Anyway I'm gonna go back to the Viv discussion. I think mr x 2 is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. His record shows an exceptional degree of consistency across conditions and such. IMO what should count against him is the fact that he didn't change his game and reinvent himself with age. Once Lloyd retired, WI didn't have a very strong middle other and a slower but steadier accumulator would've been worth a lot more to the team. The greatest batsmen like Tendulkar, Hobbs and Hammond all changed their styles massively and retained their high averages across ridiculously long periods as a result. Pre-WW1 Hobbs could play Trumper's flashy game and then his scoring rate dwindled from 40 to 25-30 runs an hour later in his career. Hammond's SR went from high 50s to 30s in 2nd second half of his career. You don't average 50 without being able to defend but if the likes of Kallis and Barrington get marked down for not displaying that extra gear then Richards should be too.
Viv could stonewall if he needed to, and has done it on few occasions to save his side from defeat. Couple of occasions that I recall are against Aus in Adelaide in 1988 and against Pak in Barbados early in his career. Both were match saving innings. The thing though is - Viv's side was so good, he rarely needed to perform out of his skin. I mean, in his entire career of 17 years and 121 Tests as a Test player, he was involved in only 1 losing Test series (that famous 75-76 series against Aus). That's pretty incredible for a player! There was a marked complacency - bordering on disinterest - in Viv's batting from mid-80s onward, but his side was so good that it almost never mattered. Whether Viv scored a quickfire 30 or a big 100, the chances were, more often than not, his side would win.
In his career of 180+ innings, he had to bat in the 4th innings on less than 25 occasions (and despite this he averages a decent 47 in the 4th innings compared to low-to-mid-30s 4th innings averages of Lara, Tendulkar & Steve Waugh).
Viv just wasn't the kind who would play for personal milestones. In late 80s in an interview, Gavaskar once asked Viv why he didn't chase down Gavaskar's record of 10,000+ Test runs when he could easily have. Viv's reply in his characteristic nonchalant manner was "Nah... that's not my style, maan". For a while in late 90s, Lara too went down that road of complacency, but Lara couldn't get away with it like Viv did simply because Lara's side was much weaker.
In any case, in spite of all this, it isn't like Viv had a Test average like Hooper's. He still averaged 50+, and had several successful series in different conditions. Other than more career runs scored because of more innings, the likes of Lara, Tendulkar etc. don't have a strong advantage over Viv even statistically speaking. That's why Viv still figured in the top-10 in both of DoG's straightforward formula based ratings.
