Ranking CW's top test cricketers by Career ICC Rating Average

[The Sean]

Geez, South African quicks come out looking bloody good in this.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Pujara greater than Greg Chappell confirmed

 

[shortpitched713]

Pujara greater than Greg Chappell confirmed

Active players are noted for a reason. He might end up worse than Robin Smith.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Hope ChePu announces his retirement tomorrow. Chappell in shambles.

 

[The Sean]

For example, they tweaked it for the the 1% rating drop for missed games in recent years, but didn't apply it retrospectively (they can never do this), so parallel systems exist for newer and older players.

I've not heard about this tweak - what did they change?

 

[AnthonyC]

Does prioritizing longevity help players in weaker teams, who have less pressure from stronger players to push them out?

 

[shortpitched713]

Does prioritizing longevity help players in weaker teams, who have less pressure from stronger players to push them out?

Not much more than playing poorly in that period could potentially hurt them. It's more of an aggregate "averaging" metric rather than an "accumulating points" over time one. The only longevity factor comes from the fact that early career up to 20 Tests and especially the first 10, don't get full marks. The longer you play, the more your "average" overcomes that somewhat arbitrary initial penalty.

 

[Migara]

Not much more than playing poorly in that period could potentially hurt them. It's more of an aggregate "averaging" metric rather than an "accumulating points" over time one. The only longevity factor comes from the fact that early career up to 20 Tests and especially the first 10, don't get full marks. The longer you play, the more your "average" overcomes that somewhat arbitrary initial penalty.

It is a moving average. Only last 20 or so matches carries a weight for the rankings. Anything beyond that is not considered.

 

[Bolo.]

I've not heard about this tweak - what did they change?

1% drop for every game missed. Came in several years ago. I can't remember what other changes I was talking about.

 

[The Sean]

1% drop for every game missed. Came in several years ago. I can't remember what other changes I was talking about.

That's what I thought you meant, but that exists for the older players too. If you look back at the older players they lose points for missing matches too. Lillee lost over 200 during WSC.

 

[Bolo.]

That's what I thought you meant, but that exists for the older players too. If you look back at the older players they lose points for missing matches too. Lillee lost over 200 during WSC.

Hmm, not sure how I'm getting this wrong. I remember reading about changes on the ICC site a few years back.

 

[shortpitched713]

It is a moving average. Only last 20 or so matches carries a weight for the rankings. Anything beyond that is not considered.

Correct. But I'm talking about averaging that rating, which is what I presented. That de facto creates the "longevity factor" to what is essentially an overall average metric.

The retrospective nature of the individual rating points however somewhat penalizes players who had their best matches at the very end of their career. Obviously the more data points (i.e. more Test played), the less these factors make an impact.

 

[shortpitched713]

That's what I thought you meant, but that exists for the older players too. If you look back at the older players they lose points for missing matches too. Lillee lost over 200 during WSC.

Was about to say, those guys have some funny looking rating charts!

 

[AndrewB]

1% drop for every game missed. Came in several years ago. I can't remember what other changes I was talking about.

The 1% drop for every game missed is mentioned in Marcus Berkmann's book about the ratings, published in 1990. (The book claims that its publication meant the algorithms were "set in stone", but I don't think that's actually correct).