sachin or dravid: who in test matches delivered more in crisis?

[sumantra]

Again you are talking things without knowing them.

You must notice in the analysis a small subjective criteria that distinguishes performance against regular teams and minnow teams. Regular : Minnow :: 1.0 : 0.5. So if Sachin scored 100 against bangladesh, only 50 runs are counted. If Gavaskar scored 84 against SL only 42 runs are counted. If Hammond scored 156 runs against India only 78 runs are counted.

Again, it is easy to throw mud on people but facts will ensure that my clothes will be cleaned. Facts will also establish that your hands are now dirty. So I suggest you know about the project a lot more than you seem to. Before jumping up to drag me and accuse me of some disingenuous stuff, please for heaven's sake verify if I have been truly disingenuous or not.

what the hell is that!!!! ufff, u r polluting the whole thing....

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Wow, that's some analysis Vijay. Regarding the bias that Tendulkar is the best, therefore let us prove it. Isn't hypothesis testing all about proving some bias?

 

[Vijay.Sharma]

no problems in that, i referred to it in another context...the fact that sunny and thousand others didn't have that wonderful opportunity is something that mr. sharma has to take in his astounding research work while mathematically judging Hammond and sachin and who not...just that it's one of the several loopholes of that glorious research...

Again my dear, here are the facts -

Minnow innings played
Barrington - 11 of 131
Border - 11 of 265
Bradman - 12 of 80
Chappell - 1 of 151 (the least)
Dravid - 9 of 259
Gavaskar - 11 of 214
..
..
..
Tendulkar - 11 of 290
Waugh - 7 of 260

Stop talking in the air Sumantra you are just coming off as a bitter person

You might want to see how the differentiation of minnow and regular was made before yapping off again

 

[Cevno]

Too much ****ing analytical debate and too many generalisations in this thread tbh.

 

[sumantra]

Again my dear, here are the facts -

Minnow innings played
Barrington - 11 of 131
Border - 11 of 265
Bradman - 12 of 80
Chappell - 1 of 151 (the least)
Dravid - 9 of 259
Gavaskar - 11 of 214
..
..
..
Tendulkar - 11 of 290
Waugh - 7 of 260

Stop talking in the air Sumantra you are just coming off as a bitter person

You might want to see how the differentiation of minnow and regular was made before yapping off again

i have told u twice before, u have won your case, i accept humbly that Tendulkar has delivered more times than anyone else, let alone Dravid...u have done it man, now will u please stop presenting your facts and let human discuss the matter?

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Why don't you try and answer the OP's question using pure observation instead of mathematics.

 

[Vijay.Sharma]

Wow, that's some analysis Vijay. Regarding the bias that Tendulkar is the best, therefore let us prove it. Isn't hypothesis testing all about proving some bias?

AN, I am not sure if you are alleging something here and I don't know how to answer such allegations. If you can be specific as to why you think it is a biased analysis I'll be more than happy to hear and correct my biases. Wherever you find bias please point them out and if possible suggest a new way.

However, please don't make a blanket allegation (in case you are) that I started off with a position and twisted stuff to show it so. If it was that easy then why would I need to do such detailed analysis. I want constructive criticism not allegations. I have received lots of constructive criticism from people and have tried to incorporate them in the analysis. Of course there are a few who have been extremely dirty with me but I am not gonna waste my time on them. If they have made some good points (as some have actually) I have incorporated them.

 

[Cevno]

Dravid at all costs.

I consider Sachin to be a coward since he never plays at 3 like other top players i.e Ricky,Viv,Don Bradman. The latest series is a prime example of his selfishness.
He did not bother moving up in the order in the absence of Gambhir,Sehwag instead Laxman was made to play at 3 which is why laxman actually failed this series.

Laxman has done well at 3 in the past and has said many times himself that he prefers batting there, so doubt that was Tendulkar's call at all.

And interesting you are not atrributing the same to KP and the English team when Bell moved up to 3 in the absence of Trott instead of Pietersen.
The only difference being that Bell did way better than Laxman there and Laxman on a few occasions threw it away after getting settled.

Some of the things Sachin gets accused of are really bordering on ridiculous many times tbh.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

I was trying to defend your position mate. I was saying that hypothesis testing is all about taking a hypothesis (e.g. Tendulkar is the greatest) and proving it, which you did in your analysis.

 

[Vijay.Sharma]

Why don't you try and answer the OP's question using pure observation instead of mathematics.

How would you answer a question that is about "delivery in crisis" with just observation.

The max you can say is, I have observed that Sachin plays great in swinging conditions, on turners, on bouncy tracks and rescues the time more often than Rahul when we are in dire circumstances. Next someone will give his opinion, "I think Rahul does better than Sachin when it really matters"

Now, someone has to define what "when it really matters" means or "delivery in crisis" means otherwise assertions will keep going on and on and on and on until one guy starts getting personal and abuses the other.

At no point am I saying subjectivity is not important. Oh I come from the school of thought that subjectivity and objectivity are both required to understand things. If I was being totally subjective there is absolutely no way Rahul would come even close to Sachin. Why? Because
a. Rahul looks ugly and makes batting look more difficult than it is
b. Rahul puts pressure on the non striker by getting bogged down
c. Sachin takes the attack to the opposition
d. Rahul's exaggerated movements give the impression that the pitch is more difficult than it seems to be
e. Rahul's expressions are so intense that you think it is a world war going on

Now, please tell me how do the above help in any discussion about "delivery in crisis". They are so subjective and each of them will spin off all kindsa tangential discussions, wouldn't they?

 

[Cevno]

Why don't you try and answer the OP's question using pure observation instead of mathematics.

Is that targetted at me or Vijay Arumugam?

Define what is a Crisis first in cricketing sense ?

define crisis.

scoring in the 2nd innings when trailing?
scoring when there's scoreboard pressure?
fighing a lone battle?

In any case i would rather have someone perform first to prevent a crisis from occuring than when the team is in crisis on many occasions depending on the situations.

 

[Vijay.Sharma]

I was trying to defend your position mate. I was saying that hypothesis testing is all about taking a hypothesis (e.g. Tendulkar is the greatest) and proving it, which you did in your analysis.

Thanks mate. Just wanted to clarify although I figured that's what you were saying

The project hypothesis was -
"The performance of the All Time Great Batsmen (ATGs) in the history of Test Cricket is similar in nature. None of the individual ATG’s performance is either significantly better or worse than the rest of the pack."

 

[Vijay.Sharma]

i have told u twice before, u have won your case, i accept humbly that Tendulkar has delivered more times than anyone else, let alone Dravid...u have done it man, now will u please stop presenting your facts and let human discuss the matter?

It's not about winning or losing here, Sumantra. We all come to web forums to share stuff...to discuss and converse. You must respect your fellow forumers even if you disagree with them.

Seriously, how would you feel if someone went on and on and on saying you were being a robot, alleging you were being disingenuous, etc? And for what? Coz you disagree with him on some small trivial thing?

Making such snide references and remarks makes you look less human than me.

 

[Bun]

Too much ****ing analytical debate and too many generalisations in this thread tbh.

thank god, i was just thinking i logged into a wrong forum.

 

[Spark]

I think everyone could use a nice drink before coming back to this thread. Go on.

---

Now, let's try to be civil.

 

[robelinda]

Maybe everyone could go and actually *watch* some cricket instead of looking up endless stats.....nothing more mind numbing than reading 100 posts of pure stats arguments.

 

[TumTum]

Vijay.Sharma, you have taken facts and manipulated and distorted them with some made up crap. Where did you get "0.5*average + 0.3*hundreds + 0.2*fifties"? Not only where did you determine that that's the best way to weight them, but what is the importance in all this anyway? Another thing which you said is that you halved the runs scored if they were against weak sides, again how do you justify this?

 

[ankitj]

Dr. Avid > 10-dull-car

The latest series proved this clearly imho.

Umm, how about South Africa series early this year?

 

[Ruckus]

Vijay.Sharma, you have taken facts and manipulated and distorted them with some made up crap. Where did you get "0.5*average + 0.3*hundreds + 0.2*fifties"? Not only where did you determine that that's the best way to weight them, but what is the importance in all this anyway? Another thing which you said is that you halved the runs scored if they were against weak sides, again how do you justify this?

Please just don't bother. With an agenda so strong, it is absolutely futile to attempt to discuss these things.

 

[Ruckus]

Back to the original topic, I think Dravid definately takes the prize for delivering in a crisis more. That being said, though, Tendulkar hardly makes it a mission of his to get runs in easy situations - I just don't think he is much better than the next great batsman at scoring runs in pressure situations. Think there is also a bit of an illusion with regards to delivering in a a crisis. If you take Laxman who has an excellent second innings record and often scores runs in pressure situations, one is tempted to glorify him as a more useful match winning/saving batsman than Tendulkar. However, that just ignores the fact that Laxman often fails to score in e.g. the first innings and Tendulkar does - perhaps there isn't as much pressure, but nonetheless the runs are still pretty much equivalent in the overall context of the match.