Batsman analysis by bowler-pitch quality - part 2

This is the follow-up article to the one analysing the batsmen performance in conditions related to bowler quality and pitch types. There were a number of very useful suggestions and after a careful study some of these have been implemented. There have been very sound arguments also that there is an element of double-counting and this method, in general, favours batsmen with very good bowling attacks backing them. This point is accepted. However it would be impossible for me to implement these radical suggestions without a lot of work, including quite a bit of validation. Hence I have gone ahead with the current method, modified suitably. The elimination of the double-counting and the development of a single evaluation factor will be done later.

Meanwhile let us look at the current method, which, double-counting notwithstanding, offers many insights. The modifications are summarized below.

1. Take the top-7(or fewer) partnerships rather than individual scores. This was suggested by Arjun again. The partnerships basis might very well end with similar numbers. However it seems to smoothen the outlier/out performer situation. If 320 for 2 was reached through 200, 50, 40 and 30, the 200 seems clearly to be a way-out performance and brings some attendant concerns. However in whichever way the partnerships have been formed, 100/100/120 or 150/20/150, the partnerships clearly convey the comfort feelings for distinct PAIRS of batsmen, rather than single batsman. This will obviate, to a great extent, the need to take off outliers.

3. However I do not want to miss out the low-3 scores, suggested by Anshu, since that normalizes the values. However this time I will take the individual scores since these represent clear failures. But I will be tougher and limit these failures to top-6 rather than top-7 since the top-6, barring stray no.7 guys like Gilchrist, (pre-WC-Win) Dhoni, Vettori et al, represent the real batsmen.

4. I will consider varying numbers for both these measures. Otherwise the impact will go out of proportion. The table is given below.

- Upto 5 innings in match: 3 + 2.
-  6 to 10 innings:        4 + 2.
- 11 to 20 innings:        5 + 3.
- 21 to 29 innings:        6 + 3.
- 30 to 44 innings:        7 + 3.

5. The final Bowler-Pitch index will be derived as a Geometric Mean (GM) of the BQI and RSI values. Both are basically runs. The GM has many benefits. It is ALWAYS a number between the smaller and arithmetic mean values. As the difference between the two numbers increases, it moves closer to the smaller number. And we never get out-of-the-range values.

6. Probably one mistake I made was to combine the first three groups as tough super groups. This set the cat amongst the pigeons. Richards' 82% was way out and readers spent quite some time on that. The first two groups are fine: they are really tough conditions. However the third one is the middle group in which many many runs are scored and should not have been combined with the first two groups. Hence I now have three super groups. The first one is the really tough one (5-4), the second one, the middle group (3) and the third one the easiest to bat against (2-1).

7. I have compiled the values for innings played and the batting averages for each group and have shown these important values, as asked for by many readers.

8. I am not going to give the individual group values. There is too much data. I will give only the summaries by the three super groups.

9. I have done the run-weighted BPI value for each batsman. However I will only show two tables of extreme values of this measure. The similarity of the numbers will warrant some obvious comments.

10. Look at the tough groups numbers carefully. The % of career score only indicates that the batsman faced tough conditions and made some runs on these more often in his career than a more fortunate peer. However an average of above 40 in the revised tough groups is something to sit up and take notice.

11.I have also given a table of selected innings for the top-3 groups. These are not presented as the best innings ever played. However these were made in very tough conditions, bowler-pitch wise. Some of these might be in this table because the bowlers behind the concerned batsmen were outstanding. But they certainly were special innings.

12.Finally I am going to present these tables with minimal comments. My hands are protesting.

1. Player wise distribution table by super groups

Batsman	Cty	Career	Career	Batting	Tough	Grps	(5-4)		Middle	Grp	(3)		Easy	Grps	(2-1)
		Inns	Runs	Avge	Inns	Runs	Avge	%	Inns	Runs	Avge	%	Inns	Runs	Avge	%
Tendulkar S.R	Ind	309	15432	55.71	58	1684	29.54	10.9%	117	5522	54.14	35.8%	134	8226	69.71	53.3%
Dravid R	Ind	284	13262	52.63	52	1554	31.71	11.7%	106	3924	39.64	29.6%	126	7784	74.85	58.7%
Ponting R.T	Aus	274	12915	52.50	47	1266	28.13	9.8%	104	4619	47.13	35.8%	123	7030	68.25	54.4%
Kallis J.H	Saf	254	12260	57.02	70	2337	37.10	19.1%	94	3910	48.88	31.9%	90	6013	83.51	49.0%
Lara B.C	Win	232	11953	52.89	91	3462	38.90	29.0%	76	3052	41.81	25.5%	65	5439	84.98	45.5%
Border A.R	Aus	265	11174	50.56	90	2858	38.62	25.6%	107	4386	47.16	39.3%	68	3930	72.78	35.2%
Waugh S.R	Aus	260	10927	51.06	74	2203	34.97	20.2%	94	4071	50.26	37.3%	92	4653	66.47	42.6%
Gavaskar S.M	Ind	214	10122	51.12	61	2177	38.19	21.5%	81	3459	43.78	34.2%	72	4486	72.35	44.3%
Jayawardene M	Slk	213	10089	50.44	52	1707	34.14	16.9%	68	2626	41.03	26.0%	93	5756	66.93	57.1%
Chanderpaul S	Win	234	9709	49.28	69	2147	35.20	22.1%	91	3501	45.47	36.1%	74	4061	68.83	41.8%
Sangakkara K.C	Slk	179	9347	55.97	36	1107	32.56	11.8%	62	3005	51.81	32.1%	81	5235	69.80	56.0%
Gooch G.A	Eng	215	8900	42.58	97	3250	34.57	36.5%	71	2971	43.06	33.4%	47	2679	58.24	30.1%
Javed Miandad	Pak	189	8832	52.57	63	2176	36.27	24.6%	67	2778	48.74	31.5%	59	3878	76.04	43.9%
Inzamam-ul-Haq	Pak	200	8830	49.61	48	1412	32.09	16.0%	82	3642	47.30	41.2%	70	3776	66.25	42.8%
Laxman V.V.S	Ind	223	8728	46.18	40	1058	27.84	12.1%	82	2894	40.19	33.2%	101	4776	60.46	54.7%
Hayden M.L	Aus	184	8626	50.74	30	1064	35.47	12.3%	72	2978	44.45	34.5%	82	4584	62.79	53.1%
Richards I.V.A	Win	182	8540	50.24	57	2370	43.09	27.8%	78	3547	47.93	41.5%	47	2623	63.98	30.7%
Stewart A.J	Eng	235	8465	39.56	97	2716	30.52	32.1%	86	3262	41.29	38.5%	52	2487	54.07	29.4%
Gower D.I	Eng	204	8231	44.25	85	2720	34.00	33.0%	75	3132	45.39	38.1%	44	2379	64.30	28.9%
Boycott G	Eng	193	8114	47.73	62	1925	33.77	23.7%	84	4023	52.93	49.6%	47	2166	58.54	26.7%
Sehwag V	Ind	165	8098	50.93	30	740	24.67	9.1%	49	1859	40.41	23.0%	86	5499	66.25	67.9%
Sobers G.St.A	Win	160	8032	57.78	43	1362	32.43	17.0%	58	2757	54.06	34.3%	59	3913	85.07	48.7%
Waugh M.E	Aus	209	8029	41.82	62	2261	40.38	28.2%	84	2879	36.91	35.9%	63	2889	49.81	36.0%
Smith G.C	Saf	168	7761	49.43	32	1015	32.74	13.1%	60	2387	41.88	30.8%	76	4359	63.17	56.2%
Atherton M.A	Eng	212	7728	37.70	96	2555	26.89	33.1%	79	3202	42.69	41.4%	37	1971	56.31	25.5%
Langer J.L	Aus	182	7696	45.27	44	953	21.66	12.4%	63	3172	54.69	41.2%	75	3571	52.51	46.4%
Cowdrey M.C	Eng	188	7624	44.07	73	2306	33.42	30.2%	79	3392	48.46	44.5%	36	1926	56.65	25.3%
Greenidge C.G	Win	185	7558	44.72	58	1824	32.00	24.1%	77	3239	46.27	42.9%	50	2495	59.40	33.0%
Mohammad Yousuf	Pak	156	7530	52.29	42	1175	30.13	15.6%	52	1941	38.06	25.8%	62	4414	81.74	58.6%
Taylor M.A	Aus	186	7525	43.50	53	1509	30.80	20.1%	73	2941	43.25	39.1%	60	3075	54.91	40.9%
Lloyd C.H	Win	175	7515	46.68	53	1963	39.26	26.1%	68	2772	46.98	36.9%	54	2780	53.46	37.0%
Haynes D.L	Win	202	7487	42.30	66	2242	35.59	29.9%	85	2860	39.72	38.2%	51	2385	56.79	31.9%
Boon D.C	Aus	190	7422	43.66	54	1747	34.94	23.5%	69	2222	35.84	29.9%	67	3453	59.53	46.5%
Kirsten G	Saf	176	7289	45.27	62	1512	26.07	20.7%	65	2802	46.70	38.4%	49	2975	69.19	40.8%
Hammond W.R	Eng	140	7249	58.46	14	319	26.58	4.4%	33	1214	39.16	16.7%	93	5716	70.57	78.9%
Ganguly S.C	Ind	188	7212	42.18	39	937	27.56	13.0%	73	2585	38.01	35.8%	76	3690	53.48	51.2%
Fleming S.P	Nzl	189	7172	40.07	64	1471	23.73	20.5%	83	3757	48.17	52.4%	42	1944	49.85	27.1%
Chappell G.S	Aus	151	7110	53.86	59	2037	38.43	28.6%	54	2461	52.36	34.6%	38	2612	81.62	36.7%
Bradman D.G	Aus	80	6996	99.94	11	537	53.70	7.7%	23	2275	98.91	32.5%	46	4184	113.08	59.8%
Flower A	Zim	112	4794	51.55	47	1263	30.07	26.3%	35	1313	45.28	27.4%	30	2218	100.82	46.3%

I am not going to do too much elaboration but will allow the readers to do their own interpretations. Now that the innings and batting averages are shown some points will be obvious.

1. It can be seen that batsmen like Botham, Wood, May et al have the tough super group % as 40+. However it can also be seen that they have all played around 50% of their innings in these groups.
2. There was a comment that batsmen from same teams had similar numbers. This is effectively disproved now. Ponting is 9.8%, Mark Waugh is 28.2%, Martyn 23.4%, Clarke 16.5% and Gilchrist 16.9%. Haynes 29.9%, Greenidge 24.1% and Lloyd 26.1%. Jayawardene is 16.9% and Sangakkara is 11.8%, with similar averages. And so on.
3. Clarke and Gilchrist have tough group averages exceeding 40. The best is McDonald/Bradman with 53+ and R.Mclean with 50+.
4. Kumble's tough group % is 22+ and Dravid's 11.7%. This does not mean anything. However the averages are 13.4 and 31.7. So read and interpret these numbers with care.
5. Slice and dice in whichever way you want to, Hammond props up the tables.

2. Top batsmen by run-weighted BQI values

Batsman	Cty	Career	Batting	Weighted
		Runs	Avge	BPI
McLean R.A	Saf	2120	30.29	41.2
Ramprakash M.R	Eng	2350	27.33	41.5
Howarth G.P	Nzl	2531	32.45	42.0
McDonald C.C	Aus	3107	39.33	43.0
Wood G.M	Aus	3374	31.83	43.0
Waite J.H.B	Saf	2405	30.44	43.2
Botham I.T	Eng	5200	33.55	43.4
Bailey T.E	Eng	2290	29.74	43.5
Hughes K.J	Aus	4415	37.42	43.6
Greig A.W	Eng	3599	40.44	43.6
Hudson A.C	Saf	2007	33.45	43.6
Benaud R	Aus	2201	24.46	43.7
Goddard T.L	Saf	2516	34.47	43.8
Wasim Raja	Pak	2821	36.17	43.8
Coney J.V	Nzl	2668	37.58	43.8
Gregory S.E	Aus	2282	24.54	43.9
Randall D.W	Eng	2470	33.38	44.0
May P.B.H	Eng	4537	46.77	44.1
Cronje W.J	Saf	3714	36.41	44.1
Rhodes J.N	Saf	2532	35.66	44.1

These are the top batsmen based on the run-weighted BPI values. McLean and Ramprakash lead the field. Most batsmen are in the 1950s-80s period.No modern batsman figures in the top-20. No sub-continental batsman is in the top-20. They all have 45+ values. A few unfancied batsmen like Ramprakash, Wood, Hughes, Howarth have made into this list.

3. Bottom batsmen by run-weighted BQI values

Batsman	Cty	Career	Batting	Weighted
		Runs	Avge	BPI
Cook A.N	Eng	5876	48.97	52.9
Trott I.J.L	Eng	2031	56.42	53.4
Ponsford W.H	Aus	2122	48.23	53.6
Jones A.H	Nzl	2922	44.27	53.8
Washbrook C	Eng	2569	42.82	54.1
Headley G.A	Win	2190	60.83	54.2
Hendren E.H	Eng	3525	47.64	54.2
Edrich W.J	Eng	2440	40.00	55.2
Hammond W.R	Eng	7249	58.46	55.4
Ames L.E.G	Eng	2434	40.57	57.2

This is the other end. Many modern batsmen and batsmen from the 1920s figure here. Somehow Ames has managed to push Hammond off the last place. Cook and Trott are the leading batsmen of today who have found their place here. Most of today's top batsmen are around the 50 mark.

4. Selected innings which crossed the BPI zone of excellence

MtNo	Year	Batsman	For	Vs	BatPos	Runs	BPI Grp	BPI	Result
788	1976	Amiss D.L	Eng	Ind	OP	179	5	34.9	Won
23	1886	Shrewsbury A	Eng	Aus	3	164	5	35.0	Won
361	1952	Endean W.R	Saf	Aus	3	162	5	35.0	Won
331	1951	Simpson R.T	Eng	Aus	3	156	5	33.6	Won
1171	1991	Gooch G.A	Eng	Win	OP	154	5	32.4	Won
45	1895	Graham H	Aus	Eng	5	105	5	29.1	Won
915	1981	Hughes K.J	Aus	Win	5	100	5	28.9	Won
827	1978	Sadiq Mohammad	Pak	Eng	2	97	5	26.6	Drawn
45	1895	Trott A.E	Aus	Eng	9	85	5	29.1	Won
890	1980	Wasim Raja	Pak	Win	6	77	5	29.1	Drawn
1056	1986	Greenidge C.G	Win	Pak	1	75	5	26.1	Won
1773	2005	Lara B.C	Win	Aus	4	226	4	40.6	Lost
1451	1999	Lara B.C	Win	Aus	4	213	4	41.4	Won
1070	1987	Greenidge C.G	Win	Nzl	OP	213	4	40.8	Won
258	1937	Bradman D.G	Aus	Eng	3	212	4	41.6	Won
42	1894	Gregory S.E	Aus	Eng	6	201	4	38.8	Lost
593	1965	Edrich J.H	Eng	Nzl	OP	310	3	49.2	Won
236	1934	Bradman D.G	Aus	Eng	5	304	3	48.2	Drawn
1641	2003	Fleming S.P	Nzl	Slk	3	274	3	47.3	Drawn
671	1970	Pollock R.G	Saf	Aus	4	274	3	47.5	Won
1697	2004	Dravid R	Ind	Pak	3	270	3	48.7	Won
257	1937	Bradman D.G	Aus	Eng	7	270	3	44.2	Won
1743	2005	Younis Khan	Pak	Ind	3	267	3	48.3	Won
1358	1997	Young B.A	Nzl	Slk	OP	267	3	49.2	Won
1271	1994	Houghton D.L	Zim	Slk	4	266	3	47.8	Drawn
1800	2006	Fleming S.P	Nzl	Saf	3	262	3	49.0	Drawn
1716	2004	Jayasuriya S.T	Slk	Pak	OP	253	3	43.8	Won
845	1979	Bacchus S.F.A.F	Win	Ind	2	250	3	49.6	Drawn

I am sure there would be adverse comments on this table. Individual innings will be commented upon saying they do not belong here. Possibly they do not. However these were very good innings played, whose inclusion here is based on the parameters set. Any list which includes Gooch's 154, Lara's 223/213, Hughes' 100, Bradman's 212/270/304, Greenidge's 213, Graeme Pollock's 274, Dravid's 270, Jayasuriya's 253 et al cannot really be a bad table. These innings would fill almost anyone's list of top-25 or so innings. The selection criteria is a composite one involving Runs, BPI group and BPI value.

To download/view the document containing the Bowler-Pitch-Index values for 7340 innings, please click/right-click here.

To download/view the document containing the Player tables for selected 261 batsmen tables please click/right-click here.