• 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.

HODI as a simulator

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
I've been growing more and more concerned about the suitability of HODI as the one-day simulator over the last few weeks and months, especially when it comes to Marmite bowling.

I took this to an extreme and ran a few tests this afternoon, the most extreme of which being when I removed the bowling talent of Flintoff, Pietersen and Vaughan, and sent England into 7-game ODI combat against the Australians with the following XI:

Solanki, Trescothick, Vaughan, Bell, Pietersen, Strauss, Collingwood, Flintoff, Read, G Jones, Giles.

You'd expect a 7-0 drubbing - but here's what happened:

Code:
Summary of Series
======= == ======

Match 1 - Australia won by 9 wickets.

Played at Adelaide

England
266\1 from 50.0 overs - ME Trescothick 130*, MP Vaughan 82*
B Lee 1-33  GD McGrath 0-8

Australia
267\1 from 46.2 overs - AC Gilchrist 128*, RT Ponting 101*
PD Collingwood 1-34  AF Giles 0-57


-------------------------------------------------------


Match 2 - England won by 5 wickets.

Played at Adelaide

Australia
278\9 from 50.0 overs - ML Hayden 106, RT Ponting 94
PD Collingwood 5-45  AF Giles 4-70

England
281\5 from 49.2 overs - KP Pietersen 82*, ME Trescothick 65
GD McGrath 1-50  JN Gillespie 1-62


-------------------------------------------------------


Match 3 - England won by 5 wickets.

Played at Adelaide

Australia
245\1 from 50.0 overs - ML Hayden 113*, RT Ponting 93*
AF Giles 1-21  PD Collingwood 0-36

England
249\5 from 48.3 overs - V Solanki 82, IR Bell 74*
GD McGrath 2-51  SK Warne 2-46


-------------------------------------------------------


Match 4 - England won by 7 wickets.

Played at Adelaide

Australia
231\5 from 50.0 overs - ML Hayden 98, MG Bevan 57*
PD Collingwood 2-43  AF Giles 1-44

England
236\3 from 46.3 overs - IR Bell 94*, KP Pietersen 76*
GD McGrath 2-39  SK Warne 1-36


-------------------------------------------------------


Match 5 - Australia won by 7 wickets.

Played at Adelaide

England
284\4 from 50.0 overs - ME Trescothick 116, IR Bell 61*
GD McGrath 2-77  JN Gillespie 1-56

Australia
285\3 from 46.3 overs - MG Bevan 135*, DR Martyn 103*
PD Collingwood 3-46  AF Giles 0-53


-------------------------------------------------------


Match 6 - England won by 4 runs.

Played at Adelaide

England
259\5 from 50.0 overs - V Solanki 73, IR Bell 55*
IJ Harvey 2-47  GD McGrath 1-58

Australia
255\4 from 50.0 overs - MG Bevan 84*, DS Lehmann 70*
AJ Strauss 2-26  PD Collingwood 1-28


-------------------------------------------------------


Match 7 - Australia won by 33 runs.

Played at Adelaide

Australia
338\5 from 50.0 overs - AC Gilchrist 159, RT Ponting 125
PD Collingwood 3-62  AF Giles 2-72

England
305\10 from 47.5 overs - MP Vaughan 75, A Flintoff 57
GD McGrath 3-50  JN Gillespie 2-60


-------------------------------------------------------

England won the series 4-3
Collingwood contrived to take fifteen wickets @ 19 apiece, and Giles 8. The other three marmite bowlers (Strauss, Bell and Trescothick) only took five wickets in the course of their 179 overs, but only conceded 896 runs (5.01 runs per over), leaving England - with a ridiculously long batting order - more than makeable chases on the majority of occasions.

The fact that such a daft selection policy becomes a viable plan does worry me somewhat. I then replayed the series with "genuine" teams - and the frontline England bowlers were, for the most part, vastly more expensive than the vegetable spread we'd seen in the series before. There was one exception - Paul Collingwood, 31 overs @ 5.06...

Australia's front line also got hammered in the series, Shane Warne being taken at significantly more than a run a ball as England clinched another thriller 4-3.

As it stands, specialist bowlers are getting closer and closer to a wasted pick in our OD sides - what are the CWBCC going to do about it?
 

AUST_HiTMaN

International Debutant
As a frontline bowler I feel strong about this issue and am also keen for a response from the CWBCC.
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
FaaipDeOiad said:
Certainly looks to be a problem. The question is - what is the alternative?
We used Syedur Rahman's sim for a while - the problem being that it doesn't chase very well. Otherwise, there's Total Cricket, which unfortunately is bug-ridden, and Dennis Shine's sim that we haven't really tried yet (but got some odd results with in testing)
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Samuel_Vimes said:
We used Syedur Rahman's sim for a while - the problem being that it doesn't chase very well. Otherwise, there's Total Cricket, which unfortunately is bug-ridden, and Dennis Shine's sim that we haven't really tried yet (but got some odd results with in testing)
I haven't seen the Dennis Shine one, but the others aren't any better than HODI I don't think.
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
FaaipDeOiad said:
I haven't seen the Dennis Shine one, but the others aren't any better than HODI I don't think.
Vastly over-rating marmite bowling is a problem for a simulation based on constantly changing averages. It makes selecting elevens a joke - we'd go with eleven Butlers or Ghansars, probably...
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
1. The preset stats in HODI are incorrect in terms of producing proper results. After fiddling around a bit I think I've found a better balance.
2. HODI doesn't do well when batsmen try to accelerate.
3. HODI doesn't incorporate economy rates or Strike Rates (neither did Syedur Rahman's though).
4. HODI is a step up from Syedur Rahman's.
5. This is why I was hesitant to switch to HODI. If you recall, we went through last season with ITC and Syedur Rahman's.

Neil, how's your simulator coming along?
 

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
i have no problems with HODI as yet, i certainly prefer it to the cricket sim. total cricket would be better for mine, but does tend to crash alot.
 

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Mr Mxyzptlk said:
1. The preset stats in HODI are incorrect in terms of producing proper results. After fiddling around a bit I think I've found a better balance.
2. HODI doesn't do well when batsmen try to accelerate.
3. HODI doesn't incorporate economy rates or Strike Rates (neither did Syedur Rahman's though).
4. HODI is a step up from Syedur Rahman's.
5. This is why I was hesitant to switch to HODI. If you recall, we went through last season with ITC and Syedur Rahman's.

Neil, how's your simulator coming along?
My sim's a little on the paused side at present, as the second year of my degree reaches the second half and starts to intensify, so I won't have much time around standard CW work and my degree (plus the cricket season with both the Uni and the juniors) to code. Maybe for season 9!

On the plus side, I did get 110% in a midterm today...
 

cbuts

International Debutant
Neil Pickup said:
My sim's a little on the paused side at present, as the second year of my degree reaches the second half and starts to intensify, so I won't have much time around standard CW work and my degree (plus the cricket season with both the Uni and the juniors) to code. Maybe for season 9!

On the plus side, I did get 110% in a midterm today...
how is that possible
 

Top