• 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.

Bradman is to Graeme Pollock as Pollock is to.....

chasingthedon

International Regular
This is taken from the final paragraph of my latest feature on the front page. I know that most forum members don't read the features, but I thought this merits wider discussion.

"I’m not sure if anyone’s done this before, but with the same 40-innings threshold applied it turns out that, in terms of career batting average, Bradman’s average is to Graeme Pollock’s as Pollock’s is to….. Graeme Swann, way down in 447th position; just let that rattle around in your brain for a while!"
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Since Bradman is such an extreme statistical outlier I don't think we can look at it simply as you do

I'd say Bradman is to Pollock as Pollock is to Mark Waugh



If Bradman and Pollock were literally batting in the same match together, having a parntership together, and you observed both of them as a spectator, I doubt you'd find yourself going 'yeah Bradman is twice the batsman Pollock is'. You'd likely think he's marginally better, despite the stats saying he's meant to be nearly twice the calibre of Pollock
 
Last edited:

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Since Bradman is such an extreme statistical outlier I don't think we can look at it simply as you do

I'd say Bradman is to Pollock as Pollock is to Mark Waugh



If Bradman and Pollock were literally batting in the same match together, having a parntership together, and you observed both of them as a spectator, I doubt you'd find yourself going 'yeah Bradman is twice the batsman Pollock is'. You'd likely think he's marginally better, despite the stats saying he's meant to be nearly twice the calibre of Pollock
Yeah but Pollock would get out nearly twice as often.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
RPI a better guide.
no it's not

Since Bradman is such an extreme statistical outlier I don't think we can look at it simply as you do

I'd say Bradman is to Pollock as Pollock is to Mark Waugh



If Bradman and Pollock were literally batting in the same match together, having a parntership together, and you observed both of them as a spectator, I doubt you'd find yourself going 'yeah Bradman is twice the batsman Pollock is'. You'd likely think he's marginally better, despite the stats saying he's meant to be nearly twice the calibre of Pollock
that's not necessarily what makes a good batsman though. It's not just how they look. Some batsmen are more talented than others but not as good because of concentration issues and errors and stuff
 
Last edited:

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Since Bradman is such an extreme statistical outlier I don't think we can look at it simply as you do
I don't know about this. If you want to talk statistics, Bradman has a good enough sample set for it not to be an anomaly. And it's not like other players of his era were averaging 70-80 either, or that Bradman had a particularly high number of not outs.

So in terms of the total skill set to score test runs he really is to Pollock as Pollock is to Swann.
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
man something about it doesnt seem right. its so hard for me to accept that 1st to 2nd is the same distance of skill as 2nd to 450th or whatever


but i guess stats r stats
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
man something about it doesnt seem right. its so hard for me to accept that 1st to 2nd is the same distance of skill as 2nd to 450th or whatever


but i guess stats r stats
wait Graeme Swann is 450th?

I assumed there'd be more than that who averaged 30+
 

indiaholic

International Captain
I know this is baseless and a lot of gut feeling is involved but I feel that Bradman would have averaged 75 over 130 tests if he had played in the modern era.
 

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Well you could always make it less 'baseless' by providing some reasons why :p
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
a lot of people have averaged a ridic high amount after 40-60 tests then after they played 100+ it dropped a steady amount, % wise. Not many dropped 25 points though, but % wise, he has a point


look at Gilly, Ponting.

Hell George Headley would be remembered in an even better light if he never came back after to play 2 tests after WW2 when he was way too old. He averaged around 70 before the last 2 tests he played in the late 40s and then in 1954 lol
 
Last edited:

indiaholic

International Captain
Heh. Would have done that if I had any tbh. Bradman's record feels like a ridiculous anomaly and he doesn't even suffer from a sample size issue. We have seen players like Sanga and Ponting going on ridiculous stretches for periods of 7-8 years and in my mind the peak would be the ability to sustain that over 15 years. Feels a lot like Rousey in MMA, where you are remarkably better than everybody else around you at that time but everybody else is maybe not good enough?
 

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
a lot of people have averaged a ridic high amount after 30-60 tests then after they played 100+ it dropped a steady amount, % wise. Not many dropped 25 points though, but % wise, he has a point
Depends if the number of Tests played equate to the number of years of one's career, considering most batsmen drop after 100 tests simply because they're aging.

Bradman missed 8-9 years because of WWII, so probably fair to predict he might have fallen slightly between the age of 30-38, the war years
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
yeah he only played 2-3 years after the war, but it looked like he hadn't missed a beat


the bulk of his test career was only what, 10 years? as long as Ponting and Sanga's super sick run of form
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
yeah he only played 2-3 years after the war, but it looked like he hadn't missed a beat


the bulk of his test career was only what, 10 years? as long as Ponting and Sanga's super sick run of form
They didn't exactly average 99 over 10 years . . .
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
yeah fair

who are some people who have averaged ~100 over a few years, or over a 20-30 tests. anyone?
I'd be surprised if anyone did over that sort of period

the 2 that come to mind are Chanderpaul and Yousuf Youhana who had crazy years
 

Top