The most comprehensive such trivia could be the same for ODI Batsman plus for Bowlers, Fielders and wicketkeepers in both ODI and Tests.

Tendulkar recently claimed the record off Lara having played 20 odd matches more and 15 more innings. Lara claimed the record from Border having played 50 odd less innings and 40 odd less matches. I also guess that Border took the record from Gavaskar having played more as well. It would be interesting to find the player who took the record with the greatest grace i.e. comtempories that broke the record in less innings, such as Lara off Tendulkar and Sobers off Cowdrey.

Neat and concise analyais. No "what ifs" and other extraneous suppositions to make it a bland theoretical exercise. Good work.

The big question is, can Ponting catch up to Tendulkar? It depends on :

1) How many more runs Tendulkar makes.
2) How good Ponting's form remains
3) How many more tests Ponting plays in (as I think Test cricket is going to scale back a bit in frequency).

Whether Ponting or Tendulkar is the record-holder after Ponting retires, that is a record that will last a long time, as there us currently no one with over 6000 runs that is young enough to cross this 12,000+ mark. Plus, tests will become slightly less frequent.

Similarly, no one will break Tendulkars ODI record of 16,361+. T20 will shrink ODIs played, and only openers who average 40+ have any chance of contesting the record.

hey nice one.....keep coming with such unorthodox stuff.

Great pice of work. It might be that Jaques Kallis might play long enough to pick up the record off Tendulkar or Ponting.

The age difference between Ponting and Tendulkar is just 1 yr 138 days. The gap in runs is close to 2000, and India plays more tests than Australia. Given the form Tendulkar is in, and the form Ponting is in, I dont think Ponting will ever be able to bridge the gap.

"Tendulkar recently claimed the record off Lara having played 20 odd matches more and 15 more innings."

And Tendulkar has a better average than Lara which indicates more 'not outs'.It would be interesting to see how many of those were

"current form he's in"?? you mean the current series? This is a guy, who has scored at least one century in every series (except the 2-test series against Sri Lanka last yr) since 2004! - and that includes the current series. Judging by that statistic, the only thing that could stop him would probably be injury or the amount of cricket played.

White people tend to perform at their top capacity until a later age than Indian people, on average.

Hayden, Steve Waugh, etc. were doing well long after they crossed 34, while Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly, etc. did not.

Warne, McGrath, etc did much better than Kumble, Srinath, etc. after the age of 33-34.

Hadlee bowled well between 35-39, while Kapil totally died off after age 32!

So Tendulkar won't add that much to his tally, but Ponting still has 3-4 more years in him before he gets to the age of Hayden or Waugh, who still performed well at age 36, 37, etc.

Ponting will surpass Tendulkar in Tests (but not ODIs), for this reason. The only hope for Tendulkar is if he gets a new major burst of form, and makes another 2000 runs, setting a final target of 14,000+.

People from Northern Pakistan (Imran, Wasim, etc.) have more white genes in them, which enables them to be taller, and play longer, than 'South Asians' like Miandad, Indians, and Sri Lankans.

Kartik - white genes? That's the most moronic thing i've ever heard.

Not bad, although Hammonds 12,000 odd days holding the record also includes 6-7 years where no Test cricket was played (ww2).
Tendulkar won't have it for long, give the punter another 2-3 years and it's all his.

The stats do not show a clear picture of what you want to tell

Ric's comment: Why not? It is simply a table of who held this particular record over what period of time. Does it not tell this accurately?

The 6-7 years markc refers to are telling - Bradman would have scored a further 7000 or so at least and still be miles ahead of them all.

Although Tendulkar passed Lara 11953 runs but statistically the only complete man in history of test cricket is Lara who has almost every record except highest no. of centuries. Like 5 times in calendar year more than or equal to 1000 runs. Century before lunch, at least 5 double centuries against 5 different test teams. He played more than 100 test matches with more than 30 centuries and with near to 50 half centuries with test average more than 50 and runs score more than 10,000 means at least in five figures. He scored double century and century in one test is another record (221 and 130 against Sri Lanka in 2001). He has scored centuries against all Test-playing nations. In 2005, He achieved this feat by scoring his first Test century against Pakistan. Former highest run gutter in history of test cricket. Highest runs in one over against Africa. Three double centuries against Australia which no other batsmen of his era has done it.

BRIAN LARA was a superior batsman than Tendulkar. Players as distinct as Lara, Viv Richards and for that matter Imran Khan are born once in the lifetime of the game. Tendulkar is great player, but not quite a Lara. Tendulkar can be compared to Ponting, Inzimam, Sehwage and the likes. Tendulkar can claim any number of records for his age and ability, but can never bat like Lara. Since 1970's Richards and Lara have been the greatest batsmen. Tendulkar is genius, but cricket has produced many more capable match winners than Tendulkar. Scoring more does never mean winning more matches. Sometimes those runs could have been scored by anyone. In fact if it comes to the match winning capabilities, Richards, Inzimam, Steve Waugh, Bevan, Ponting, Javed Miandad would outsmart Sachin Tendulkar.Among Indian Azhar played better under pressure. For pure batsmenship, if one has to pick a player in last 16 years, it is LARA. LARA was the best and different from rest of his time.

All interesting stuff, but look at Bradman's test and 1st class runs statistics. No one else comes even close, for an equivalent number of matches!

@kartik. Lol at white genes. But one more reason for the asian players not doing well after a certain age is cos 90% of asian players lie about their age!

Now Tendulkar passed his record otherwise he was the highest runs maker in history of test cricket with highest individual inning that is 400 not out and highest individual inning in first class 501 not out with two quadruple in first class (except Bill Ponsford), two triple centuries in test cricket along with Bradman and Sehwag. He crossed 150 or 150 plus 19 times in test cricket, which is another record of him, currently nearest one is Tendulkar, 17 times. He held all these record at a time. A unique feat no one has it before him. Now Tendulkar has become highest run gutter in test cricket. In the last test, Tendulkar made another record. He scored 90 times 50 or 50 plus innings in test cricket. Allan Border also scored 90 times 50 or 50 plus inning. Lara and Tendulkar both are two best batsmen of this century yet now.

Also Geoffe, Hammond never finished til 1947, given an extra 6/7 years he to would've finished with well over 10,000 runs. So you would've had Bradman and Hammond well over 10,000 and neither Boycs nor AB or Gavaskar or any others from Hobbs to Tendulkar would ever of had a sniff of that record. Unless of course Apartheid never happened.

The surprising that I noticed in this list there was no tussle among players playing at the same time like what happened with Warne and Murali. Boycott and Gavaskar are the closest in that list!

People often Lara had a lot more match winning innings than Tendulkar as an argument of Lara being better. They often forget that Tendulkar has scored runs more consistently then Lara ever did (more centuries than Lara), saved more games than Lara did. Lara was an amazing batsman, someone I prefer to watch over Tendulkar, but to pronounce him a player in a league higher than Tendulkar is ridiculous. At the end of it all, Tendulkar has done for his team than Lara ever did for West Indies and that rates Tendulkar as a better cricketer than Lara ever was.

Tendulkar has crossed Lara and now become highest run maker in history of test cricket but statistic is not only criteria for judging batting skills in Test Cricket as remember his inning of 400 not out, saves the history of white wash in W. Indies against any test playing opponent at home. 277 runs against Australia not even save the match but also gave chance to his team to level or win the series and they won the series after this inning. His inning of 120 runs in 2006 against India, save the match. His inning of 80 runs not out against Sri Lanka in 2003 won the two test match series in favour of W. Indies. Mostly times he faced the situation to turn matches in favour of team single handed which is not possible every time like he scored 226 runs at Adelaide in 2005 against Australia and won man of the match also but his team lost this match. His 221 + 130 runs in same match against Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka in 2001, they failed to win but he declared man of the match and man of series.

Tendulkar is now history maker of test runs now but Lara scored nine double hundred in which three double centuries against Australia and two of them at their home grounds and two triple centuries against England in which one is quadruple, two against Sri Lanka and against Pakistan and South Africa one each, what a unique feat! Tendulkar (17 times) will soon break another record of Lara that is 19 times 150 or 150 plus inning in test cricket. Some people are saying that we cannot compare him with Sir Vivian Richard (no doubt, one of the best batsmen in test cricket) but he manage 150 or 150 plus inning seven times in test cricket only whereas Tendulkar managed it seventeen times. When we compare both players, this a plus point for Tendulkar. One more record that Tendulkar is missing that is double centuries against five different test playing nation as he was not out at 194 against Pakistan in 2004 and captain declared the inning (might be in favor of his team)

Statistics show that Tendulkar has outperformed Lara in ODIs, but I rate Lara as a better batsman because test cricket is the real deal. Lara dominates and controls the game more than Tendulkar. If we take away the scores of 400 no and 375, Lara's best score was 277 against the mighty Australians. Tendulkar's average is higher because of the not outs, but if a team needs someone to score a century and bring home a match, that person would definitely be Lara.Statistics can also be used to suggest that Lara tends to go beyond the 150 mark more often than anyone due to his powers of concentration, and his unlimited stroke play. People may say that consistency personified is Sachin, but what is consistency really? Is it just the ability to just score 100, or is it the ability to mass produce great innings, great runs in general? Lara,in bad form, stills scores a fifty or two or even the odd century, Sachin hardly makes when in bad form.Lara took less matches to get record, so, he is #1.

Tendulkar is the highest runs gutter in Test cricket now. He crossed Lara and achieved this feat. What about the inconsistency of Lara or Tendulkar, it is amazing that both have the same tendency of inconsistency in Test cricket. Lara scored 97 innings from 0 - 19 runs means in his every hundred innings, he scored almost 42 innings of very low scores. Tendulkar scored 104 innings from 0 - 19 runs range means he scored almost 42 innings out of hundred innings of very low scored. In last 51 test matches Lara scored 5410 runs with the help of 19 centuries and 15 half centuries. In last 51 test matches Tendulkar scored 3653 runs with the help of 9 centuries and 17 half centuries.

Lara masterpiece innings are 400 not out, 375, 277, 226, 221+130 same test, 213 and 153 not out. As we compare him with Tendulkar, he never manage innings which we can compare with these innings of Lara. Even Sir Vivian Richard never manage any double hundred at home in test and Sir Garry Sober never manage any double hundred at opponent’s home in test matches. Although both are the two greatest batsmen in history, no doubt about it. Lara scored four double hundreds at home and five at opponent’s home, which is more than any test batsman except Bradman. Lara scored 82 fifty plus innings in 232 innings, it means that we can compare it with Steve Waugh also managed 82 fifty plus innings in career in 260 innings. In which 16 innings are 80 to 99, 16times Tendulkar did. Then 34 are centuries, we can compare it with Gavaskar as he has also scored 34 centuries in test cricket in 214 innings. In 34 centuries, 19 innings are +150, which we can compare it with Tendulkar, 17 times he did.

And now we have Tendulkar's 103 not out match winning knock against England to chase the fourth highest run in Chennai December 2008. This innings can be compared and kept in the level with any of the best test innings ever played.

http://ashikuzzaman.blogspot.com/2008/12/sachin-wins-1st-test-against-chennai.html

Cab anyone please tell me if it's possible to take advantage of CricInfo StatsGuru query interface to figure out how many time Saching Tendulkar has been OUT in test cricket for a run between 0 -19 and 20-49. I will consider first one as very bad and the second one as not-so-good score for him. Eventually I would like to use similar queries for Brian Lara, Don Bradman, Viv Richards, Ricky Ponting, Sunil Gavaskar and others. This statistics will give a percentage of a player's bad innings and average innings whenever the batsman walked to the pitch with a bat. It should be a very interesting data!

If Ananth is interested to do analysis on this area, I would appreciate him so much.

interesting that Sir Donald Bradman never held the record even though he played in the same era as Hammond. How close did he get as his final agg was 6996 and Hammonds was 7249

Ric's comment: Bradman, with ten Tests still to play (although he wouldn't have known this!) had 5773 runs when Hammond finished his 7249 runs. Even though Bradman scored 1223 runs in those last 10 Tests, it wasn't sufficient to bridge the gap. Hammond started his Test career before Bradman, and therefore got a headstart on Bradman, but Bradman did catch him, and between February and December 1932 actually had more Test runs than Hammond. But Hobbs was way ahead at that stage, and with Hammond playing more Tests in the mid-1930s than Bradman, drew away from him again.

All these facts might be true, but I'm sure that Tendulkar has no rival when it comes to being the victim of the "umpiring conspiracies". Apparently there is a concerted attempt to keep the scores of these mentioned players close enough so when the older one retires his record will be easily broken.

Sachin Tendulkar is a great batsman where as Brian Lara was a classic batsman.Choice is yours

Rather great blog to pay attention to in my opinion. The only question I have, why don't you add this article to social bookmarks? That might bring lots of traffic to this blog.