
Michael Atherton -0.554
Carl Hooper -0.655
Arjuna Ranatunga -0.765
Marvan Atapattu -0.815
Ian Botham -0.885
Kapil Dev 1.691

Current Players
Kumar Sangakarra 2.448
Jacques Kallis 1.921
Alastair Cook 1.860
Ricky Ponting 1.770
Virender Sehwag 1.635
Sachin Tendulkar 1.536
Rahul Dravid 1.519
Mahela Jayawardene 1.504
Mohammad Yousuf 1.475
Graeme Smith 1.434
Kevin Pietersen 1.186
Younis Khan 0.605
Shivnarine Chanderpaul 0.568
VVS Laxman 0.532
Ramnaresh Sarwan 0.000
Chris Gayle -0.018
Mark Boucher -1.587
For Dravid, Chanderpaul, Laxman and Sarwan who are currently in the middle of a Test, I have not included this Test at all.
 

weeman27bob

International Regular
Sangakkara seems to be rated far too high.

I mean yes he's a good batsman, but considerably better than Sobers and Lara, and better than Hutton? I, personally, don't think so.
 

Spark

Global Moderator
I don't think it should be suggested for a moment that this is precisely indicative of a player's quality/greatness, so I think we should leave that aside from the outset.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
What's the methodology? I'm trying to think of what it could be which would make it so that if Sangakarra and Cook retired, they'd be the 4th and the 8th best batsmen of all time...do you weigh the tally of runs per season very high instead of an average?


Though I must say, I can definitely see Alastair Cook breaking SRT's record of most runs some day.
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
Interesting analysis. Any details on the methodology?
The figures are based on their full careers. Low scores are punished (excluding not outs) and high scorers are rewarded. Middle of the road scores mean nothing in this exercise.

High scoring not outs are definitely included, but are not as significant as they are for when you work out a batsman's average.

A bit vague I know :)
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
I don't think it should be suggested for a moment that this is precisely indicative of a player's quality/greatness, so I think we should leave that aside from the outset.
Ya it's fun for the sake of it. I remember doing one for spinners which had Stuart Clark as the second best spinner of all time or something.

Actually I made like six or seven of these statistical threads back then. Ah to be bored.
 

Rush

Banned
The figures are based on their full careers. Low scores are punished (excluding not outs) and high scorers are rewarded. Middle of the road scores mean nothing in this exercise.

High scoring not outs are definitely included, but are not as significant as they are for when you work out a batsman's average.

A bit vague I know :)
What is a middle of the road score? 50-99?
 

Spark

Global Moderator
Would I be correct in saying then that it's weighted towards players who convert? That definitely explains Cook and Ponting's rating at a minimum. Reckon Ponting at his peak would be insanely high if so.
 

Howe_zat

Audio File
Rewarding big scores would definitely help Cook, but I'd have thought on that criteria Lara would be among the very top.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I might be in the minority on this, but I still think Gilchrist > Sanga purely as a Test batsman, though I expect Sanga to keep up his form for a couple more years and change that. Would be interesting to see how many people agree with me.
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
Negative indices for some players! :-O
Haha yep. That's why I wrote that I consider 0.000 to be a very good Test batsman. I think -0.001 to -0.499 are still good test batsman.

Sangakkara seems to be rated far too high.

I mean yes he's a good batsman, but considerably better than Sobers and Lara, and better than Hutton? I, personally, don't think so.
Yeah, I know that's why I made two separate lists. Sangakkara and Cook both have good conversion rates and fail less often than most cricketers. Oops just realized that I didn't move Strauss to the current list..

I for one, approve of this system.
Haha good stuff.
 
Last edited:

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
What is a middle of the road score? 50-99?
Nah less. Scores of 50-99 often impact matches.

Would I be correct in saying then that it's weighted towards players who convert? That definitely explains Cook and Ponting's rating at a minimum. Reckon Ponting at his peak would be insanely high if so.
What do you mean by 'rating at a minimum'. Yeah Ponting would have dipped a little recently.

Rewarding big scores would definitely help Cook, but I'd have thought on that criteria Lara would be among the very top.
Lara could have been higher if I used a different point system for massive scores. Lara failed fairly often throughout his career, 62 single figure scores which didn't help him. But still anyone over 1.000 is an awesome batsman.

I might be in the minority on this, but I still think Gilchrist > Sanga purely as a Test batsman, though I expect Sanga to keep up his form for a couple more years and change that. Would be interesting to see how many people agree with me.
They are completely different cricketers. I loved Gilly, but I am not too surprised that he's not ended up that high on this analysis as strike rate isn't a factor and he had quite a long weak period towards the end of his career.
 

Spark

Global Moderator
What do you mean by 'rating at a minimum'. Yeah Ponting would have dipped a little recently.
As in those are the two cricketers who come to mind instantly who are (over the course of their careers) excellent converters, but other names haven't come to mind straight away yet.
 

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
Ya it's fun for the sake of it. I remember doing one for spinners which had Stuart Clark as the second best spinner of all time or something.

Actually I made like six or seven of these statistical threads back then. Ah to be bored.
C'mon he is a bit slowish ,but that is stretching it a bit:p
 
Last edited:

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
So exactly how was this calculated? Can we know? :)
Yes. I used my Casio to calculate it..

As in those are the two cricketers who come to mind instantly who are (over the course of their careers) excellent converters, but other names haven't come to mind straight away yet.
Yeah and the thing with Cook is that he rarely makes a duck. Getting out for 0 regularly does not help a few people in my rankings and nor should it.
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
So exactly how was this calculated? Can we know? :)
Batsman got different points for each time they reached a 'landmark'. Batsman who narrowly missed out on 'landmarks' were punished a bit which could explain someone like Steve Waugh who had a habit of making scores in the 90s, seem a little low on the list.

Batsman who made high not outs were only rated on their actual innings output, not what might have been.

Scores considered 'neither here nor there' were excluded from the calculations as they didn't impact on the match in a positive or negative way. Of course this is debatable are you will find instances when a score of 34 coming in at 3/4 chasing 104 is a positive contribution compared to making 34 in a score of 5/542 dec, but so be it, I felt like I had to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

Batsman who failed to get off the mark did not go too well. Conversely those who frequently troubled the scorers did well. You might consider 1&51 the same as 0&52 - In this exercise 1&51 was rated higher.

That's about all really.,

Are there any players that seem surprisingly high or low, perhaps compared with other ranking lists that you've seen?

Kanhai, Azharuddin and Richie Richardson stand out, but it's kind of refreshing IMO to see a few different names do well.

Of course the absolute best always manage to find a way to be right up the top, I can't believe Bradman is again over double his nearest rival.
 

Top