very nice analysis, and certainly opens up a whole new way of looking at scoring rates. personally, i found this short piece a lot more insightful than some of the recent lengthy posts on It Figures.

Sorry, please explain the 225% and 287% increases cited in the para on Mike Hussey.

Nice way of gauging a batsman's adaptability to all three forms of the game. However, don't you think that the batsmen's averages should be taken into account. For instance, how well do the batsmen fare in terms of their averages in the three formats as compared to other top-order batsmen.

very very very interesting observation,
just goes to prove what T20 has done to international cricket,
im sure the increase in strike rate will only go higher as time progresses, (not good news for bowlers though)
another good thing what i am assuming is that since the event of T20 the test matches would have been more result oriented as in less of draws.
can you please fill me up on this one.
Thanx and best regards.

Interesting analysis, although the statement regarding Clarke`s status amongst this group smacks of some personal grievance. I`ve just run Dravid`s statistics through the same model, and he ends up at .68 - not a premier run-scoring batsman then? Consigned to the dustbin? It`s one thing to analyse statistics based solely on SR, quite another to make a qualitative analysis of `where (batsmen) should be` on this basis alone.

Interesting analysis, although the statement regarding Clarke`s status amongst this group smacks of some personal grievance. I`ve just run Dravid`s statistics through the same model, and he ends up at .68 - not a premier run-scoring batsman then? Consigned to the dustbin? It`s one thing to analyse statistics based solely on SR, quite another to make a qualitative analysis of `where (batsmen) should be` on this basis alone.

Hi Ric
Comparing strike rates in the three formats is a bit problematic because there is no good way to normalize across the formats.
May I suggest that you have a look at the consistency of the performances. For instance, does increased strike rates of Hayden and Gilchrist also reflect in their consistency, my guess is that though strike rates have gone up, consistency may have gone down.
Maybe try to estimate the ratio of variance and mean of the score of the top batsmen...

right arm over
Arvind

Ric,
I have been studying these relationships for some time now. Unfortunately the T20I information is still very shallow, so it is difficult to draw conclusions. Also, IPL teams have started to pick Twenty20 specialists whereas T20Is teams merely pick those that fit the mould. (In other words, Michael Clarke should not be playing T20Is.)

Roles are another aspect that makes it difficult to compare batsmen across the formats. Take Kallis for example. In Tests he anchors the innings for SA. In ODIs his role is similar. But recently in T20Is he has been given the license to attack at the top of the batting order. His ratios from here on in are therefore bound to be distorted (as suggested by his recent IPL form).

Anyway, a few years from now we should be able to compare Rilee Rossouw, Phil Hughes and Mandeep Singh and see who has mastered all three formats of the game.

What bullshit! Why is this a story? This is just pointless number-crunching. The numbers dont prove/disprove anything, they just happen to be. If you are so enthu, why dont you go calculate the surface area of an elephant? It'll be as pointless. Disappointed, that such an article appeared in cricinfo.

Very interesting article indeed!

This is great. It squarely highlights the scoring rate compared to the average player. However, please now multiply the ratios per form of the game with a ratio that focuses on their batting average per form of the game (against some average). This should provide (a.) a rate and (b) a result in order to get an effectiveness for each player. This should spread the results even more.

Amazing stuff!

I actually thought ODI scoring rates would be closer to 6, but that may be because I am from india. Almost every match here has both teams crossing 300.

Insightful. Wondering if the same analysis could be done for bowlers. Guessing Murali to be at the top of the list.

Great observation, Ric. Fact again turns out stranger than fiction!

Nice analysis! Please extend it to some of the other top players - how do the likes of Sehwag, Gayle and Pietersen compare to Gilchrist? What about supposed go-slow merchants like Cook, Sameraweera et al?

Interesting stuff Ric.

I used StatsGuru to pull out the top run scorers in each of the 3 formats since Feb 2005 and I limited my analysis to only those players who appear in the top 100 run scorers in all 3 – this leaves 42 players in all.

I seem to have slightly different numbers to you for the Aussies in my list (maybe because StatsGuru includes matches like the ICC vs Aus and other similar non-country v country matches? Maybe also some rounding?)

That said, the top 5 players based on your combined ratio method are:

Afridi 3.75
Sehwag 2.55
Gilchrist 2.06
Symonds 1.83
Jayasuriya 1.64

The bottom 3 are:

Chanderpaul 0.54
Salman Butt 0.56
Tamim Iqbal 0.69

Gautam Gambhir seems to be the most consistently average player in terms of SR, his overall ratio is exactly 1 and each individual ratio is between 0.97 and 1.03.

@ Tommy P

Based on the data that I pulled from Statsguru, Gayle is 8th on the list with a ratio of 1.43. Pietersen is 10th with 1.30

The complete top 10 are

Afridi
Sehwag
Gilchrist
Symonds
Jayasuriya
Yuvraj
Dilshan
Gayle
McCullum
Pietersen

Cook & Samaraweera don’t feature on my list of 42 as they haven’t played enough T20 matches to qualify.

Other notable players who are “below average” in terms of SR are;

Shoaib Malik 0.74
Kallis 0.76
Sarwam 0.80

Hope this helps

Pretty neat, Ric.

I'd love to do a D-L type analysis at some point that takes into account the match situation when these players batted. Easier said than done, I know!

Brilliant analysis! the 1.5 ratios are terrific... would love to see how they go each year...