Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22
Like Tree11Likes

Thread: Test team ratings since 1877

  1. #1
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,019

    Test team ratings since 1877

    I have spent the last few months working on a system that ranks teams based on results at home/away and quality of opposition. I have come up with the following current ranking for teams:

    India 626
    South Africa 594
    Australia 581
    New Zealand 522
    England 509
    Pakistan 501
    Sri Lanka 498
    West Indies 427
    Bangladesh 403
    Zimbabwe 350

    A rating above 500 represents an above-average team. A rating below 400 represents a minnow. Bangladesh have climbed above the minnow threshold with their victory today over Sri Lanka.

    The ratings look similar to the official ICC version. The difference is that I use 500 as an average score instead of 100. My system also takes into account performances at home vs. away. I wanted to add in margin of victory but I found it to be problematic.

    A test win is worth 750 points. A draw gets 500 points and a loss 250 points. A series score is the average match results. So, in a three test series, if a team wins 2-1, then their series score would be 583 ((750+750+250)/3). This series score is then adjusted based on the rating of the opposition and whether the team was playing at home or away.

    The series score is then added to their rating before the series. How much a team's rating will chance based on their series result is dependent on how many matches were played in the series. A 5 match series will change a team's rating a lot more than a single match series.

    If we use the current India-Australia series as an example, if India win the series 2-1, then their series score is 563. This is upgraded to 612 because they are playing a strong Australian team with a rating of 581.

    India's current rating is 626. Their series score of 612 is added and weighted against their current rating and produces a new rating of 624, a very minor adjustment.

    Australia meanwhile if they lose the series 1-2 will have a series score of 437. Taking into account their opposition and the fact that they are playing away from home, their series score is adjusted to 530.

    Their new rating will be 573.

    Therefore, both teams' ratings will not change by that much at all. At other points in history, teams have lost a series 0-5 and their rating dropped dramatically. England in 2006/07 went from 599-544 after being whitewashed in the Ashes.

    Here are the top 10 highest ratings achieved by test teams

    Australia 2007 714
    West Indies 1986 667
    Australia 1952 642
    South Africa 2013 641
    England 2011 639
    Australia 1959 630
    India 2016 626
    India 2010 620
    Australia 2016 612
    Australia 1976 609

    I have attached a spreadsheet that shows the historical ratings of all test teams.

    A final note, teams start with a rating of 400. South Africa after being reinstated as a test team in 1992 began with a rating of 400, which did not reflect their strength. However, they soon had a rating of over 500.

    I hope you find the historical ratings interesting and worth discussing/debating.

    I will use these ratings to rate individual test performances and then to rate the top 100 test batsmen and bowlers. I hope to also share those results in the months to come.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by Days of Grace; 19-03-2017 at 08:16 AM.
    Greatest Ever Test XI: JB Hobbs, L Hutton, DG Bradman (c), IVA Richards, BC Lara, GS Sobers, AC Gilchrist (wk), Imran Khan, RJ Hadlee, MD Marshall, SK Warne 12th man: M Muralitharan


    Favorite XI: WG Grace, VT Trumper, IVA Richards, DCS Compton, FMM Worrell (c), AC Gilchrist (wk), CL Cairns, SK Warne, FS Trueman, SE Bond, T Richardson 12th man: H Larwood

    "Neither of them will have an international cricket career past 2016."
    Blocky on Martin Guptill and Ish Sodhi. 20/11/2014.

  2. #2
    State Vice-Captain Victor Ian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    here
    Posts
    1,339
    Quote Originally Posted by Days of Grace View Post
    ...
    If we use the current India-Australia series as an example, if India win the series 2-1, then their series score is 563. This is upgraded to 612 because they are playing a strong Australian team with a rating of 581.

    India's current rating is 626. Their series score of 634 is added and weighted against their current rating and produces a new rating of 624, a very minor adjustment.

    ...
    Is that a typo? Otherwise I'm not following. Can you explain that a bit more?

    The top 10 highest ratings seems a bit modern biased. Is that because of a larger divide between good and bad sides this decade?

  3. #3
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,019
    Quote Originally Posted by Victor Ian View Post
    Is that a typo? Otherwise I'm not following. Can you explain that a bit more?

    The top 10 highest ratings seems a bit modern biased. Is that because of a larger divide between good and bad sides this decade?
    Yes, that's a typo. I will correct it.

    Teams play a lot more series these days so if a team is in good form or has outstanding players, then there are a lot of opportunities available to them in the modern era to improve their rating.

  4. #4
    International Coach weldone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Kolkata->Mumbai->London
    Posts
    11,652
    Assigning 400 to SA after re-admission maybe a bit unfair. It should be 500 (average) IMO.
    "Cricket is an art. Like all arts it has a technical foundation. To enjoy it does not require technical knowledge, but analysis that is not technically based is mere impressionism."
    - C.L.R. James


  5. #5
    State Vice-Captain Victor Ian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    here
    Posts
    1,339
    It makes sfa difference to their rankings after a certain amount of time. What is your basis for declaring they were average when they rejoined? (hindsight is not allowed)

    Everyone starts as a 'minnow' (400 points). That they were better than this is shown by their rapid improvement in rankings.

  6. #6
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,019
    Yes, I played around with that aspect of the ratings for a long time. In the end, starting everyone at 400 is fair. You cannot start Bangladesh and Zimbabwe at 500, for example. 500 represents a good test team. New Zealand have had three or four teams that have been rated above 500.

  7. #7
    U19 12th Man srbhkshk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    :O
    Posts
    217
    What time period do you consider for current rankings?

  8. #8
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,019
    Quote Originally Posted by srbhkshk View Post
    What time period do you consider for current rankings?
    There is no time period, which makes it different from the ICC ratings. Teams just keep getting their ratings adjusted depending on performance from series to series.
    zorax likes this.

  9. #9
    U19 12th Man srbhkshk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    :O
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by Days of Grace View Post
    There is no time period, which makes it different from the ICC ratings. Teams just keep getting their ratings adjusted depending on performance from series to series.
    OK, so how do you decide the weight for old performances and new?
    zorax likes this.

  10. #10
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,019
    Quote Originally Posted by srbhkshk View Post
    OK, so how do you decide the weight for old performances and new?
    A ratio of 4:1 for current rating to series performance. This is then adjusted based on the number of matches in the series.
    zorax likes this.

  11. #11
    U19 12th Man srbhkshk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    :O
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by Days of Grace View Post
    A ratio of 4:1 for current rating to series performance. This is then adjusted based on the number of matches in the series.
    Seems fair, have you checked how the ratings change if you change the ratio?
    [Sorry for all the questions I'm just interested :P ]

  12. #12
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,019
    Quote Originally Posted by srbhkshk View Post
    Seems fair, have you checked how the ratings change if you change the ratio?
    [Sorry for all the questions I'm just interested :P ]
    No worries. I'm glad someone is taking an interest!

    I tried a 3:1 ratio but it make the ratings a little too volatile. I like the 4:1 ratio because if a team rated 500 wins a 5 match series 5-0 against an opponent equally rated 500, then their rating will increase 50 points ((500*4)+(750))/5. If it's a win in a single match series, then the rating would increase by 10 points. So it has a nice look to it.
    zorax likes this.

  13. #13
    Cricket Web Staff Member Howe_zat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Top floor, bottom buzzer
    Posts
    25,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Days of Grace View Post
    There is no time period, which makes it different from the ICC ratings. Teams just keep getting their ratings adjusted depending on performance from series to series.
    World Rugby rankings work like this I think, though they're always a zero-sum points exchange which I think is not the case here?
    "truth has been permanently banned." - Prince EWS

    ~

    The Cricket Web Podcast - episode 23 out now

    We're on iTunes - why not give us a review?

  14. #14
    vcs
    vcs is offline
    International Coach vcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    India
    Posts
    14,488
    Does it benefit teams that have chances to play longer series?
    Quote Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
    Chix love a man with a checkered posting history.

  15. #15
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,019
    Quote Originally Posted by vcs View Post
    Does it benefit teams that have chances to play longer series?
    Longer series carry more weight and will change your rating more drastically, so it could go either way!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. DoG's Test Team Ratings - Throughout History
    By Days of Grace in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 19-09-2013, 08:44 PM
  2. # 6 for 1877-1940 Test XI
    By oz_fan in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 28-05-2007, 02:03 PM
  3. # 5 for the 1877-1940 Test XI
    By oz_fan in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 23-05-2007, 12:27 AM
  4. # 4 for the 1877-1940 Test XI
    By oz_fan in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 16-05-2007, 10:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •