So didn't even score 100 runs a Test in that period - suggests a very red-inked contrived stat to me.just had a cheeky look at Vengsarkar because I heard he had a ridic golden patch
hit ~1800 runs, averaged 101 over 20 tests from Dec '85 to Nov '88
Cribbage once ran a set of 'standardised' batting averages taking high and low scoring eras and countries into account, and then multplied them by how long a career they had to get an overall 'value' rating. I'll try and find the thread later if I can. I remember it pretty much ended up with a score of 0-5 for batsmen where 0-1 was for players who weren't really batsmen, 1-2 if they were a good international player, 2-3 if they were among the best in the world and 3-5 if they were a genuine legend of the game. Bradman was 11.And it sounds bloody silly to do that, if you were to grade players fairly you'd give Sachin a 9 and Bradman a 10 unless you want to give him a 14 out of 10. So basically, because he's an outlier we have to look at batting in a different light
George Digweed won the clay-shooting world championship 26 times over a period of 30 years.what are some other examples of such superiority? phar lap?
Goes well with the avatarThere are professional squash players?
fred spofforth should not average more than m vijayCribbage once ran a set of 'standardised' batting averages taking high and low scoring eras and countries into account, and then multplied them by how long a career they had to get an overall 'value' rating. I'll try and find the thread later if I can. I remember it pretty much ended up with a score of 0-5 for batsmen where 0-1 was for players who weren't really batsmen, 1-2 if they were a good international player, 2-3 if they were among the best in the world and 3-5 if they were a genuine legend of the game. Bradman was 11.
edit: it's here I don't completely agree with him but found it a memorable exercise anyway
I'm pretty sure Vijay would average far more if the exercise was done todayfred spofforth should not average more than m vijay
i know it's the past but this is an injustice
that's a fair callSo didn't even score 100 runs a Test in that period - suggests a very red-inked contrived stat to me.
Hammer. Nail. Head.How do the numbers work in statistics? They usually say you need twenty innings to be significant, as we saw recently with Vogues. Bradman has 80 innings' so I'm sure that is way into being significant enough to shut up. Then we have another 300 first class games where the same pattern is seen as oddly superior to everyone else. Bradman is no statistical anomaly. He is a human anomaly.
Pretty much. I'm not sure why people are trying to prove otherwise. FFS the guy averaged 99.94, like everytime I quote that the mind still boggles. I remmeber reading in cricket satire magazine Googly (which is some of the best cricket satire I have ever read) mentioning Lara's ridiculous county run at Warwickshire amongst THAT purple patch, and to think there was a guy doing this in TEST matches on uncovered pitches...astonishing. Saying Bradman is a once in a lifetime player is even doing him a disservice, which says a lot. I look at guy like Lara who to me in a once in generation type player and think "**** me, how good was Bradman?".How do the numbers work in statistics? They usually say you need twenty innings to be significant, as we saw recently with Vogues. Bradman has 80 innings' so I'm sure that is way into being significant enough to shut up. Then we have another 300 first class games where the same pattern is seen as oddly superior to everyone else. Bradman is no statistical anomaly. He is a human anomaly.