Request Your Custom Title Now!
It's constantly brought up in comparisons with Chappell as well, who is bigged up as someone who got hundreds against the quartet regularly, forgetting he got pretty much all his runs when Holding was extremely raw.Meh, even if you filter for purely in matches when 2 or more ATG pacers were bowling, Gavaskar was still exceptional and better than pretty much anyone in the world at accumulating vs great quicks. You'd have to do an analysis like 'It was a hot day in Madras so his 236 in a series where Holding and Marshall took 60 wickets @ 20 doesn't count" to discount his record. He obviously doesn't average 70 vs. the absolute best WI attacks he faced but who does?
Gavaskar was also the only batsman with the technique to open the batting and score run-a-ball hundreds against the great WI attack.
EDIT: Even reading the article, It says he played three series against attacks where two or more great bowlers were present and scored 390 @ 55, 240 @ 30 and 505 @ 50. His biggest innings in the first series came not as the article seems to imply when the pacers were rested but when Roberts and Holding were playing. Even if you want to consider only his performances in the last two of those series when the proper 'quartet' was playing, His record is still insane relative to bowling standards.
Honestly, the 'myth' about him being some sort of rabbit when the great WI pacers were in operation and cashing in v. weak attacks is far bigger than the myth that actually averaged 70 v. an ATG bowling line-up across two decades on CW.
And that one where he swatted Philander over cover for six like he was some club bowler? Glorious.Rahane's so pleasing on the eye when he plays his shots, even if he gets in a tangle sometimes. Still remember 2 sixes of his one in Wellington after he got to his 100 and one against Anderson @ Lords. Just godlike