Rank these 5 Test openers in order (Boycott, Greenidge, Hayden, Sehwag, G Smith)

[Johan]

on the regards to earlier discusson, Alec Stewart is 1000% closer to Sachin Tendulkar than Tendulkar is to Bradman.

 

[Johan]

Below Smith for me

No. Stupid Guy, Gooch is above the 2000s FTB quaret.

 

[Johan]

Why is that surprising. Him seeing off 10 overs of new ball in swinging conditions can mean the difference between a score of 150 to 300.

not surprising just mentioning that was his exact philosophy to batting, especially since it worked.

 

[Coronis]

It really should be the default for openers. Part of the reason Smith, Hayden and Sehwag (and even Warner to an extent) were able to be so successful as openers playing aggressively was the nature of the pitches and the bowlers they faced when opening.

 

[subshakerz]

It really should be the default for openers. Part of the reason Smith, Hayden and Sehwag (and even Warner to an extent) were able to be so successful as openers playing aggressively was the nature of the pitches and the bowlers they faced when opening.

Yeah hence they have to behind Greenidge and Boycott.

 

[shortpitched713]

on the regards to earlier discusson, Alec Stewart is 1000% closer to Sachin Tendulkar than Tendulkar is to Bradman.

Actually, the two gaps happen to be exactly equally far apart.

 

[Johan]

Actually, the two gaps happen to be exactly equally far apart.

not at all, Stewart averages 40, Sachin 50, Bradman 100, Ratio of 1:2 between Sachin-Bradman and ratio of 4:5 between Stewart-Sachin.

 

[shortpitched713]

Actually Sachin averages 54.

QED

 

[Johan]

4 or so points inflation beating up on helpless Bangladeshi and Zimbabwe (2000s) lineups

 

[shortpitched713]

If you can't tell I'm trolling.

I have no idea precisely how good Bradman was, but I'm rather confident he was easily the GOAT. Whether twice as good or 1.864 times better that the next guy, I don't really care.

 

[Johan]

If you can't tell I'm trolling.

I can but I usually just play along.

 

[Coronis]

If you can't tell I'm trolling.

I have no idea precisely how good Bradman was, but I'm rather confident he was easily the GOAT. Whether twice as good or 1.864 times better that the next guy, I don't really care.

Lets put it this way. He was 1.62 times the batsman Voges was.

 

[shortpitched713]

Lets put it this way. He was 1.62 times the batsman Voges was.

You can also be twice as good, but not score twice as many runs. Like many things I would expect there to be diminishing returns. Anyway, Bradman was a freak, but what else is new.

 

[Coronis]

You can also be twice as good, but not score twice as many runs. Like many things I would expect there to be diminishing returns. Anyway, Bradman was a freak, but what else is new.

Maybe he was so grumpy cos people called him a freak.

 

[Bolo.]

It really should be the default for openers. Part of the reason Smith, Hayden and Sehwag (and even Warner to an extent) were able to be so successful as openers playing aggressively was the nature of the pitches and the bowlers they faced when opening.

Smith's SR is a bit deceptive. He would leave everything he could while the ball was moving to get the shine off. Eventually the bowlers would bowl at his body, which was a 4 ball for him. That plus major acceleration later are why his SR is so high.

He was lucky to play in an era that had few bowlers who could move the ball away from him.

 

[Tejretics]

I’d go:

1. Greenidge
2. Boycott
3. Smith
4. Sehwag
5. Hayden

 

[BazBall21]

Graeme Smith's strike rate surprised me but nearly all very tall batsmen are/were aggressive. Their high centres of gravity give them a disadvantage in defence.