Significance of the 'second innings denial' effect.

[Mr Miyagi]

The stats are right there. You've been shown this dozens of times already.

3 bowlers with similar stats, Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee. The 2 from stronger teams have lower wpm. It's not a coincidence. It's the facts. That's the proof that it's 50 steps back.

Trying to quantify every single potential factor affecting wpm that's related to team strength, even if possible, would be an exceedingly stupid, and pointless, waste of time. Because we already know the answer. We need to know every single factor that leads to it.

So why does Hadlee not have 20 wpm?

 

[Mr Miyagi]

No offence, but you don't even understand grade school scientific theory. Whatever you've got a "genius mind" for is seriously letting you down here.

No offence but this isn't science :P

You use hypothesis and premise when the correct terms are theory and conclusion.

Try again.

I am fairly well educated. :P

 

[TheJediBrah]

So why does Hadlee not have 20 wpm?

is this another dumb comment you're going to delete then claim that you never made it?

 

[Mr Miyagi]

is this another dumb comment you're going to delete then claim that you never made it?

No.


So why does Hadlee not have 20 wpm?

 

[Starfighter]

My "genius mind" as you put it has already got a fair share of accolades and awards. To be quite sincere with you, this wouldn't compare with what I already have achieved.

This may strike you as arrogant. This may strike you as conceited. But it is genuine and authentic. I am not a "dumb" person. No matter how much you think I ought to be.

But I couldn't care a less about discussing me. Discuss the theory. Deny it or accept it. Over to you.

Oh, accolades and awards such as what? Don't need to name names or dates, just general details, like say, 'best performance in third year statistics at my university' or something like that. I expect with the level of intellect you've displayed over the past five pages it must be something quite major, possibly even a nationally recognised award or two.

 

[TheJediBrah]

No offence but this isn't science :P

You use hypothesis and premise when the correct terms are theory and conclusion.

wrong. Both are appropriate

Try again.

I am fairly well educated. :P

I don't really care what you claim because you're clearly not showing it.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Oh, accolades and awards such as a what? Don't need to name names or dates, just general details, like say, 'best performance in third year statistics at my university' or something like that. I expect with the level of intellect you've displayed over the past five pages it must be something quite major, possibly even a nationally recognised award or two.

You really want details?

 

[Starfighter]

You really want details?

Yeah, that'd be very nice

 

[TheJediBrah]

Oh, accolades and awards such as what? Don't need to name names or dates, just general details, like say, 'best performance in third year statistics at my university' or something like that. I expect with the level of intellect you've displayed over the past five pages it must be something quite major, possibly even a nationally recognised award or two.

Can we not devolve into this. It's not relevant how educated someone wants to claim they are and is just going to lead to a **** argument.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Yeah, that'd be very nice

Can we not devolve into this. It's not relevant how educated someone wants to claim they are and is just going to lead to a **** argument.

Seems like there's a disagreement afoot. You two sort it out.

I make no claims to appeal to authority or qualifications, but I have plenty :P

 

[TheJediBrah]

Maybe you can use your superior intellect to explain why playing in a stronger team = lower wpm, if your theory claims the opposite.

 

[Starfighter]

I make no claims to appeal to authority or qualifications, but I have plenty :P

Well, c'mon then show 'em, put your money where your mouth is. I'm serious.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Still second team innings, so it makes no difference

Ironic considering you were so insistent on splitting the two. Changing your tune.

Unfortunately for you, I have not ever wavered on first team innings from second team innings.
Or if you want to keep on denying second innings effect (3rd and 4th inings),

vs.

Dipak was a batsman when Hadlee played with him. He became a bowler later. If you think they were bowling instead of Hadlee - go have a look - but they weren't. NZ wasn't bowling at all. They didn't have the runs in the 4th. Hence Hadlee averages 8 overs. It is more in the 3rd, as people give declaration cushion space, 16 overs, but still well below his 29 overs in first and second.
Like I said, McGrath and Warne both average 18% in the 4th.

If all you care about is McGrath, don't bother replying to me. McGrath bowls 18% of his overs in the 4th innings. Deal with it.

Lets now look at who bowled more 4th innings overs.
Hadlee getsthe benefit of 6% of his total overs in the 4th at just 15 runs per wicket.
McGrath gets the benefit of 18% of his overs in the 4th at just 19 runs per wicket.

I would like a clear answer to these questions, to see if this helps with any of the confusion:

Are we considering 4th innings only, and its effect?

or

Are we considering both 3rd and 4th innings, but separately, and hence there will be two effects?

or ,

are we considering both 3rd and 4th innings together—i.e., 2nd bowling innings—and its lumped effect?

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Maybe you can use your superior intellect to explain why playing in a stronger team = lower wpm, if your theory claims the opposite.

Define stronger team, is it better batting than Hadlee had so greater wpm, or is it better bowling than Hadlee had so lower wpm?

You're wasting your, my and everyone else who gets this now time. It goes both ways. There are two limits.

Two discrete limits.

Two discrete limits.

Two discrete limits.

Two discrete limits.

Competition for wickets and runs.

Runs and competition for wickets.

Ad nauseam.

Why does Streak only average 3,3 wpm less than than Broad and Anderson who compete?





Please stop wasting my time :P

 

[Mr Miyagi]

vs.





I would like a clear answer to these questions, to see if this helps with any of the confusion:

Are we considering 4th innings only, and its effect?

or

Are we considering both 3rd and 4th innings, but separately, and hence there will be two effects?

or ,

are we considering both 3rd and 4th innings together—i.e., 2nd bowling innings—and its lumped effect?

All of the above.

All of the above.

The effect is noticable in 3rd and 4th, it is escalated further in the 4th from the 3rd as the declaration cushion factor is not mitigated, it is destroyed altogether.

All 4 innings matter.

 

[Starfighter]

Is it that hard to say which of the phenomena associated with your two discrete limits is the more influential? A qualitative assessment will do.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Well, c'mon then show 'em, put your money where your mouth is. I'm serious.

I once drew a picture that was so good, my mum put it on the fridge with a magnet.

Yeah - I'm that good :P

 

[TheJediBrah]

Define stronger team, is it better batting than Hadlee had so greater wpm, or is it better bowling than Hadlee had so lower wpm?

You're wasting your, my and everyone else who gets this now time. It goes both ways. There are two limits.

Two discrete limits.

Two discrete limits.

Two discrete limits.

Two discrete limits.

Competition for wickets and runs.

Runs and competition for wickets.

Ad nauseam.

Why does Streak only average 3,3 wpm less than than Broad and Anderson who compete?





Please stop wasting my time :P

Same irrelevant bullshit. No surprise.

Doesn't explain why it is a fact that playing in a stronger ALL-ROUND team = lower wpm. You've been shown a dozen times already that your contrived hypotheticals of "NZ with stronger batting but not stronger bowling" is meaningless.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Same irrelevant bullshit. No surprise.

Doesn't explain why it is a fact that playing in a stronger ALL-ROUND team = lower wpm. You've been shown a dozen times already that your contrived hypotheticals of "NZ with stronger batting but not stronger bowling" is meaningless.

HEATH STREAK 3.3 wpm

It goes both WAYSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

 

[Starfighter]

All of the above.

All of the above.

The effect is noticable in 3rd and 4th, it is escalated further in the 4th from the 3rd as the declaration cushion factor is not mitigated, it is destroyed altogether.

All 4 innings matter.

My dear friend;
If the answer is all of the above, then why did you insist so hard on splitting them in your analyses? It's not like a self-proclaimed flawless mind like yours to be so inconsistent

Especially as you did not bring up the declaration cushion factor as a major factor