Pick your nation's 24 best ODI players throughout history

[kiwiviktor81]

Larsen would be one of the first names down in an ATG side. With Vettori, Hadlee and Bond you could really strangle a side.

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

Is the sim a hobby, or are you hoping to put advertising on the web site?

Or is it to predict future matches/series for statistical betting?

Sorry if I'm being too forthright.

Edit: just saw your sig.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

It's more of a hobby, I have been working on a version of it for 12 years, since I first learned Python. Actually I used to simulate matches with 10-sided dice when I was a kid (Martin Crowe used to play dice cricket too apparently), so this is a natural extension of that. This is the third version and by far the best since a) I know how to program better and b) I'm getting more input from people who know better (such as Dan, who doesn't post here but has done as much on this version of the simulator as I have).

I don't plan to put advertising on it other than that the link is on the publishing company page and there are naturally links there to books that we sell.

Basically the more popular it gets the happier I will be so we'll see what happens. People really could use it for gambling and I hope they do as it has a lot of power there.

 

[NZTailender]

Drop Larsen? Maybe for Ambrose or S Pollock.

Chatfield>Larsen in the strangling stakes. My group of 24 is pretty bowler heavy in some regards, though this only became apparent when trying to make a 2nd XI which was the context for the 'drop Larsen' post to maybe make that side a little stronger.

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

Chatfield>Larsen in the strangling stakes. My group of 24 is pretty bowler heavy in some regards, though this only became apparent when trying to make a 2nd XI which was the context for the 'drop Larsen' post to maybe make that side a little stronger.

Well if you're talking actual performance. Larsen strangled in the 90's. If you're talking the simulator, there is not much in it with regard the bowling and Larsen offers much more with the bat.

 

[mr_mister]

I'll do one for Kenya for fun


The Obuyas
The Sujis
Odoyo
Otenio
Odumbe
Ouma
Obanda
Ongondo
Steve motherloving Tikolo
Vadher
Karim
Shah
Modi
Chudasama


close enough to 24

 

[weldone]

Why do you need 24 players for the simulator? Are you planning some kind of really looooong tournament with fatigue and injuries?

 

[kiwiviktor81]

The BCs can now run a top five in which Martin Crowe has the lowest average. It seems to be closing in on this for the ATGest team (in terms of which ATG team can beat the other NZ ATG teams).

1. Turner
2. Guptill
3. Williamson
4. Taylor
5. Crowe
6. Hadlee (3)
7. McCullum
8. Vettori (4)
9. Bond (2)
10. Southee (5)
11. Boult (1)

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Why do you need 24 players for the simulator? Are you planning some kind of really looooong tournament with fatigue and injuries?

For one, there's room for about 24, and secondly I want to cover all the players that the majority of people using the simulator would want in the game. As you can see from this thread, there is plenty of discussion about who even makes it to the final 24, so I want to make sure that as many people are happy as possible.

 

[weldone]

For one, there's room for about 24, and secondly I want to cover all the players that the majority of people using the simulator would want in the game. As you can see from this thread, there is plenty of discussion about who even makes it to the final 24, so I want to make sure that as many people are happy as possible.

Ok then let me do it seriously

Batsmen: Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly, Virender Sehwag, Virat Kohli, Mohammad Azharuddin, Gautam Gambhir, Rohit Sharma, Ajay Jadeja
All-rounders: MD Dhoni, Rahul Dravid, Kapil Dev, Irfan Pathan, Manoj Prabhakar, Yuvraj Singh, Suresh Raina, Ravindra Jadeja
Bowlers: Javagal Srinath, Zaheer Khan, Harbhajan Singh, Anil Kumble, Ravichandran Ashwin, Mohammad Shami, Bishan Bedi, Venkatesh Prasad

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

The BCs can now run a top five in which Martin Crowe has the lowest average. It seems to be closing in on this for the ATGest team (in terms of which ATG team can beat the other NZ ATG teams).

1. Turner
2. Guptill
3. Williamson
4. Taylor
5. Crowe
6. Hadlee (3)
7. McCullum
8. Vettori (4)
9. Bond (2)
10. Southee (5)
11. Boult (1)

Try

1. Guptil
2. Williamson
3. Taylor
4. Anderson
5. McCullum
6. Ronchi (wk)
7. Crowe (2)
8. Astle (5)
9. Hadlee (3)
10. Bond (1)
11. Larsen (4)

Its pretty good. Crowe was taking more wickets than Hadlee, who's economy was fantastic. Crowe and Astle can salvage, but if 2 of the top 6 go big, a win is almost assured. Ronchi can still get tonnes from 6 on your simulator because of his strike rate. But he often performs below his average overall. If Turner scored big, a loss was almost assured.

Vettori instead of Astle may have been better overall for performance. I cannot recall.

I just wish Lance Cairns (Danny Morrison or Snedden), Jacob Oram (Adam Parore) and Jesse Ryder(John Wright) were available. Drop Ronchi for Jesse and switch him with McCullum in the batting order. I'm curious to see what its like with Lance and Jacob Oram. Oram instead of Astle makes more sense for both batting SR and bowling.

Had Boult and Pringle with Hadlee and Bond, wickets galore. But the scorecard suffered far too much.

Your simulator is much fun. Well done.

 

[Migara]

Sri Lanka

1.Sanath Jayasuriya (96 Man of the tournament plus a plenty of records both with bat and ball)
2.Muttiah Muralitharan (Best ODI wicket taker)
3.Aravinda De Silva (96 WC Man of the Final)
4.Chaminda Vaas
5.Kumar Sangakkara
6.Mahela Jayawardena
7.TM Dilshan
8.Lasith Malinga
9.Arjuna Ranathunge
10.Angelo Mathews
11.Romesh Kaluwitharana
12.Nuwan Kulasekara
13.Dilhara Fernando
14.Chamara Silva
15.Russel Arnold
16.Roshan Mahanama
17.Kumar Dharmasena
18.Upul Chandhana
19.Marvan Atapattu
20.Pramodaya Wickremasinghe
21.Hashan Thillakaratne
22 Lahiru Thirimanna
23 Asanka Gurusinha
24.Dinesh Chandimal

From greatest . . .

1. Sanath Jayasuriya
2. TM Dilshan
3. Angelo Mathews
4. Muttiah Muralitharan
5. Kumar Sangakkara
6. Chaminda Vaas
7. Aravinda de Silva
8. Arjuna Ranatunga
9. Mahela Jayawardane
10. Lasith Malinga
11. Russell Arnold
12. Marvan Atapattu
13. Rumesh Ratnayake
14. Romesh Kaluwitharana
15. Roshan Mahanama
16. Asanka Gurusinha
17. Kumar Dharmasena
18. Upul Chandana
19. Nuwan Kulasekara
20. Roy Dias
21. Ravi Rathnayake
22. Hashan Tillekaratne
23. Suraj Randiv
24. Nuwan Zoysa

 

[jonbrooks]

Batsmen: Ryder, Jones, Crowe, Turner, Williamson, Taylor, Fleming, Guptill
All-rounders: Cairns, Harris, Hadlee, Astle, McCullum, Twose, Smith
Bowlers: Vettori, Bond, Mills, Pringle, Boult, Morrison, Larsen, Allot

I've gone for an extra bowler. :-)

 

[NZTailender]

Well if you're talking actual performance. Larsen strangled in the 90's. If you're talking the simulator, there is not much in it with regard the bowling and Larsen offers much more with the bat.

Except that Chatfield's SR is a shade under 10 balls better and his economy rate is .20 or so better. I know who I'd want in the simulator for the strangling role.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Weirdly, Crowe's bowling strike rate (44) is not much worse than Hadlee's (40). It's just that Hadlee had an economy rate of 3.3. Hadlee may have been the Vettori of his era - better than the other bowlers by such a margin that the other team just played him out and scored off the others.

Moreover, you have to take wickets to get a good strangle going, because the batsman's aggression is a function of the wickets in hand - the higher the wickets in hand, the more aggressive the equilibrium point is. Hadlee and Bond are givens but you need another striker in there, especially considering there's so much cake up top that positions 8 down seldom get to bat.

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

Weirdly, Crowe's bowling strike rate (44) is not much worse than Hadlee's (40). It's just that Hadlee had an economy rate of 3.3. Hadlee may have been the Vettori of his era - better than the other bowlers by such a margin that the other team just played him out and scored off the others.

Moreover, you have to take wickets to get a good strangle going, because the batsman's aggression is a function of the wickets in hand - the higher the wickets in hand, the more aggressive the equilibrium point is. Hadlee and Bond are givens but you need another striker in there, especially considering there's so much cake up top that positions 8 down seldom get to bat.

I was being bowled out all the time. But with 300+ on the board. ODI evolution.

Hadlee and Bond are givens. I used Hadlee in the middle overs to maximise on his economy. Crowe by opening the bowling I think was getting more meaningless death wickets. I liked watching Hadlee, Crowe and Larsen put the squeeze on De Villiers.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

It's been almost 25 years now, but in the haze of my childhood I remember Crowe and Jones both being pretty decent part time bowlers.

Also, playing Crowe at 8 means that your tail will almost never bat, so you can afford to have Bond, Boult and Pringle all in there.

I think there's some merit to Hadlee at 6 in an ATG side because of his high strike rate.

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

It's been almost 25 years now, but in the haze of my childhood I remember Crowe and Jones both being pretty decent part time bowlers.

Also, playing Crowe at 8 means that your tail will almost never bat, so you can afford to have Bond, Boult and Pringle all in there.

I think there's some merit to Hadlee at 6 in an ATG side because of his high strike rate.

I seemed to get more runs and wins when Hadlee batted 9, and Crowe at 8 (at 7 when Astle played at 8).

Astle's bowling was getting murdered, though. Amla prevents the simulator from being "gamed" because you bowl him pie chuckers at the start, he tonnes up. Bond has to open the bowling to have a shot at removing him early.

The all out attack bowling line up could skittle SA regularly, but overall - lost far too many games. Larsen was more valuable than Pringle or Boult (when Bond and Hadlee) are already in the side.

Your simulator is very clever, and proves to me two things that we have seen in ODI cricket evolution. The best batsmen should bat 1-3, the highest strikers 4-6, ahead of those who are probably better batsman, but score more slowly, like Duminy.

We are seeing this with Tendulkar opening last decade, and now the likes of Morgan, Maxwell, Miller, De Villiers etc batting in the 4-6 spots.

Why it took people so long to realise that icing players should be in the higher middle order, and not the lower middle order is beyond me. Its simple statistics. Give them more time to bat as they score faster. But don't put them all in the top 3, because you may well have a batting collapse. But if the best 3 collapse, there is the chance of hitting out and still posting 300. (Ronchi v Sri Lanka is a real world example).

I should rejink my batting order to prove that your simulator demonstrates this, but I really like Anderson batting at 4, after Kane and Guptil open with Taylor at 3.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Hmm, that's all very interesting.

If I may say so, the simulator AI is very good. Every ball, the batsman calculates the match situation and the class of the bowler to arrive at the level of aggression that ought to maximise the total runs scored. So it's actually quite hard to beat. if you put two evenly-matched teams into Custom Mode it's quite a challenge.

Another factor is that a team that thrashes a weak side might not be better against a strong side than a side that only narrowly beats a weaker side. This is all down to cake-icing ratios. The simulator tries to fix it so that the icing batsmen come in around over 35 or so.

We're adding Zimbabwe to the simulator as I write here and it seems like your team is especially proficient in kicking the **** out of them. I suspect this is because Anderson at 4 usually comes in much later than if we were playing South Africa, say.

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

I'm only playing SA 2015 WC side. I only ever have Anderson at 4 or 5. (Trying Crowe at 4 with Astle at 8).

Trying to find the strongest NZ side. I have little doubt Jesse Ryder would make the team stronger over Ronchi or McCullum.

Ronchi does not seem to ton up at 7, but he does so at 6.

Things we see now like Morgan, Dhoni and Maxwell up in the order to #4 I think are here to stay. It just makes more sense to give them a full innings, and cut out their not outs given their high scoring rates.

De Villiers is an unfair example, the man is a freak of nature.

But having icing batting in overs 15-35 as opposed to 35 on, I thing will a continuing trend.

And it appears that it is better statistically to slog your way out of trouble and chance a win, but if fail to collapse and lose, than to grind out a low score and lose anyway. I suspect that is true in real cricket just players have felt pressure not to do so - "must rebuild slowly" after heavy wickets lost. But I cannot imagine Miller or AB taking it easy after the top order collapses in real life. Nor Maxwell for that matter, Faulkner maybe.