Strike-rates of some famous batsmen from year's past

[cnerd123]

I think had it not be for WWI I think Hobbs would generally be seen as conclusively the second best batsman of all-time. Even despite that I still think he's the clear #2 when you consider that a significant portion of his career was in his 40's, and at his prime he was averaging high-50's in a time when batsman were lucky to average above 40.

It's pretty remarkable. During his career before the war, he scored nearly 1000 runs more than anyone else whilst averaging 57. The next highest average was Aubrey Faulkner with 50 in 18 less innings, and only 5 other men averaged above 40 (min qualification: 100 runs)

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo

Faulkner also took 56 wickets @ 28 during this time. Sydney Barnes took 160 @ 15.91 lmao

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo

Bill Whitty and Warren Bardsely probably fairly underrated cricketers going off those stats.

 

[Coronis]

Sutcliffe is weird. No real holes. Bossed it in Ashes tests also. Maybe low SR is a clue but Hutton and Hammond are rated very highly. Maybe it's because there was an emphasis on dazzling stroke play in those days. Or maybe it's simply because he had Hobbs at the other end.

Big point I agree with.

I still am not 100% sure here but Hobbs, Sobers and Tendulkar are all jumbled up around that #2 spot. Hard to split....

 

[Bolo]

Guinness book of world records 1992, the only recorded source of cricket stats proven to have been in existence prior to the internet, told me that Hobbs and his centuries were a big deal at FC level.

I locked this information into my memory dutifully knowing it would someday be if great use to me. A mere two decades or so later I was watching slumdog millionaire. This exact info popped up as a question on the gameshow. My converted knowledge came in handy by allowing me to get a one minute headstart on the plot. And all this minute cost me was two decades of waiting. Bargain.

Anyway, I have a point buried in here. This is maybe my only encounter with historical FC records in normal life. For it to have happened twice means Hobbs was considered a big deal at FC level. Worth a mention- I think he has historically been held in such high regard due more to FC.

Over 61000 runs and 197 tons in a career that spanned 29 years. Meaty.

Anyway, average of 50ish. Well below test. Anyone know anything about the average? How did it change across his career? I assume age would have slowed him well before the end. Also, how much were other bats managing across his career?

 

[bagapath]

Guinness book of world records 1992, the only recorded source of cricket stats proven to have been in existence prior to the internet, told me that Hobbs and his centuries were a big deal at FC level.

I locked this information into my memory dutifully knowing it would someday be if great use to me. A mere two decades or so later I was watching slumdog millionaire. This exact info popped up as a question on the gameshow. My converted knowledge came in handy by allowing me to get a one minute headstart on the plot. And all this minute cost me was two decades of waiting. Bargain.

Anyway, I have a point buried in here. This is maybe my only encounter with historical FC records in normal life. For it to have happened twice means Hobbs was considered a big deal at FC level. Worth a mention- I think he has historically been held in such high regard due more to FC.

Over 61000 runs and 197 tons in a career that spanned 29 years. Meaty.

Anyway, average of 50ish. Well below test. Anyone know anything about the average? How did it change across his career? I assume age would have slowed him well before the end. Also, how much were other bats managing across his career?

There are tons of great articles on his FC career. including one by CMJ from 2002. See if you can find it on the net.

 

[Bolo]

There are tons of great articles on his FC career. including one by CMJ from 2002. See if you can find it on the net.

I'm really just asking abouts a stats resource for FC. His annual averages plus whatever other averages are available that would function as a reasonable basis of comparison

 

[Days of Grace]

Cricket archive but it has a pay wall.

 

[Bolo]

Cricket archive but it has a pay wall.

Thx, but no paywall for me

 

[a massive zebra]

I'm really just asking abouts a stats resource for FC. His annual averages plus whatever other averages are available that would function as a reasonable basis of comparison

Hobbs annual averages in first class cricket are as follows:

1905 1,317 @ 25.82 with 2 centuries
1906 1,913 @ 40.70 with 4 centuries
1907 2,135 @ 37.45 with 4 centuries
1907/08 Ashes tour 876 @ 41.71 with 2 centuries
1908 1,904 @ 37.33 with 6 centuries
1909 2,114 @ 40.65 with 6 centuries
1909/10 South Africa tour 1,124 @ 66.11 with 3 centuries
1910 1,982 @ 33.03 with 3 centuries
1911 2,376 @ 41.68 with 4 centuries
1911/12 Ashes tour 943 @ 55.47 with 3 centuries
1912 2,042 @ 37.81 with 3 centuries
1913 2,605 @ 50.09 with 9 centuries
1913/14 South Africa tour 1,489 @ 74.45 with 5 centuries
1914 2,697 @ 58.63 with 11 centuries
1919 2,594 @ 60.33 with 8 centuries
1920 2,827 @ 58.90 with 11 centuries
1920/21 Ashes tour 924 @ 51.33 with 4 centuries
1921 312 @ 78.00 with 1 century
1922 2,552 @ 62.24 with 10 centuries
1923 2,087 @ 37.94 with 5 centuries
1924 2,094 @ 58.17 with 6 centuries
1924/25 Ashes tour 865 @ 54.06 with 3 centuries
1925 3,024 @ 70.33 with 16 centuries
1926 2,949 @ 77.61 with 10 centuries
1927 1,641 @ 52.94 with 7 centuries
1928 2,542 @ 82.00 with 12 centuries
1928/29 Ashes tour 962 @ 56.59 with 2 centuries
1929 2,263 @ 66.55 with 10 centuries
1930 2,103 @ 51.29 with 5 centuries
1930/31 India tour 593 @ 53.90 with 2 centuries
1931 2,418 @ 56.23 with 10 centuries
1932 1,764 @ 56.90 with 5 centuries
1933 1,105 @ 61.38 with 6 centuries
1934 624 @ 36.70 with 1 century

Pre War 25,517 @ 42.39 with 65 centuries
Post War 36,243 @ 58.83 with 134 centuries

 

[Starfighter]

Comparing that to his test averages says a bit about the pitches in English first class cricket pre-war. And to think they were so distinctly better post-1900 roughly than before that there were complaints about excessive runscoring.

Though I can imagine he improved with experience as well.

 

[mr_mister]

So pre war Trumpers FC average was actually higher

Lol

 

[morgieb]

So pre war Trumpers FC average was actually higher

Lol

I imagine the Australian pitches were a lot better than English ones, though.

 

[Starfighter]

I imagine the Australian pitches were a lot better than English ones, though.

A test average of 46 in Australia and 28 in England says yes. Be interested to know the difference between Trumper's Australian average and his average on tour including the games against the counties.

I suspect England had somewhat higher quality bowling domestically too at the time.

 

[a massive zebra]

So pre war Trumpers FC average was actually higher

Lol

And Ranjitsinhji's FC average was much higher than either of these!

1893 439 @ 25.82 with 0 centuries
1894 387 @ 32.25 with 0 centuries
1895 1,775 @ 49.31 with 4 centuries
1896 2,781 @ 57.93 with 10 centuries
1897 1,940 @ 45.12 with 5 centuries
1897/98 Ashes tour 1,157 @ 60.89 with 3 centuries
1899 3,159 @ 63.18 with 8 centuries
1899/1900 USA tour 125 @ 62.50 with 0 centuries
1900 3,065 @ 87.57 with 11 centuries
1901 2,468 @ 70.51 with 8 centuries
1902 1,106 @ 46.08 with 3 centuries
1903 1,924 @ 56.58 with 5 centuries
1904 2,077 @ 74.17 with 8 centuries
1908 1,138 @ 45.52 with 3 centuries
1912 1,113 @ 42.81 with 4 centuries
1920 39 @ 9.75 with 0 centuries

Total 24,693 @ 56.37 with 72 centuries

Ranjitsinhji's overall first class average stood as the highest for a complete career by an England based batsman until Geoff Boycott (56.84) retired in 1986. In the nine English seasons he played between 1895 and 1904, Ranji was never outside the top 5 of the seasonal batting averages, finishing 1st on three occasions (he also topped the FC averages on the 1897-98 Ashes tour).

 

[a massive zebra]

A test average of 46 in Australia and 28 in England says yes. Be interested to know the difference between Trumper's Australian average and his average on tour including the games against the counties.

I suspect England had somewhat higher quality bowling domestically too at the time.

Trumper's annual averages in first class cricket are as follows:

1894/95 22 @ 7.33 with 0 centuries
1897/98 192 @ 19.20 with 0 centuries
1898/99 873 @ 62.36 with 2 centuries
1899 Ashes tour 1,556 @ 34.58 with 3 centuries
1899/1900 721 @ 72.10 with 2 centuries
1900/01 458 @ 65.43 with 1 century
1901/02 486 @ 27.00 with 0 centuries
1902 Ashes tour 2,570 @ 48.49 with 11 centuries
1902 South Africa tour 307 @ 43.86 with 0 centuries
1902/03 446 @ 49.56 with 2 centuries
1903/04 990 @ 55.00 with 2 centuries
1904/05 198 @ 49.50 with 0 centuries
1905 New Zealand tour 436 @ 109.00 with 1 century
1905 Ashes tour 1,667 @ 36.24 with 2 centuries
1905/06 250 @ 41.66 with 1 century
1906/07 23 @ 7.66 with 0 centuries
1907/08 797 @ 41.95 with 3 centuries
1908/09 0 @ 0.00 with 0 centuries
1909 Ashes tour 1,435 @ 33.37 with 3 centuries
1909/10 105 @ 105.00 with 1 century
1910/11 1,246 @ 69.22 with 3 centuries
1911/12 583 @ 34.29 with 1 century
1912/13 843 @ 84.30 with 3 centuries
1913/14 107 @ 21.40 with 0 centuries
1914 New Zealand tour 628 @ 69.78 with 1 century

Total 16,949 @ 44.57 with 42 centuries
England Total 7,228 @ 38.65 with 19 centuries

 

[AndrewB]

Were the Sheffield Shield matches timeless in Trumper's era?

 

[Bolo]

Hobbs annual averages in first class cricket are as follows:

1905 1,317 @ 25.82 with 2 centuries
1906 1,913 @ 40.70 with 4 centuries
1907 2,135 @ 37.45 with 4 centuries
1907/08 Ashes tour 876 @ 41.71 with 2 centuries
1908 1,904 @ 37.33 with 6 centuries
1909 2,114 @ 40.65 with 6 centuries
1909/10 South Africa tour 1,124 @ 66.11 with 3 centuries
1910 1,982 @ 33.03 with 3 centuries
1911 2,376 @ 41.68 with 4 centuries
1911/12 Ashes tour 943 @ 55.47 with 3 centuries
1912 2,042 @ 37.81 with 3 centuries
1913 2,605 @ 50.09 with 9 centuries
1913/14 South Africa tour 1,489 @ 74.45 with 5 centuries
1914 2,697 @ 58.63 with 11 centuries
1919 2,594 @ 60.33 with 8 centuries
1920 2,827 @ 58.90 with 11 centuries
1920/21 Ashes tour 924 @ 51.33 with 4 centuries
1921 312 @ 78.00 with 1 century
1922 2,552 @ 62.24 with 10 centuries
1923 2,087 @ 37.94 with 5 centuries
1924 2,094 @ 58.17 with 6 centuries
1924/25 Ashes tour 865 @ 54.06 with 3 centuries
1925 3,024 @ 70.33 with 16 centuries
1926 2,949 @ 77.61 with 10 centuries
1927 1,641 @ 52.94 with 7 centuries
1928 2,542 @ 82.00 with 12 centuries
1928/29 Ashes tour 962 @ 56.59 with 2 centuries
1929 2,263 @ 66.55 with 10 centuries
1930 2,103 @ 51.29 with 5 centuries
1930/31 India tour 593 @ 53.90 with 2 centuries
1931 2,418 @ 56.23 with 10 centuries
1932 1,764 @ 56.90 with 5 centuries
1933 1,105 @ 61.38 with 6 centuries
1934 624 @ 36.70 with 1 century

Pre War 25,517 @ 42.39 with 65 centuries
Post War 36,243 @ 58.83 with 134 centuries

I
Groovy, thx.

He was 52ish when he retired. Wtf are those numbersin his late 40s and 50s

 

[trundler]

Trumper was a sticky dog bully lololol

 

[a massive zebra]

Were the Sheffield Shield matches timeless in Trumper's era?

Yes, Sheffield Shield matches were timeless up to and including the 1926–27 season.

 

[Kirkut]

Jessop probably constrained by the demands of test cricket would have played a more natural game if the Golden Age had T20.

But isn't test supposed to be least constrained of all formats?

 

[the big bambino]

Comparative sr over all 3 formats suggests tests are the most constrained when considering batting strike rates.