• 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.

Highest ODI ratings ever

ak24alive

ak24alive

Cricket Spectator
Hello forumers.
This is my first post here.
I found this forum while looking for a place to post a question I have had for the last two days. I don't know exactly how the ODI batsmen ratings rise and fall. And how much does a player need to score to get a raise of a certain points. I am sure there are dozens of variables involved like the opposition against whom the player scored runs, the player's strike rate or the percentage runs he scored in the match for his team etc etc.

So can someone please explain this formula to me firstly and then can someone estimate how much Kohli will rise in the ratings after the West Indies ODIs end. Let's assume that he scores a 50 in the last idea. Don't think it's too far fetched to assume that. ?
The ratings haven't been updated since the start of the series. He is on 884 right now. He scored 140, 157*, 107 and 16 in the last 4 games.
I want to know how close he will get to Sir Viv Richards' ranking points of 935. Because if someone deserves to be at the top of ODI all time high ratings it's gotta be Kohli imo.
I am sure if he hadn't skipped the Asia Cup (where I believe he would have either gone up with his then ratings i.e. 911 or stayed the same) he would have been at the pinnacle of ODI ratings by the end of Asia cup itself, if not then by the end of Windies series for sure.
Thanks in advance for the answers.
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
stephen said:
As far as I'm aware the formula is secret.
Click to expand...

The ICC Player Rankings are a sophisticated moving average. Players are rated on a scale of 0 to 1000 points. If a player’s performance is improving on his past record, his points increase; if his performance is declining his points will go down.

The value of each player’s performance within a match is calculated using an algorithm, a series of calculations (all pre-programmed) based on various circumstances in the match.

All of the calculations are carried out using pre-programmed formulae, using the information published in a Test match scorecard. There is no human intervention in this calculation process, and no subjective assessment is made.

Test Match Rankings
For a batsman, the factors are:

Runs scored
Ratings of the opposing bowling attack; the higher the combined ratings of the attack, the more value is given to the batsman’s innings (in proportion)
The level of run-scoring in the match, and the team’s innings total; an innings of 100 runs in a match where all teams scored 500 is worth less than 100 runs in a match where all teams were bowled out for 200. And if a team scores 500 in the first innings and 200 in the second innings, a century in the second innings will get more credit than in the first innings (because the general level of run scoring was higher in the first innings)
Out or not out (a not out innings receives a bonus)
The result. Batsmen who score highly in victories receive a bonus. That bonus will be higher for highly rated opposition teams (i.e. win bonus against the current Australia team is higher than the bonus against Bangladesh.)
For a bowler, the factors are:

Wickets taken and runs conceded
Ratings of the batsmen dismissed (at present, the wicket of Kumar Sangakkara is worth more than that of Makhaya Ntini – but if Ntini's rating improves, the value of his wicket will increase accordingly)
The level of run-scoring in the match; bowling figures of 3-50 in a high-scoring match will boost a bowler’s rating more than the same figures in a low-scoring match
Heavy workload; bowlers who bowl a large number of overs in the match get some credit, even if they take no wickets;
The result. Bowlers who take a lot of wickets in a victory receive a bonus. That bonus will be higher for highly rated opposition teams
Bowlers who do not bowl in a high-scoring innings are penalized.

The players’ ratings are calculated by combining their weighted performance in the latest match with their previous rating. This new ‘weighted average’ is then converted into points. Recent performances have more impact on a player’s rating than those earlier in his career, but all his performances are taken into account. A great player who has had a lean run of form will still have a respectable rating.



Players who miss a Test match for their country, for whatever reason, lose one per cent of their points.

New players start at zero points, and need to establish themselves before they get full ratings. There is a scale for calculating qualifications. For example, a batsman who has played 10 Test innings gets 70 per cent of his rating (i.e. his rating will be between 0 and 700 points). He doesn’t get 100 per cent until he has played 40 Test innings. A bowler who has taken 30 wickets also gets 70 per cent of his full rating. He doesn’t get 100 per cent until he has taken 100 Test wickets. This means that successful new players can enter the top 30 after just a few Tests, but are unlikely to reach the world top five until they have many Test matches under their belts.

One-Day Rankings
The principles behind the ODI Ratings are similar to those for the Test Ratings, with the following important differences:

Batsmen gain significant credit for rapid scoring. They only get a small amount of credit for being not out (because a not out batsman is, by definition, batting at the end of the innings when the value of his wicket is low)
Bowlers gain significant credit for economy. A bowler who bowls 10 overs 0-10 is likely to see his rating improve significantly, even though he hasn’t taken a wicket.
Players lose only a half per cent (½%) of their points for missing a match for their country.All ODI matches are considered equal, except for ICC Cricket World Cup matches, where good performances gain extra credit.Big scores or wicket hauls against very weak nations get much less credit than the same performances against the main ODI countries.

ICC Player Rankings


Kohli's points will be affected because India has been playing the Windies (a lowly-ranked team without any elite ODI bowlers). India has also lost a match and tied another.
 
vcs

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I believe he is penalized for missing matches.

FWIW, I wasn't convinced by many of the names in the highest ODI ratings ever list. Then again, many were before my time and it is possible to have less than ATG batsmen attaining a very high peak rating when they were in top form. My personal opinion is that this is the best peak I've seen, even better than Sachin in '98.
 
ak24alive

ak24alive

Cricket Spectator
Fuller Pilch said:
The ICC Player Rankings are a sophisticated moving average. Players are rated on a scale of 0 to 1000 points. If a player’s performance is improving on his past record, his points increase; if his performance is declining his points will go down.

The value of each player’s performance within a match is calculated using an algorithm, a series of calculations (all pre-programmed) based on various circumstances in the match.

All of the calculations are carried out using pre-programmed formulae, using the information published in a Test match scorecard. There is no human intervention in this calculation process, and no subjective assessment is made.

Test Match Rankings
For a batsman, the factors are:

Runs scored
Ratings of the opposing bowling attack; the higher the combined ratings of the attack, the more value is given to the batsman’s innings (in proportion)
The level of run-scoring in the match, and the team’s innings total; an innings of 100 runs in a match where all teams scored 500 is worth less than 100 runs in a match where all teams were bowled out for 200. And if a team scores 500 in the first innings and 200 in the second innings, a century in the second innings will get more credit than in the first innings (because the general level of run scoring was higher in the first innings)
Out or not out (a not out innings receives a bonus)
The result. Batsmen who score highly in victories receive a bonus. That bonus will be higher for highly rated opposition teams (i.e. win bonus against the current Australia team is higher than the bonus against Bangladesh.)
For a bowler, the factors are:

Wickets taken and runs conceded
Ratings of the batsmen dismissed (at present, the wicket of Kumar Sangakkara is worth more than that of Makhaya Ntini – but if Ntini's rating improves, the value of his wicket will increase accordingly)
The level of run-scoring in the match; bowling figures of 3-50 in a high-scoring match will boost a bowler’s rating more than the same figures in a low-scoring match
Heavy workload; bowlers who bowl a large number of overs in the match get some credit, even if they take no wickets;
The result. Bowlers who take a lot of wickets in a victory receive a bonus. That bonus will be higher for highly rated opposition teams
Bowlers who do not bowl in a high-scoring innings are penalized.

The players’ ratings are calculated by combining their weighted performance in the latest match with their previous rating. This new ‘weighted average’ is then converted into points. Recent performances have more impact on a player’s rating than those earlier in his career, but all his performances are taken into account. A great player who has had a lean run of form will still have a respectable rating.



Players who miss a Test match for their country, for whatever reason, lose one per cent of their points.

New players start at zero points, and need to establish themselves before they get full ratings. There is a scale for calculating qualifications. For example, a batsman who has played 10 Test innings gets 70 per cent of his rating (i.e. his rating will be between 0 and 700 points). He doesn’t get 100 per cent until he has played 40 Test innings. A bowler who has taken 30 wickets also gets 70 per cent of his full rating. He doesn’t get 100 per cent until he has taken 100 Test wickets. This means that successful new players can enter the top 30 after just a few Tests, but are unlikely to reach the world top five until they have many Test matches under their belts.

One-Day Rankings
The principles behind the ODI Ratings are similar to those for the Test Ratings, with the following important differences:

Batsmen gain significant credit for rapid scoring. They only get a small amount of credit for being not out (because a not out batsman is, by definition, batting at the end of the innings when the value of his wicket is low)
Bowlers gain significant credit for economy. A bowler who bowls 10 overs 0-10 is likely to see his rating improve significantly, even though he hasn’t taken a wicket.
Players lose only a half per cent (½%) of their points for missing a match for their country.All ODI matches are considered equal, except for ICC Cricket World Cup matches, where good performances gain extra credit.Big scores or wicket hauls against very weak nations get much less credit than the same performances against the main ODI countries.

ICC Player Rankings


Kohli's points will be affected because India has been playing the Windies (a lowly-ranked team without any elite ODI bowlers). India has also lost a match and tied another.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info. My first question is satisfactorily answered. Now do you have any guesses on how many points Kohli will gain after the Windies series?
I am guessing about 15 points gained from the first odi. 10 from the second coz it was a draw. About 5 from the third coz they lost. Might lose 5 from the 4th but they won by a big margin so I don't know.
So if he performs well in the 5th he might gain another 5/10 points. That's a rise of about 30/35 points. So I guess he will be on 915 by the end of the series. Then there's the Aussie ODIs at the start of 2019. But only 3 ODIs and Australia isn't rated very high either. So even if he plays well he might fall just short of Sir Viv's 935. He might have to wait for the NZ series.
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
vcs said:
I believe he is penalized for missing matches.

FWIW, I wasn't convinced by many of the names in the highest ODI ratings ever list. Then again, many were before my time and it is possible to have less than ATG batsmen attaining a very high peak rating when they were in top form. My personal opinion is that this is the best peak I've seen, even better than Sachin in '98.
Click to expand...
Don't forget that World Cup games are worth double ranking points and with far fewer ODIs played, a great run in a World Cup could make a huge difference. For instance, David Gower only averaged 30 in his career but scored the most runs in the 1983 World Cup (and lots of centuries around that time) so has one of the highest ever batting rankings. They (batsman of that era) also batted against ATG ODI bowlers so runs scored against a Garner or a Hadlee would've been worth a lot.
 
ak24alive

ak24alive

Cricket Spectator
Fuller Pilch said:
They (batsman of that era) also batted against ATG ODI bowlers so runs scored against a Garner or a Hadlee would've been worth a lot.
Click to expand...
I am not sure anymore about that. My eye test definitely agrees with you. The bowlers when Sachin and Ponting were at their peak were Warne, Murli, Pollock, McGrath, Wasim, Donald, Ambrose, Walsh and whonot.
But I recently read an article which showed that bowlers from that era averaged 32.42 and bowlers now average 32.86 and they used a lot of stats to prove that their isn't a big difference between bowlers back then and now. I don't necessarily agree but I can see that our nostalgia often kicks in while talking about players from the golden eras and we aren't objectively discussing after that.
 
ak24alive

ak24alive

Cricket Spectator
vcs said:
I believe he is penalized for missing matches.

FWIW, I wasn't convinced by many of the names in the highest ODI ratings ever list. Then again, many were before my time and it is possible to have less than ATG batsmen attaining a very high peak rating when they were in top form. My personal opinion is that this is the best peak I've seen, even better than Sachin in '98.
Click to expand...
+1
I think Sir Viv deserves to be at the top rightfully coz we all know how fast he used to play compared to players of his time and that particularly has him at the top. Coz in the ICC criteria posted above it says that a high scoring rate is given high importance in the formula.
Kohli however has reached a level of consistency where he deserves to be standing with Sir Viv or even higher.

And yes he was penalized 27 points for skipping Asia cup. 6 matches in total. The same happened to him in t20s where he was the highest ranked batsmen as recent as the start of this year. Missing matches have helped him apparently which is understandable but from a fan's point of view(which is generally stupid lol) missing matches costed him some awesome records. He would have likely crossed 935 if he hadn't missed Asia cup. He would have crossed Sanga's tally of 2868 runs in a calendar year if he hadn't missed 3 T20 last year. He had 2815 or 2818 already when he skipped those T20s.
 
Last edited:
ak24alive

ak24alive

Cricket Spectator
Hey @Fuller Pilch I was meaning to ask do we get any alerts when someone quotes us on here. Coz I haven't received any.
 
vcs

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
ak24alive said:
That's kinda stupid.. no offence to the site. Who cares about likes! How will one know if someone quotes them especially in a big thread with many replies.
Click to expand...
Oh we do, believe me (unless it's from *****). That's just how sad we are.

Excellent avatar choice BTW.
 
ak24alive

ak24alive

Cricket Spectator
vcs said:
Oh we do, believe me (unless it's from *****). That's just how sad we are.

Excellent avatar choice BTW.
Click to expand...
Lol no I meant notifications about likes.
A like's a like no matters who gives it. So why even notify lol. I am active on a tennis forum called talk tennis warehouse and it gives alerts on quotes and likes both. I find it much more user friendly and pretty than this one. But this is awesome too.

About the avatar: will always be a Freddy fanboi. Cricket comes later.
 
vcs

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
He's probably done though. :(

(in all likelihood, I was probably saying this in 2016 as well)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top