Who is more likely to win a test match with this scoreline?

[Jono]

In your view, based on the information below, who is most likely to win this test match?

Team A is currently batting in the 4th innings on day 5 at lunch. Their score is 5/150. The batsmen currently at the crease include one of its openers and its number 7.

Team B is currently bowling, and has set a target of 250 to win.

No team has any injuries.

You do not have any further information.

I've asked this question to a range of people and have generally received evenly split responses, so curious what CWers think. When I ask for the reasoning behind their answer it tends to bring out different perspectives on how they view test cricket. They apply a range of assumptions based on the info (e.g. what a target of 250 suggests about the pitch, what a set opener in means for a chase etc.) which I've found interesting.

What is your view?

 

[Burgey]

'Straya

 

[vcs]

B probably wins 7 or 8 out of 10 times, especially in Asia. I was pretty confident England would win chasing 290 against Bangladesh when they got to 100/0, but successful 4th innings chases are pretty rare for a reason.

Also depends on the venue, if we're looking at a 5th day Perth or Gabba or New Zealand wicket, a decent lower order and a set batsman would certainly make the batting side favourites.

 

[honestbharani]

Team A because I feel in most conditions you should back your last 5 to get you at least a 100 runs, especially when one of your main batsmen is still at the crease. Of course, it is too little information to make an informed prediction but gun to my head, I will back the batting team to get 100 runs with about 60 overs left to play.

 

[Bijed]

Team B for me, maybe 2/3 of the time. They'd win more, probably if for example the 6 & 7 were in.

But there's a lot of other factors which would change my opinion. They might only be 5 down as the result of some spectacularly bad batting - the pitch might be pretty friendly and a bit of application from this partnership could easily see them through. The strength of the tail also would make a big difference, as they could be one more wicket away from a total collapse or they might have bowlers who can bat all the way down.

I know you left out that information on purpose, though. It's just been drilled in to me to always consider these other things.

Edit: Also, when the wickets went down. If team A were, say, 20/3 because the new ball was swinging, but now it's not really doing anything that would bode better for new batsmen coming to the crease. Whether they're scoring quickly enough to reach the target without having to face the 2nd new ball could also have an impact.

 

[Howe_zat]

It's a bit iffy to bet on your back 5 making 100+ in the first match innings. In the 4th innings when the top 5 have only managed 150 it seems unlikely.

 

[Howe_zat]

Numbers: Overall 4th innings partnerships for wickets 6-10 average 19 runs per wicket. But since the new millenium and the retirement of Phil Tufnell it's gone up to 21. So it's the sort of thing that's only really become expected in modern cricket.

 

[Bijed]

Someone better with Statsguru or whatever than me basically needs to check how many times, when the first five wickets have gone down for 150 or less, how many times the last 5 have added another 100 and how many times they haven't. I've tried, but can't get it to give we what I want. Should probably restrict it to post millennium/last 10 years or something.

 

[Athlai]

Also have a set opener presumably on 50-100*. Match has also gone on for 5 days so either there were runs on the wicket, or it's been rain affected and the pitch is newish. All that considered and better tails, I'd back team A more often than not on paper.

 

[wpdavid]

Barring poor weather, there have been some decent scores in this match if we're in Day 5.

I agree with the comments about depending on whether the new ball accounted for a batch of quick wickets or whether the pitch has deteriorated on Days 4 & 5 and is just much harder to bat on now. If the former, then Team A. if the latter, team B.

 

[centurymaker]

Team B favorites and would win 6-7 times out of 10, if the match were to be anywhere.

The chances of winning would be higher if in Asia.

Ultimately the pressure gets to the batsmen or the tailenders ..doing the chasing. Seen it happen too many times.

 

[Burgey]

It's a bit iffy to bet on your back 5 making 100+ in the first match innings. In the 4th innings when the top 5 have only managed 150 it seems unlikely.

What if Hayden is 60 not out and Gilly is 35 not out? You may as well pack up now if you're fielding. Game over.

 

[centurymaker]

No matter how easy it may seem or how good a position a batting team may be in, while chasing a decent target on day 5, it is never ever easy to actually chase it down.
The closer you get to the target, the harder it seems to get..

For some reason this game comes to mind-http://m.espncricinfo.com/australia-v-india-2014-15/engine/current/match/754737.html

Chasing 363
242/2
315 all out.
Both batsmen well well set..

 

[harsh.ag]

Would put money on Team B given the info. Think that's the question people should be answering. Who would you put your money on?

 

[Spark]

Team A will regularly struggle to get to 200 IMO, would think that Team B are objectively in a pretty comfortable position.

 

[Jono]

Would put money on Team B given the info. Think that's the question people should be answering. Who would you put your money on?

...assuming the odds are identical*

Which ends up being the same question I am asking really.

 

[watson]

One more wicket and the bowling team is into the tail enders - so I think that I'd rather back the bowlers to win the game, especially if you tell me the bowlers include McGrath and Warne, or Ambrose and Walsh.

However, if the two batsman at the crease happen to be Langer and Gilchrist, or Sehwag and Dhoni in full flight then I might want to think again.

 

[harsh.ag]

...assuming the odds are identical*

Which ends up being the same question I am asking really.

Meant like betting among friends.

 

[Furball]

In that example I think more often than not I would much rather be the bowling captain than the opening batsman.

 

[Furball]

Also have a set opener presumably on 50-100*. Match has also gone on for 5 days so either there were runs on the wicket, or it's been rain affected and the pitch is newish. All that considered and better tails, I'd back team A more often than not on paper.

Opener could have blocked his way to 25* (120) and now needs to change his mindset slightly before it's too late.

Maybe it's the 3 and 4 who have scored the bulk of the runs but got out in quick succession, with 5 and 6 continuing the collapse.

Even if the batting team scores at 4 an over (which is still fairly rapid by Test standards) it's going to take them practically the entire afternoon session to knock off the runs, when your first 5 wickets have gone down for just 150 then it's hard to imagine a team lasting an entire session unscathed.