I had mentioned in response to one of the comments on the macro-analysis article on Test hundreds that in my follow-up article I would look at special hundreds, selected based on specific selection criteria. I had also made it clear that this would not be my own personal selections, as I normally do but one based on selection criteria in my computer program, with external additions in very very special cases only. Anyone finding fault with the three special additions is probably not a true follower of the game.

To answer the sceptics, I have also shown the actual program statement doing the filtering. Though it is a 'C' program statement, it will be crystal clear to anyone reading this article. So kindly do not come out with statements that this article has been written to specifically include or exclude one specific hundred.

If a nice new selection criterion is suggested I will have no problem doing that and adding the tables at the end. I have also toughened the selection criteria to make sure that there are approximately between 10 and 25 entries in the tables. This has been done to ensure that all the table entries are shown in this article itself. Hence everything is in the open in this article.

My own selections from out of the table entries are spread right through the article. Readers can come with their own selections.

Preliminary program work 

score =   matchdata[mat]->score[inns];
bqi =     matchdata[mat]->weighted_ctd_bow_avge[inns];
mat_rpw = matchdata[mat]->rpw;
runs =    matchdata[mat]->pldata[inns][pos].batruns;
balls =   matchdata[mat]->pldata[inns][pos].batballs;
score1 =  matchdata[mat]->score[0];
score2 =  matchdata[mat]->score[1];
score3 =  matchdata[mat]->score[2];
score4 =  matchdata[mat]->score[3];
if (follow-on) deficit = score1-score2;
else           deficit = score2-score1;
if (follow-on) target = score2+score3-score1+1;
else           target = score1+score3-score2+1;

Normally I write special programs for each article when the number of tables is quite high and there are sorting and formatting requirements. My program reads the Match database record serially and sets the variables for use, as done above. Then a series of functions follow, doing the selections and form the tables. Afterwards the tables are sorted and printed. These are then incorporated, with appropriate narratives, into the Html file.

Now for the tables. I am not going to come out with the most obvious of tables, based on the score. It is shown anywhere and everywhere. My first table is one where the mark was set on the first day of Test cricket and that mark has yet to be breached. It has stood the test of about 10000+ days of Test cricket. This table relates to the % of batsman innings share in the completed innings. I have softened the criteria to losing 9 wickets or more since the last batsman is already in.

1. Hundreds which form a high proportion of completed innings

if (runs>=100 && (runs/score)>=0.6 && wkts>=9)

Ordered by innings %

MtId Year For Vs  Batsman              Score BP Runs  %TS

0001 1877 Aus Eng Bannerman C         245/10  1 165* 67.3%
1439 1999 Aus Eng Slater M.J          184/10  1 123  66.8%
1481 2000 Ind Aus Laxman V.V.S        261/10  1 167  64.0%
0779 1976 Win Eng Greenidge C.G       211/10  1 134  63.5%
0542 1963 Nzl Eng Reid J.R            159/10  4 100  62.9%
0652 1969 Win Nzl Nurse S.M           417/10  3 258  61.9%
0846 1979 Aus Eng Yallop G.N          198/10  4 121  61.1%
1884 2008 Ind Slk Sehwag V            329/10  1 201* 61.1%
1171 1991 Eng Win Gooch G.A           252/10  1 154* 61.1%
0732 1974 Eng Win Amiss D.L           432/ 9  1 262* 60.6%

Bannerman stands supreme at 67.3% of the completed innings. To boot, he opened the innings and remained unbeaten, as did quite a few others in the table. If Slater had scored a single more, he would have overtaken Bannerman. Laxman's brave away innings launched a remarkable career. Amiss has come in because of my decision to include 9-wkt situations. This innings was played away, in West Indies, against not a great West Indian attack, but 230 in arrears.

2. Hundreds which have been scored a better than run-a-ball

if (runs>=150 && runs<=balls)

Ordered by Runs scored

MtId Year For Vs  Batsman             BP Runs Balls SR

1870 2008 Ind Saf Sehwag V             1 319  304 104.9
1937 2009 Ind Slk Sehwag V             1 293  254 115.4
1781 2006 Ind Pak Sehwag V             1 254  247 102.8
1594 2002 Nzl Eng Astle N.J            5 222  168 132.1
0765 1975 Win Aus Fredericks R.C       1 169  145 116.6
1742 2005 Aus Nzl Gilchrist A.C        7 162  146 111.0
1698 2004 Slk Zim Jayasuriya S.T       1 157  147 106.8
1782 2006 Pak Ind Shahid Afridi        6 156  128 121.9
1550 2001 Aus Eng Gilchrist A.C        7 152  143 106.3
1753 2005 Eng Bng Trescothick M.E      1 151  148 102.0
1561 2001 Slk Bng Jayawardene D.P.M.D  4 150  115 130.4
And a special entry
1045 1986 Win Eng Richards I.V.A       3 110   58 189.7

Now for quick hundreds. I could not just select all hundreds scored at better than run-a-ball. There were too many such innings, 49 to be precise. So I selected only innings of 150 or more runs. What does one say of Sehwag? Three of his 250+ innings have been scored at better than run-a-ball and are the first three entries. He certainly defies description. He has been the single most devastating match-winner during the past decade. Astle's break-neck 222 was essayed, with almost nothing at stake, but it worried the England team for a while. Then comes Fredericks' famous innings. Gilchrist is the only other batsman to have multiple entries. I have added Richards' hundred since it was scored at today's 20-20 scoring rate at a time when 200-ball centuries were considered quick.

3. Hundreds in matches with low match RpW

if (mat_rpw<20.0 && runs>7.5*mat_rpw)

Ordered by ratio of Runs and RpW

MtId Year For     Batsman             BP Runs MRpW Ratio  

0001 1877 Aus Eng Bannerman C          1 165* 15.2 10.9
0201 1931 Aus Win Ponsford W.H         1 183  17.7 10.4
0032 1889 Eng Saf Abel R               1 120  12.3  9.7
0290 1947 Aus Ind Bradman D.G          3 185  19.2  9.6
1617 2002 Aus Pak Hayden M.L           1 119  13.6  8.7
0443 1957 Eng Win Graveney T.W         3 164  18.9  8.7
0023 1886 Eng Aus Shrewsbury A         3 164  19.4  8.5
0205 1931 Aus Win Bradman D.G          3 152  18.4  8.3
0076 1902 Aus Saf Armstrong W.W        1 159* 19.3  8.3
0007 1882 Aus Eng McDonnell P.S        5 147  18.0  8.2
0045 1895 Aus Eng Graham H             5 105  12.8  8.2
0049 1896 Eng Saf Hill A.J.L           1 124  15.5  8.0
0736 1974 Aus Nzl Redpath I.R          1 159* 19.9  8.0
1171 1991 Eng Win Gooch G.A            1 154* 19.1  8.0
0415 1955 Pak Nzl Hanif Mohammad       1 103  12.8  8.0
2016 2011 Aus Saf Clarke M.J           5 151  18.9  8.0
0058 1899 Eng Saf Warner P.F           1 132* 17.4  7.6
0037 1892 Eng Saf Wood H               8 134* 17.7  7.6

The above is a table of invaluable hundreds, made in matches where runs were at a premium. This is determined by using the match RpW figure. A match RpW value of of below 20 indicates a tough match for batsmen. The ordering is by the ratio of the runs scored and RpW figure. Hence this indicates a measure of out-performance compared to the other batsmen. I have used the overall match figure. Bannerman's century is on top with a whopping ratio of 10.9. Ponsford is next with 10.4. Most of these performances have been way back.

The two exceptions are Hayden's 119 in a match at Sharjah where Pakistan, in two innings, totaled 112 runs. The result could well have been "Hayden defeated Pakistan by an innings and 7 runs". The other is the recent Michael Clarke classic, a futile innings, but an outstanding one, without doubt. I am quite happy that an innings from what could have been one of the greatest of Test series, and could be called "The unfinished symphony", has found place in this elite list.

Out of 18 entries, Australia have accounted 10 for and England, 7, with the lone odd entry from Pakistan. My take is that this is possibly the result of the number of Ashes series, the quality of bowling attacks and the uncovered pitches. As many as nine of these efforts have been effected before WW1.

4. Hundreds by batsmen carrying their bat through completed innings

if (runs>=150 && batpos<3 && allout && batsman_notout)

Ordered by Runs scored

MtId Year For Vs  Batsman             Score BP Runs

0693 1972 Nzl Win Turner G.M          386/10  1 223*
1470 1999 Slk Zim Atapattu M.S        428/10  1 216*
0264 1938 Aus Eng Brown W.A           422/10  1 206*
0326 1950 Eng Win Hutton L            344/10  1 202*
1884 2008 Ind Slk Sehwag V            329/10  1 201*
0164 1926 Aus Eng Bardsley W          383/10  1 193*
0441 1957 Win Eng Worrell F.M.M       372/10  1 191*
1444 1999 Pak Ind Saeed Anwar         316/10  1 188*
1397 1998 Aus Saf Taylor M.A          350/10  1 169*
1939 2009 Win Aus Gayle C.H           317/10  1 165*
2006 2011 Zim Pak Mawoyo T.M.K        412/10  1 163*
0076 1902 Aus Saf Armstrong W.W       309/10  1 159*
0736 1974 Aus Nzl Redpath I.R         346/10  1 159*
1408 1998 Zim Pak Flower G.W          321/10  1 156*
0330 1951 Eng Aus Hutton L            272/10  1 156*
1171 1991 Eng Win Gooch G.A           252/10  1 154*
0947 1983 Pak Ind Mudassar Nazar      323/10  1 152*

Now for those warriors who stood at one end, scored millions (ok, hundreds) of runs and saw the 10 other batsmen lose their wickets. I necessarily have to limit this table since there are many hundreds by batsmen carrying their bat through. Hence I have limited the innings to 150+ scores. There are many stand-out innings in this collection. If I have to pick three out of this wonderful collection, I would nominate Saeed Anwar's 188* (a truly great match-winning innings, away), Sehwag's 201* (similar reason as Anwar's) and the best of all, Gooch's 154* (against Ambrose/Patterson/Marshall/Walsh and match-winning, to boot: only Lara and Laxman have played better innings).

5. Hundreds scored against top bowling attacks

if (runs>=100 && bqi<23.00)

Ordered by quality of bowling (increasing value of BQI)

MtId Year For Vs  Batsman             BP Runs  BQI

0045 1895 Aus Eng Graham H             5 105  21.25
0852 1979 Ind Eng Viswanath G.R        4 113  21.39
0852 1979 Ind Eng Vengsarkar D.B       3 103  21.39
0345 1952 Win Aus Worrell F.M.M        3 108  21.80
0347 1952 Win Aus Stollmeyer J.B       1 104  22.30
0042 1894 Aus Eng Gregory S.E          6 201  22.40
0042 1894 Aus Eng Giffen G             3 161  22.40
1523 2000 Win Aus Lara B.C             4 182  22.52
0901 1981 Eng Win Willey P             7 102* 22.55
0466 1959 Aus Eng McDonald C.C         1 170  22.56
0036 1892 Aus Eng Lyons J.J            3 134  22.76
0908 1981 Aus Eng Border A.R           5 106* 22.83
0330 1951 Eng Aus Hutton L             1 156* 22.89
0044 1895 Aus Eng Iredale F.A          4 140  22.91
0444 1957 Aus Saf Benaud R             7 122  22.94

These hundreds are the ones scored against the very best bowling attacks. Look at the quality of English attack off which Viswanath and Vengsarkar scored their hundreds. Both were scored away in England. Similarly the two hundreds scored by Worrell and Stollmeyer, away, against the very strong Australian attack in 1952. Only one innings has come in from the current millennium, Lara's 182 against the Australian attack.

Hutton's 156*, which featured in the previous table also, leads my selection(against a big total and a formidable attack), followed by Lara's 182 (in only 235 balls, away, no other West Indian even reaching 50) and Willey's 102* (on the first day, away and against Roberts/Holding/Croft/Garner and batting at no.7).

Now for a selection of hundreds scored in different innings. I have not bothered with the first and second innings. The first innings is quite difficult to categorize. Also. facing a huge total in the second innings is not necessarily a mountain to climb since the pitch has been shown to be a reasonably batting-friendly one, scoreboard pressure notwithstanding. To select second innings hundreds, it would require a combination selection criteria, such as "Facing total > 400 && tough pitch/top bowling attack et al". I am not doing multiple criteria in this article.

6. Hundreds scored in third innings with team in huge arrears

if (runs>=160 && thirdinns && deficit>=250)

Ordered by Runs scored

MtId Year For Vs  Batsman              Scores  3rdInns BP Runs  Res

0446 1958 Pak Win Hanif Mohammad      (579-106) 657/10  1 337  Draw
1162 1991 Nzl Slk Crowe M.D           (174-497) 671/10  4 299  Draw
0439 1957 Eng Win May P.B.H           (186-474) 583/10  4 285* Draw
1535 2001 Ind Aus Laxman V.V.S        (445-171) 657/10  3 281  Win
1269 1994 Pak Aus Saleem Malik        (521-260) 537/10  4 237  Draw
2009 2011 Slk Pak Sangakkara K.C      (197-511) 483/ 6  3 211  Draw
1562 2001 Zim Saf Flower A            (600-286) 391/10  5 199* Lost
1511 2000 Zim Nzl Whittall G.J        (465-166) 370/10  6 188* Lost
1162 1991 Nzl Slk Jones A.H           (174-497) 671/10  3 186  Draw
0078 1903 Aus Eng Trumper V.T         (285-577) 485/10  5 185* Lost
0352 1952 Ind Eng Mankad M.H          (235-537) 378/10  1 184  Lost
0299 1948 Eng Aus Compton D.C.S       (165-509) 441/10  4 184  Lost
0695 1972 Win Nzl Davis C.A           (133-422) 564/10  5 183  Draw
1535 2001 Ind Aus Dravid R            (445-171) 657/10  6 180  Win
0507 1961 Eng Aus Dexter E.R          (195-516) 401/ 9  3 180  Draw
0723 1973 Eng Nzl Fletcher K.W.R      (253-551) 463/ 9  4 178  Draw
0496 1960 Eng Saf Pullar G            (155-419) 479/10  1 175  Draw
0731 1974 Eng Win Amiss D.L           (131-392) 392/10  1 174  Lost
1481 2000 Ind Aus Laxman V.V.S        (150-552) 261/ 5  1 167  Lost
0801 1977 Pak Win Majid Khan          (194-448) 540/10  1 167  Draw
1420 1998 Eng Saf Stewart A.J         (552-183) 369/10  4 164  Draw
0285 1947 Eng Saf Compton D.C.S       (533-208) 551/10  4 163  Draw
And a special personal entry, one of the all-time great innings
0905 1981 Eng Aus Botham I.T          (401-174) 359/10 149 Win.
This time another wonderful innings as suggested by Alex
1716 2004 Slk Pak Jayasuriya     (243-264)  438/10 1 253 Win.

However the fun starts in the third innings. The batsmen may or may not be facing huge deficits and hundreds scored in these deficit situations are valuable. If a team has a huge deficit, the first target is to clear the deficit and then build on setting a reasonable target. These are hundreds scored when the deficit is greater than 250, irrespective of follow-on or non-follow-on situations. The bar had to move up to 160 since otherwise there would have been quite a few entries.

Spare a thought for the diminutive Hanif Mohammed, who, after Pakistan followed on over 400 runs behind, batted for over 16 hours to save the Test. The pleasing fact is that most of these back-to-the-wall efforts have been fruitful in that the matches have been saved and in two cases, needless to say which Test, the Laxman-Dravid epic, won. And the special personal entry, Botham's unbelievable 149 also set up the match win.

Laxman's 281 (Like Lars's, one sentence will suffice: in my opinion amongst the three best Test innings ever played) stands head and shoulders above all, followed by Botham's 149 (only loses sheen when compared to Laxman) and Hanif's 337 (arguably the best match-saving innings ever.

Now the the fourth innings which are the purest ones. the target being known right from the beginning. It could be 1 or 836 (both are actual targets in Test matches). This number is clearly available to both teams. While time/overs/weather are factors, this target never changes. There is no D/L creeping in Tests somewhere there, moving the goal-posts. The innings played which we never forget are also outstanding fighting ones. Great defensive innings, often as valuable as attacking match-winning innings are played in the fourth innings.

7. Winning hundreds scored in fourth innings with team chasing huge targets

if (runs>=100 && fourthinns && matchwon && (wkts>=6 || target>=350))

Ordered by Runs scored

MtId Year For Vs  Batsman               Scores    4thInns BP Runs Res

0302 1948 Aus Eng Morris A.R          (496-458-365) 404/3  1 182  Win
0302 1948 Aus Eng Bradman D.G         (496-458-365) 404/3  3 173* Win
1453 1999 Win Aus Lara B.C            (490-329-146) 311/9  5 153* Win
1469 1999 Aus Pak Gilchrist A.C       (222-246-392) 369/6  7 149* Win
1658 2003 Pak Bng Inzamam-ul-Haq      (281-175-154) 262/9  4 138* Win
0178 1929 Eng Aus Sutcliffe H         (397-417-351) 332/7  1 135  Win
1469 1999 Aus Pak Langer J.L          (222-246-392) 369/6  3 127  Win
0822 1978 Aus Win Wood G.M            (205-286-439) 362/7  1 126  Win
0822 1978 Aus Win Serjeant C.S        (205-286-439) 362/7  5 124  Win
1812 2006 Slk Saf Jayawardene D.P.M.D (361-321-311) 352/9  4 123  Win
1797 2006 Aus Bng Ponting R.T         (427-269-148) 310/7  3 118* Win
1355 1997 Eng Nzl Atherton M.A        (346-228-186) 307/6  1 118  Win
1360 1997 Aus Saf Waugh M.E           (209-108-168) 271/8  4 116  Win
0775 1976 Ind Win Viswanath G.R       (359-228-271) 406/4  4 112  Win
1012 1985 Nzl Pak Coney J.V           (274-220-223) 278/8  6 111* Win
1899 2008 Saf Aus Smith G.C           (375-281-319) 414/4  1 108  Win
1899 2008 Saf Aus de Villiers A.B     (375-281-319) 414/4  5 106* Win
1645 2003 Win Aus Sarwan R.R          (240-240-417) 418/7  5 105  Win
0811 1977 Aus Ind Mann A.L            (402-394-330) 342/8  3 105  Win
1704 2004 Eng Nzl Thorpe G.P          (384-319-218) 284/6  5 104* Win
0074 1902 Eng Aus Jessop G.L          (324-183-121) 263/9  7 104  Win
1645 2003 Win Aus Chanderpaul S       (240-240-417) 418/7  6 104  Win
1898 2008 Ind Eng Tendulkar S.R       (316-241-311) 387/4  4 103* Win
0345 1952 Aus Win Hassett A.L         (272-216-203) 260/9  3 102  Win
0775 1976 Ind Win Gavaskar S.M        (359-228-271) 406/4  1 102  Win
1795 2006 Aus Saf Martyn D.R          (303-270-258) 294/8  4 101  Win
1593 2002 Aus Saf Ponting R.T         (239-382-473) 334/6  3 100* Win
And a few special entries, two of which have been suggested by readers
0990 1984 Win Eng Greenidge C.G       (286-245-300) 344/1  1 214* Win
0320 1950 Aus Saf Harvey R.N          (311-75-99)   336/5  5 151* Win
1883 2008 Saf Eng Smith G.C           (231-314-363) 283/5  1 154* Win

These are defining match-winning played in the fourth innings. The process for selecting the hundreds is quite tricky. Hayden's 101* out of 171 for 1 hardly qualifies, but Greenidge's 214 out of 344 for 1 cannot be ignored. So I have a complex set of selection criteria. The win is quite tough if more than 5 wickets are lost. Hence I have selected all such hundreds. In addition, all hundreds scored in chases of 350 and above are selected.

My own selection amongst these would be Lara's 153* (A legend-one sentence will suffice: in my opinion amongst the three best Test innings ever played), Mark Waugh's 116 (series-winning innings, away and against a top attack) and Gilchrist's 149 (in only his second Test, a forerunner of things to come in many a Test). Bradman and Morris scored two huge centuries. Butcher's was in a dead rubber. Only the ease of the West Indian win keeps the special entry, Greenidge's 214, out.

8. Fighting losing hundreds scored in fourth innings with team chasing substantial targets

if (fourthinns && matchlost && (runs>=125 || (runs>=100 && 2*runs>=score))

Ordered by Runs scored

MtId Year For Vs  Batsman               Scores     4thInns BP Runs Res

1594 2002 Nzl Eng Astle N.J           (228-147-468) 451/10  5 222  Lost
1847 2007 Slk Aus Sangakkara K.C      (542-246-210) 410/10  3 192  Lost
0722 1973 Nzl Eng Congdon B.E         (250- 97-325) 440/10  3 176  Lost
0800 1977 Eng Aus Randall D.W         (138- 95-419) 417/10  3 174  Lost
1932 2009 Nzl Slk Vettori D.L         (416-234-311) 397/10  8 140  Lost
0646 1969 Win Aus Nurse S.M           (619-279-394) 352/10  7 137  Lost
1442 1999 Ind Pak Tendulkar S.R       (238-254-286) 258/10  4 136  Lost
1925 2009 Aus Eng Clarke M.J          (425-215-311) 406/10  5 136  Lost
0803 1977 Pak Win Asif Iqbal          (280-198-359) 301/10  6 135  Lost
1223 1993 Eng Aus Gooch G.A           (289-210-432) 332/10  1 133  Lost
0194 1930 Aus Eng Bradman D.G         (270-144-302) 335/10  3 131  Lost
1688 2004 Slk Aus Jayasuriya S.T      (120-211-442) 324/10  1 131  Lost
0159 1925 Eng Aus Sutcliffe H         (600-479-250) 290/10  1 127  Lost
1843 2007 Pak Saf Younis Khan         (450-291-264) 263/10  3 126  Lost
1306 1995 Pak Slk Moin Khan           (232-214-338) 212/10  7 117* Lost
0900 1981 Eng Win Gooch G.A           (265-122-379) 224/10  1 116  Lost
1205 1992 Win Aus Simmons P.V         (395-233-196) 219/10  1 110  Lost

The selection criteria in lost matches has to be different. I have selected innings where the score is greater than 125 or comprises of more than half the team score. Note the last three innings, all very commendable efforts.

I would plump for Tendulkar's fighting and valiant 136, on a day when he was ill. The failure of the Indian late-order to score 12 runs should not take anything away from his master class. Randall's 174 which almost won the Centenary Test for England and Astle's 222 follow next.

9. Match-saving hundreds scored in fourth innings with team chasing huge targets

if (fourthinns && matchdrawn && (runs>149 || (runs>=100 && wkts>=7))

Ordered by runs scored

MtId Year For Vs  Batsman               Scores     4thInns BP Runs Res

0193 1930 Win Eng Headley G.A         (849-286-272) 408/5  3 223  Draw
0854 1979 Ind Eng Gavaskar S.M        (305-202-334) 429/8  1 221  Draw
0271 1939 Eng Saf Edrich W.J          (530-316-481) 654/5  3 219  Draw
0289 1947 Saf Eng Mitchell B          (427-302-325) 423/7  1 189* Draw
0248 1935 Aus Saf McCabe S.J          (157-250-491) 274/2  3 189* Draw
1315 1995 Eng Saf Atherton M.A        (332-200-346) 351/5  1 185* Draw
1760 2005 Aus Eng Ponting R.T         (444-302-280) 371/9  3 156  Draw
1367 1997 Pak Slk Saleem Malik        (331-292-386) 285/5  4 155  Draw
0824 1978 Win Aus Kallicharran A.I    (343-280-305) 258/9  5 126  Draw
1025 1985 Slk Ind Mendis L.R.D        (249-198-325) 307/7  5 124  Draw
1350 1997 Saf Ind Cullinan D.J        (410-321-266) 228/8  4 122* Draw
0311 1949 Ind Win Hazare V.S          (286-193-267) 355/8  5 122  Draw
1261 1994 Eng Nzl Stewart A.J         (476-281-211) 254/8  1 119  Draw
1397 1998 Aus Saf Waugh M.E           (517-350-193) 227/7  4 115* Draw
1005 1984 Aus Win Hilditch A.M.J      (479-296-186) 198/8  1 113  Draw
1281 1995 Aus Eng Taylor M.A          (309-116-255) 344/7  1 113  Draw
0281 1947 Eng Aus Washbrook C         (365-351-536) 310/7  1 112  Draw
0373 1953 Eng Aus Watson W.           (346-372-368) 282/7  5 109  Draw
0796 1977 Nzl Aus Congdon B.E         (552-357-154) 293/8  3 107* Draw
1918 2009 Nzl Ind Taylor R.L          (379-197-434) 281/8  4 107  Draw
0654 1969 Eng Win Boycott G           (380-344-295) 295/7  1 106  Draw
1025 1985 Slk Ind Dias R.L            (249-198-325) 307/7  4 106  Draw
1908 2009 Win Eng Sarwan R.R          (566-285-221) 370/9  3 106  Draw
1672 2003 Eng Slk Vaughan M.P         (382-294-279) 285/7  1 105  Draw
1281 1995 Aus Eng Slater M.J          (309-116-255) 344/7  1 103  Draw
1096 1988 Pak Win Javed Miandad       (174-194-391) 341/9  4 102  Draw
1232 1993 Saf Slk Rhodes J.N          (331-267-300) 251/7  6 101* Draw
1392 1997 Saf Aus Kallis J.H          (309-186-257) 273/7  3 101  Draw
And a special reader entry: a 17-year old, playing away, saving a match for India,
1149 1990 Ind Eng (519-432-320) Tendulkar 343/6 119* 6 Draw

Drawn matches present their own characteristics. Scoring 100 out of 200 for 2 is no great effort. Since the match has been saved, the number of wickets lost is significant. I have selected innings in which 7 or more wickets are lost. These are the difficult matches. In addition, to recognize individual efforts, I have also selected hundreds which are 150 and above.

For me, Gavaskar's 221 stands tall, having taken India agonizingly close to a wonderful away victory. Atherton's 10-hour 492-ball epic of 185* and McCabe's 189* (if for nothing else, to do justice to one who was forgotten amongst the Bradman avalanche of runs) complete my trio of hundreds.

10. Hundreds scored which are the only ones in the match by either teams

if (runs>=200 && match100s==1)

Ordered by Runs scored

MtId Year For Vs  Batsman             BP Runs

0226 1933 Eng Nzl Hammond W.R          3 336*
1977 2010 Win Slk Gayle C.H            1 333
0215 1932 Aus Saf Bradman D.G          3 299*
1697 2004 Ind Pak Dravid R             3 270
1725 2004 Ind Bng Tendulkar S.R        4 248*
0631 1968 Nzl Ind Dowling G.T          1 239
0972 1983 Ind Win Gavaskar S.M         4 236*
0832 1978 Pak Ind Zaheer Abbas         4 235*
1710 2004 Slk Saf Sangakkara K.C       3 232
0256 1936 Eng Aus Hammond W.R          3 231*
1592 2002 Slk Pak Sangakkara K.C       3 230
0212 1931 Aus Saf Bradman D.G          3 226
1169 1991 Win Aus Greenidge C.G        1 226
1748 2005 Nzl Slk Vincent L            4 224
0417 1955 Ind Nzl Mankad M.H           1 223
1394 1998 Slk Zim Atapattu M.S         1 223
0473 1959 Win Pak Kanhai R.B           3 217
1470 1999 Slk Zim Atapattu M.S         1 216*
1723 2004 Aus Nzl Langer J.L           1 215
1478 1999 Nzl Win Sinclair M.S         3 214
1805 2006 Ind Win Jaffer W             1 212
1104 1988 Pak Aus Javed Miandad        4 211
0276 1946 Eng Ind Hardstaff jnr J      5 205*
1191 1992 Pak Eng Aamer Sohail         1 205
0365 1953 Aus Saf Harvey R.N           3 205
0893 1981 Aus Ind Chappell G.S         3 204
1379 1997 Zim Nzl Whittall G.J         4 203*
1151 1990 Pak Nzl Shoaib Mohammad      1 203*
1717 2004 Nzl Bng Fleming S.P          3 202
1884 2008 Ind Slk Sehwag V             1 201*
0910 1981 Aus Pak Chappell G.S         3 201
0932 1982 Pak Eng Mohsin Khan          1 200

The above table represents the list of century makers in matches in which they were the ones to do so. Except that the bar has been set quite high, only those who have scored 200 or more are considered. Remember that the next best score is below 100. The stand-out innings are Dravid's 270 (a match-winning innings, away against a good attack, Greenidge's 226 (after two low innings, this was responsible for a huge win, also against a very good attack) and Sehwag's 201 (a modern classic: an unforgettable Sehwag 231-ball epic and won the away match).

I will now go to a table which is available in any statistical section. However I have included the same in this to round off this article. This is the list of batsmen who scored hundreds in wach innings.

11. Two hundreds scored in a match

if (runs>=100 && otherruns>=100)

Ordered by match Runs scored

MtId Year For Vs  Batsman             BP Runs1 Runs2 RunsMat

1148 1990 Eng Ind Gooch G.A            1  333   123   456
0733 1974 Aus Nzl Chappell G.S         4  247*  133   380
1572 2001 Win Slk Lara B.C             4  221   130   351
0646 1969 Aus Win Walters K.D          5  242   103   345
0686 1971 Ind Win Gavaskar S.M         1  124   220   344
1562 2001 Zim Saf Flower A             5  142   199*  341
0693 1972 Win Nzl Rowe L.G             3  214   100*  314
0289 1947 Saf Eng Mitchell B           1  120   189*  309
1905 2009 Slk Bng Dilshan T.M          6  162   143   305
0159 1925 Eng Aus Sutcliffe H          1  176   127   303
0879 1980 Aus Pak Border A.R           6  150*  153   303
1623 2002 Aus Eng Hayden M.L           1  197   103   300
And the only batsman who has replicated his scores in each innings
0934 1982 Slk Ind Mendis L.R.D         4  105   105   210

Gooch is the only batsman to have scored a triple century and century in the same match, against India during 1990. The match total was 456, ahead of the next by a comfortable margin. Chappell's total stood for a long time. Chappell, Lara and Gavaskar achieved this feat in away locations. Gavaskar, in his debut series. Rowe did this in his debut Test. Border is the only batsman to have exceeded 150 in both innings.

12. Tests by nos 9, 10, and 11 (not yet there)

if (runs>=100 && batpos>=9)

Ordered by Batting position and runs scored

MtId Year For Vs  Batsman             BP Runs

0016 1884 Eng Aus Read W.W            10 117
1400 1998 Saf Pak Symcox P.L          10 108
0066 1902 Aus Eng Duff R.A            10 104
1139 1990 Nzl Ind Smith I.D.S          9 173
1971 2010 Eng Pak Broad S.C.J          9 169
0098 1908 Aus Eng Hill C               9 160
0623 1967 Pak Eng Asif Iqbal           9 146
1676 2003 Nzl Pak Vettori D.L          9 137*
1800 2006 Nzl Saf Franklin J.E.C       9 122*
0209 1931 Eng Nzl Allen G.O.B          9 122
0609 1966 Eng Win Murray J.T           9 112
1529 2001 Saf Slk Pollock S.M          9 111
1701 2004 Bng Win Mohammad Rafique     9 111
1573 2001 Nzl Aus Parore A.C           9 110
1541 2001 Saf Win Pollock S.M          9 106*
1349 1997 Saf Ind Klusener L           9 102*
0136 1921 Aus Eng Gregory J.M          9 100
0281 1947 Aus Eng Lindwall R.R         9 100

Finally the list of hundreds made in batting positions 9-11. No century has yet been made in position 11. Three centuries have been made in No.10. The most recent one, and the only hundred in the past 100 years, is Pat Symcox's 108 against Pakistan, in a rain-affected drawn match. Smith's 173 was against India helped New Zealand recover from 131 for 7 to 381. Broad's 169 is recent vintage helping England recover from 102 for 7 to 446 and led England to an innings win against Pakistan. For me, these two innings and Asif's 146, including a stand of 190 for the ninth wicket with Intikhab, stand out.

Readers' selections:

(Maximum of four per reader, to be given in the form
Tendulkar 155, Lara 277, Ponting 156, Hutton 202*
Also short names, not "cricket-follower-from-rajnandgaon" ???
Must be limited to a single line.)

Dave Bollen: Botham 149, SR Waugh 200, Lara 277, Laxman 167.
Gaur: Lara 153*, Tendulkar 136, VVS 281, Sehwag 201*.
Yogesh: Tendulkar 136, Gilchrist 149*, Laxman 281, Damien Martyn 104.
Alok:  Lara 153*, Laxman 281, Tendulkar 103* and Botham 149.
Andrew: Lara 153*, Trescothick 180, Pietersen 158, S Waugh ???.
Ravi M: Bradman 103*, Hughes 100*, Border 100*, Walters 104*
Navin A: Laxman 281, Lara 153*, Gooch 154*, Dravid 270 (closest to my own).
Gerry: Gavaskar 121, Sobers 132, Fredericks 169, Azhar Mehmood 132 (Saf).
Ghose: Lara 153*, Atherton 185*, Hughes 100*, Laxman 281
Sandeep: Sehwag 201*, Laxman 281, Dravid 270, Sehwag 151
Rachit: Tendulkar 136, Gooch 154, Lara 213, Laxman 281
Rakesh: Laxman 281, Lara 153*, Sehwag 201, Tendulkar 136
Ashtung: Laxman 281, Lara 153*, Pietersen 158, Tendulkar 136
Rex: Laxman 281, Sehwag 201*, Tendulkar 103*, Gooch 154*
Sarath: Bradman's 103*, Laxman's 281, Lara's 153* and Sachin's 136.
Andrew: Jessop's 104, Sutcliffe's 135, McCabe's 232* and Harvey's 151*.
Zain: V.Sehwag's 293, Sehwag's 201, S.Anwar's 188 and Broad's 169.
Trevor: Gooch 154, Tendulkar 136, Fredericks 169, Laxman 281.
Aaditya: Laxman 281, Tendulkar 155, Lara 213, Slater 123.
Alex: Slater 123, Greenidge 134, Taylor 144, Jayasuriya 253.
Vivek: Tendulkar 155, Lara 153*, Tendulkar 155, Gilchrist 102.
James: Lara's 153*, Laxman's 281, Mark Taylor's 144, M Waugh's 116.
Karthik: Lara 153*, Laxman 281, Gilchrist 149* and Botham 149.
Jaytirth: Laxman 281, Lara 153, Sehwag 201, Anwar 188
Kothandaram:Lara 153*, Laxman 281, ME Waugh 115, Tendulkar 136.
AB: Lara 153, Gooch 154, Laxman 281 and Dravid 233.
Oshada: Lara 153*, Jayawardene 123, Sangakkara 192, Greenidge 214*
Iain: Bradman 334, Gilchrest 160, S Waugh 200, M.Waugh 116
Bull: Lara's 153, Laxman's 281, Bradman's 103*, Clarke's 151.
Raghav: Laxman 281, Lara 153, Botham 149, McCabe 187
Sudarshan: Laxman 281, Sachin 136, Inzamamul 138* and Sarwan 105
Aditya: Headley 270, Gavaskar 101, Pollock 125 and ???.
Deepak: Ganguly 144, Mudassar 114, McCabe 232 and ???.
Jayanth: Hanif Mohd's 337,Gavasker's 221, Laxman's 281, Lara's 153.
krishna  : lara 153, kapil 119, laxman 281, steve waugh 200
Harsh: Lara153,Gooch154,Mcabe232,Pollock125
Vinish: Lara 153*, Laxman 281, Gooch 154 and Lara 213 (Author's privilege to select one of 
three).
Obelix: S.Waugh 200, Border 98/100, Slater 106, Hilditch 70/113.

I write three types of articles. The first, and the most often done, are the hard-core analysis, often sailing on uncharted seas. Examples are the Bowling quality and Series analysis. Then there are anecdotal articles which are normally my selections, with facility for readers to come out with their own. Examples are the the Test opening day performances and the innings bowling efforts. The third type of articles are rare. I take a single facet of the game and analyze it in depth but in a narrow manner, bringing out almost every aspect of that. Examples are the articles on Bradman and Muralitharan. The current article is one such analysis. The subject is Test hundreds. I would be very surprised if, after reading this article, the reader reverts with a possible analysis on Test hundreds I have missed.

1. Number of Test hundreds scored

SNo Batsman          Year Cty Mat 100s  

  1.Tendulkar S.R    1989 Ind 182  51  
  2.Kallis J.H       1995 Saf 145  40  
  3.Ponting R.T      1995 Aus 154  39  
  4.Dravid R         1996 Ind 158  35  
  5.Lara B.C         1990 Win 131  34  
  6.Gavaskar S.M     1971 Ind 125  34  
  7.Waugh S.R        1985 Aus 168  32  
  8.Hayden M.L       1994 Aus 103  30  
  9.Bradman D.G      1928 Aus  52  29  
 10.Jayawardene M    1997 Slk 125  29  

As anyone and their neighbour's cat are aware of, Tendulkar stands head-and-shoulders above all others with 51 Test hundreds, 99 in all. This might be 52 by the time this article is published. Kallis and Ponting would have to play about 50 Tests more to overhaul Tendulkar and it is very unlikely that this would happen. The modern greats are all there, along with the incomparable Bradman, who has 29.

2. Average value of hundreds

SNo Batsman          Year Cty Mat 100s  Avge

  1.Bradman D.G      1928 Aus  52  29  186.0
  2.Zaheer Abbas     1969 Pak  78  12  179.8
  3.Sehwag V         2001 Ind  90  22  176.3
  4.Lara B.C         1990 Win 131  34  173.2
  5.Amiss D.L        1966 Eng  50  11  170.8
  6.Jayasuriya S.T   1991 Slk 110  14  168.3
  7.Hammond W.R      1927 Eng  85  22  167.5
  8.Gayle C.H        2000 Win  91  13  166.8
  9.Sangakkara K.C   2000 Slk 103  27  165.3
 10.Simpson R.B      1957 Aus  62  10  164.6
...
...
108.Kallicharran A.I 1972 Win  66  12  122.2
109.Waugh M.E        1991 Aus 128  20  120.6
110.Katich S.M       2001 Aus  56  10  118.2
111.Lamb A.J         1982 Eng  79  14  117.3
112.Amarnath M       1969 Ind  69  11  113.8

Now for the average value of the hundreds made. This is an excellent measure to determine how big the hundreds were and have a handle on the propensity of the batsman concerned to "take a fresh guard", so to speak. Bradman, having the cushion of two triple and ten double in his 29, stands quite clear of the next with an average hundred score of 186. Zaheer Abbas, four of whose 12 hundreds were doubles, has a very high average hundred value of 179.8. Then come Sehwag and Lara. Both have two triple-hundreds, Lara has seven other doubles and Sehwag, four other doubles. Both of them also had the ability to go past 150 often. Their average hundred value is around 170+, as is Amiss's value. In the later half of the top-ten group, we have two Sri Lankans. There is also Gayle, would he ever play for West Indies again ?

The top-four century makers, Tendulkar, Kallis, Ponting and Dravid all have average hundred values around 145. Jayawardene, in line with the other Sri Lankan batsmen, has an average hundred value of 160.

The other end is interesting. Amarnath and Lamb did not exceed 150 at all. Katich and Mark Waugh, just once. This leads to an average hundred value of around 120.

3. Frequency of hundreds - Inns/hundred

SNo Batsman          Year Cty Mat 100s  I/H

  1.Bradman D.G      1928 Aus  52  29   2.8
  2.Headley G.A      1930 Win  22  10   4.0
  3.Walcott C.L      1948 Win  44  15   4.9
  4.Sutcliffe H      1924 Eng  54  16   5.2
  5.EdeC Weekes      1948 Win  48  15   5.4
  6.Tendulkar S.R    1989 Ind 182  51   5.9
  7.Hayden M.L       1994 Aus 103  30   6.1
  8.Kallis J.H       1995 Saf 145  40   6.2
  9.Sobers G.St.A    1954 Win  93  26   6.2
 10.Chappell G.S     1970 Aus  87  24   6.3
...
...
108.Hooper C.L       1987 Win 102  13  13.3
109.Laxman V.V.S     1996 Ind 128  16  13.4
110.Jayasuriya S.T   1991 Slk 110  14  13.4
111.Gatting M.W      1978 Eng  79  10  13.8
112.Stewart A.J      1990 Eng 133  15  15.7

Now for the frequency of hundreds. I have taken innings per hundred rather than matches per hundreds to avoid penalising the batsmen in stronger teams. Bradman scored a hundred every 2,8 innings, quite difficult to even visualize this type of frequency. Expressed another way, a hundred in less than every two Tests. Headley and Walcott are below 5.0. Sutcliffe and Weekes, just above 5.

Then comes Tendulkar. It is necessary to take this number of 5.9 in perspective. We should not forget that this has been achieved over nearly 300 innings. It is consistency of the highest order. Based on this measure, Tendulkar is currently going through a slump, 11 innings have gone by since his last hundred. But that might change soon and he might score two in two. Kallis has the same frequency as the great Sobers.

AT the other end, the surprise is Laxman whose frequency is a fairly high 13.4. But it must be said that many of his recent 50s have been match-winning and mean more than many a hundred. He makes his runs in difficult situations and does not necessarily gets as many hundreds as his compatriots do. His value will be known only when he retires.

Now a compilation of the hundreds total as % of the team runs for the concerned innings.

4. Hundred total as % of team total runs

SNo Batsman          Year Cty Mat 100s %TtR

  1.Hanif Mohammad   1952 Pak  55  12  44.4
  2.Headley G.A      1930 Win  22  10  42.3
  3.Gooch G.A        1975 Eng 118  20  41.9
  4.Lara B.C         1990 Win 131  34  40.5
  5.Amiss D.L        1966 Eng  50  11  40.0
  6.Bradman D.G      1928 Aus  52  29  38.8
  7.Sehwag V         2001 Ind  90  22  38.3
  8.Gayle C.H        2000 Win  91  13  37.8
  9.Flower A         1992 Zim  63  12  37.7
 10.Hammond W.R      1927 Eng  85  22  37.3
...
...
108.Gilchrist A.C    1999 Aus  96  17  26.9
109.Ganguly S.C      1996 Ind 113  16  26.8
110.Martyn D.R       1992 Aus  67  13  26.6
111.Bell I.R         2004 Eng  69  16  26.5
112.Clarke M.J       2004 Aus  72  15  26.3

How much Hanif Mohammad, Gooch and Lara meant to their somewhat weak teams is shown by this number. When they scored hundreds, these batsmen scored over 40% of their team score. Bradman and surprisingly Sehwag are there. And Flower is not a surprise. Hammond's hundreds were huge.

Three Australian modern greats are at the end of the table, their hundreds forming only around 25%, they probably taking off a few percentage points off each other. I must hasten to add that these tables were formed before the conclusion of the dramatic South Africa - Australia Test which ended just now. Clarke's % would have gone up and he might very well be off the bottom. Unfortunately the table formation for this particular article is such a major effort that I cannot repeat the same.

Now to recognize the hundreds made away from home.

5. % of hundreds scored away

SNo Batsman          Year Cty Mat 100s Hm  Aw %Away

  1.Amarnath M       1969 Ind  69  11   2   9  81.8
  2.Saeed Anwar      1990 Pak  55  11   3   8  72.7
  3.Asif Iqbal       1964 Pak  58  11   3   8  72.7
  4.Barrington K.F   1955 Eng  82  20   6  14  70.0
  5.Katich S.M       2001 Aus  56  10   3   7  70.0
  6.Martyn D.R       1992 Aus  67  13   4   9  69.2
  7.Hobbs J.B        1908 Eng  61  15   5  10  66.7
  8.Hanif Mohammad   1952 Pak  55  12   4   8  66.7
  9.Amiss D.L        1966 Eng  50  11   4   7  63.6
 10.Shastri R.J      1981 Ind  80  11   4   7  63.6
...
...
108.Vengsarkar D.B   1976 Ind 116  17  13   4  23.5
109.Compton D.C.S    1937 Eng  78  17  13   4  23.5
110.Lamb A.J         1982 Eng  79  14  11   3  21.4
111.Mudassar Nazar   1976 Pak  76  10   8   2  20.0
112.Wright J.G       1978 Nzl  82  12  10   2  16.7

The forgotten toughie of Indian Cricket, Mohinder Amarnath leads the table, with a stupendous % of 81.8, nine out of eleven hundreds having been scored away from home. He is nearly 10 percentage points ahead of the next batsman. And let us not forget that most of these were against tough Pakistani and West Indian attacks. A number of Pakistani batsmen, led by Saeed Anwar appear in the top-10. The only modern batsmen to get in here are the two Australians, Martyn and Katich. Their roles in the strong Australian line-ups has often been overlooked.

At the other end, Vengsarkar is a real surprise. He has only scored four outside, three at Lord's and one famous classic at Headingley.

The three Indian batsmen in the top-10 in the table of hundreds scored, Tendulkar, Dravid and Gavaskar have all scored more hundreds away. Lara has scored exactly half his tally away. Bradman has scored just over a third of his hundreds away. Kallis and Ponting, less than half.

6. Hundreds analysis based on Results

SNo Batsman          Year Cty Mat 100s  W  D  L  WinF

  1.Slater M.J       1993 Aus  74  14  11  3  0  0.89
  2.Gilchrist A.C    1999 Aus  96  17  14  2  1  0.88
  3.Greenidge C.G    1974 Win 108  19  14  5  0  0.87
  4.Bradman D.G      1928 Aus  52  29  23  4  2  0.86
  5.Hayden M.L       1994 Aus 103  30  23  5  2  0.85
  6.Waugh M.E        1991 Aus 128  20  15  4  1  0.85
  7.Hassett A.L      1938 Aus  43  10   7  3  0  0.85
  8.Martyn D.R       1992 Aus  67  13  10  2  1  0.85
  9.Smith G.C        2002 Saf  91  22  15  7  0  0.84
 10.Bell I.R         2004 Eng  69  16  11  5  0  0.84
 11.Ponting R.T      1995 Aus 154  39  28  7  4  0.81
 12.Waugh S.R        1985 Aus 168  32  25  2  5  0.81
 13.Langer J.L       1993 Aus 105  23  15  7  1  0.80
 14.Inzamam-ul-Haq   1992 Pak 120  25  17  6  2  0.80
 15.Hussey M.E.K     2005 Aus  62  15  10  4  1  0.80
...
...
108.Collingwood P.D  2003 Eng  68  10   2  5  3  0.45
109.Shastri R.J      1981 Ind  80  11   1  8  2  0.45
110.Lamb A.J         1982 Eng  79  14   4  4  6  0.43
111.Lara B.C         1990 Win 131  34   8 12 14  0.41
112.Flower A         1992 Zim  63  12   2  3  7  0.29

Using the 2-1-0 base, I have determined the Win Factor for batsmen when they scored hundreds. Slater has an enviable 11 wins-3 draws in the 14 occasions he made hundreds. Gilchrist is almost there, with just a single loss. Greenidge is equally impressive. The table is stuffed with Australians, ten out of 15. Tendulkar has a Win Factor of 0.59 and Dravid, 0.64.

Spare a thought for poor Lara. 14 of his hundreds have been in a losing cause, almost always for no fault of his. A reflection of the lack of support from his team mates.

Now to the table which separates the hundreds into men and boys. This looks at the hundreds scored against the two top two bowling groups (BQI below 35.00). This is based on the article on Test bowling groups which I had done a few months back.

7. Hundreds against top two bowling groups

SNo Batsman          Year Cty Mat 100s BQ5 BQ4         %TopGrp

  1.Amiss D.L        1966 Eng  50  11    1   9  1  0  0  90.9
  2.Martyn D.R       1992 Aus  67  13    8   3  2  0  0  84.6
  3.Richards I.V.A   1974 Win 121  24    7  13  2  2  0  83.3
  4.Kallicharran A.I 1972 Win  66  12    3   7  2  0  0  83.3
  5.Atherton M.A     1989 Eng 115  16    4   9  1  1  1  81.2
  6.Hussain N        1990 Eng  96  14    5   6  3  0  0  78.6
  7.Chappell I.M     1964 Aus  75  14    4   7  1  1  1  78.6
  8.Edrich J.H       1963 Eng  77  12    2   7  2  1  0  75.0
  9.Umrigar P.R      1948 Ind  59  12    4   5  2  0  1  75.0
 10.Thorpe G.P       1993 Eng 100  16    4   8  4  0  0  75.0
...
...
108.Bell I.R         2004 Eng  69  16    2   2  4  5  3  25.0
109.Mudassar Nazar   1976 Pak  76  10    2   0  5  2  1  20.0
110.Hammond W.R      1927 Eng  85  22    1   3  3  8  7  18.2
111.Samaraweera T.T  2001 Slk  68  12    0   2  5  3  2  16.7
112.Morris A.R       1946 Aus  46  12    1   0  9  2  0   8.3

Amiss, having faced top class bowling attacks, throughout his career, leads with 90.9, ten of his 11 hundreds having been scored against top quality bowling attacks. Damien Martyn, the unsung Australian batsmen, in addition to scoring most of his hundreds away, has scored 11 of his 13 hundreds against top quality bowling attacks. And the incomparable Richards, although not having to face his own team's pace bowlers, has scored 20 of his 24 hundreds against the top groups. As did Kallicharran.

Tendulkar and Lara have scored upwards of 55% of their hundreds against the top two groups. Kallis, Dravid and Hayden have scored below 50% of their hundreds against similar attacks.

The other end is led by Hammond who feasted on sub-standard bowling attacks to the tune of 15 out 22 hundreds. Bell and Samaraweera are the modern batsmen who have done so. It is a clear pointer to the fact that Samaraweera's 50-plus Batting average is not really as valuable as it looks.

7-addl. Weighted average of BQI for 100s

SNo Batsman          Year Cty Mat Ins 100s AveBQI

  1.Martyn D.R       1992 Aus  67 109  13   30.1
  2.Asif Iqbal       1964 Pak  58  99  11   31.0
  3.Hussain N        1990 Eng  96 171  14   31.5
  4.Richards I.V.A   1974 Win 121 182  24   31.5
  5.Kallicharran A.I 1972 Win  66 109  12   31.6
  6.Botham I.T       1977 Eng 102 161  14   32.1
  7.Thorpe G.P       1993 Eng 100 179  16   32.2
  8.Lloyd C.H        1966 Win 110 175  19   32.2
  9.Chappell G.S     1970 Aus  87 151  24   32.2
 10.Chappell I.M     1964 Aus  75 136  14   32.4

This is based on the average BQI (Bowling quality index) faced by the batsman during his innings of 100 or more. This table draws from Boll's suggestion. The table also vindicates the enhanced stature of Martyn, whose averege BQi was 30.1, almost wholly Group 5. Asif Iqbal is a surprise Pakistani batsman in the second position. Hussain and Richards follow next. The top-10 group includes quite a few English batsmen of the 1990s, facing up to West indies and Australian attacks. Both the Chappells are there.

Tendulkar's average BQI is a very respectable 34.2, which puts him clearly in the Bowling group 4. Over 51 Tests that is very good. Ponting, Sewhag and Laxman are just below the 34 mark.

The other end is populated by five Englishmen, greats of 1920-1950s and ending with Ian Bell. The downloadable table has since been modifuied with this table. Samaraweers is just ahead of Bell.

8. Conversion of 50s to hundreds

SNo Batsman          Year Cty Mat 100s 50s  %Con

  1.Bradman D.G      1928 Aus  52  29   42  69.0
  2.Headley G.A      1930 Win  22  10   15  66.7
  3.Prince A.G       2002 Saf  62  11   21  52.4
  4.Walcott C.L      1948 Win  44  15   29  51.7
  5.Azharuddin M     1985 Ind  99  22   43  51.2
  6.Hayden M.L       1994 Aus 103  30   59  50.8
  7.Amiss D.L        1966 Eng  50  11   22  50.0
  8.Ijaz Ahmed       1987 Pak  60  12   24  50.0
  9.Vaughan M.P      1999 Eng  82  18   36  50.0
 10.Morris A.R       1946 Aus  46  12   24  50.0
...
...
108.Gayle C.H        2000 Win  91  13   46  28.3
109.Simpson R.B      1957 Aus  62  10   37  27.0
110.Atherton M.A     1989 Eng 115  16   62  25.8
111.Stewart A.J      1990 Eng 133  15   60  25.0
112.Laxman V.V.S     1996 Ind 128  16   71  22.5

When Bradman reached a 50, there was a 69% chance of having that converted into a hundred. Headley also has a high conversion rate. The top 10 batsmen all have conversion rates of 50 or higher. In other words their number of hundreds was at least equal to the number of fifties.

The conversion rates of almost all top batsmen in the hundreds table are between 40 and 50 with the exception of Dravid whose conversion rate is only 36%. A real surprise is Laxman at the end, with a conversion rate of less than one in four. Quite difficult to explain either of these.

Now we come to a series of tables which are not performance-oriented. As such these are ordered by the standard sequence of hundreds scored. The first is the one by innings.

9. Hundreds by Innings

SNo.Batsman          Year Cty Mat 100s  1  2  3  4

  1.Tendulkar S.R    1989 Ind 182  51  20 18 10  3
  2.Kallis J.H       1995 Saf 145  40  18 12  9  1
  3.Ponting R.T      1995 Aus 154  39  20 13  2  4
  4.Dravid R         1996 Ind 158  35  14 15  5  1
  5.Lara B.C         1990 Win 131  34  12 13  7  2
  6.Gavaskar S.M     1971 Ind 125  34  11 12  7  4
  7.Waugh S.R        1985 Aus 168  32  17 13  2  0
  8.Hayden M.L       1994 Aus 103  30  10  9 10  1
  9.Bradman D.G      1928 Aus  52  29   9 10  7  3
 10.Jayawardene M    1997 Slk 125  29  11 13  2  3

Of special interest would be the fourth innings hundreds. Of the top-10, Ponting and Gavaskar have scored 4 hundreds in the fourth innings. Of course, we must allow for meaningless hundreds also. Of the others only the unlikely duo of Younis Khan and Sarwan have scored 4 second innings hundreds, indicating their value to their teams. Readers must remember that this is not an Innings Ratings analysis. Sacrilege it is, but Lara's all-time classic of 153* is considered in the same group as Boycott's 100 at Hyderabad against Pakistan during 1978.

Now for a very interesting analysis. This is based on the career split into three equal parts. Three seems the right number since it allows the starting period, settled middle period and (possibly) declining ending period to be looked into.

10. Hundreds by career split third

SNo.Batsman          Year Cty Mat 100s  C1  C2  C3

  1.Tendulkar S.R    1989 Ind 182  51   16  18  17
  2.Kallis J.H       1995 Saf 145  40    7  16  17
  3.Ponting R.T      1995 Aus 154  39    9  21   9
  4.Dravid R         1996 Ind 158  35    9  14  12
  5.Lara B.C         1990 Win 131  34    9   9  16
  6.Gavaskar S.M     1971 Ind 125  34   16  10   8
  7.Waugh S.R        1985 Aus 168  32    5  12  15
  8.Hayden M.L       1994 Aus 103  30   11   9  10
  9.Bradman D.G      1928 Aus  52  29   12   8   9
 10.Jayawardene M    1997 Slk 125  29    9   7  13
 11.Border A.R       1979 Aus 156  27    9  14   4
 12.Sangakkara K.C   2000 Slk 103  27    4  12  11
 13.Sobers G.St.A    1954 Win  93  26    9   9   8
 14.Inzamam-ul-Haq   1992 Pak 120  25    5  10  10
 15.Chanderpaul S    1994 Win 136  24    2  12  10
 16.Mohammad Yousuf  1998 Pak  90  24    6   7  11
 17.Chappell G.S     1970 Aus  87  24    8   8   8
 18.Richards I.V.A   1974 Win 121  24   11   8   5
 19.Javed Miandad    1976 Pak 124  23    7   7   9
 20.Langer J.L       1993 Aus 105  23    7   9   7
 21.Hammond W.R      1927 Eng  85  22    9   6   7
 22.Cowdrey M.C      1954 Eng 114  22    6  10   6
 23.Azharuddin M     1985 Ind  99  22    7   7   8
 24.Sehwag V         2001 Ind  90  22    8   7   7
 25.Smith G.C        2002 Saf  91  22    7   6   9
 26.Boycott G        1964 Eng 108  22    5  10   7
 27.Boon D.C         1984 Aus 107  21    7   7   7
 28.Kirsten G        1993 Saf 101  21    5   6  10
 29.Harvey R.N       1948 Aus  79  21   11   5   5
 30.Barrington K.F   1955 Eng  82  20    6   6   8
 31.Gooch G.A        1975 Eng 118  20    4   7   9
 32.Waugh M.E        1991 Aus 128  20    7   9   4
 33.de Silva P.A     1984 Slk  93  20    5   7   8

Tendulkar is amazing. Almost dead equal split of his 51 centuries, indicating wonderful consistency, possibly the trait he is identified with almost always. However note the wide variations with many others. Kallis has a poor start but then plateaus for the next two thirds. Ponting is still more bizarre. A very average start and end and a wonderful middle one third, during which he averages a hundred every two and half Tests. Dravid is like Kallis. Lara follows a different pattern. Nothing great for two-thirds and then an explosive end. There is still no answer as to why he quit or was made to quit. The West Indian Board specializes in losing their best players. Gavaskar is the mirror image of Kallis/Dravid: great upto two-thirds and then a drop. Hayden is almost like Tendulkar. Bradman, a little like Gavaskar, or should it be the other way around. Jayawardene is like Lara. Phew! what a lot of variations within the top 10 players.

Of the rest, look at Sangakkara, how much he has done after a very poor start. Richards has scored nearly a half of his hundreds in the first third of his career. The only perfect split is Greg Chappel's: 8-8-8 and Boon's; 7-7-7.

The last table is a special one. I have split the hundreds by the % of innings score. A hundred which is greater than 50% is a very special effort. The most famous ones are by Charles Bannerman, Laxman, Slater, Gooch and Greenidge. At the other end I have hundreds which formed lower than 25% of the team score. These represent almost always huge innings and the century maker would normally have played a secondary role.

11. Hundreds by % of innings score

SNo.Batsman          Year Cty Mat 100s 50+% Oth -25%

 94.Hanif Mohammad   1952 Pak  55  12    5    7   0
 31.Gooch G.A        1975 Eng 118  20    5   14   1
 24.Sehwag V         2001 Ind  90  22    5   16   1
  9.Bradman D.G      1928 Aus  52  29    6   22   1
  6.Gavaskar S.M     1971 Ind 125  34    7   24   3
  5.Lara B.C         1990 Win 131  34    6   26   2
 37.Taylor M.A       1989 Aus 104  19    4   11   4
 26.Boycott G        1964 Eng 108  22    4   16   2
...
...
  1.Tendulkar S.R    1989 Ind 182  51    2   43   6
  2.Kallis J.H       1995 Saf 145  40    0   32   8
  3.Ponting R.T      1995 Aus 154  39    0   34   5
  4.Dravid R         1996 Ind 158  35    0   25  10
  7.Waugh S.R        1985 Aus 168  32    0   20  12
  8.Hayden M.L       1994 Aus 103  30    3   20   7
 10.Jayawardene M    1997 Slk 125  29    2   20   7

I have ordered this, somewhat loosely, on the number of hundreds which were greater than 50% of team score. Hanif Mohammed has five such efforts, out of 12, indicating his immense contributions to Pakistani cricket. Sehwag has five such efforts, mainly because of his appetite for big scores and scoring rate. A number of others in the top group, like Gooch, Lara, Gavaskar have played in weaker teams. Gavaskar leads this table with seven such efforts, unfortunately including the inconsequential 103. Bradman has six such efforts.

Look at the four modern greats like Kallis, Ponting, Dravid and Steve Waugh who do not have a single such effort. Also the number of below-25% efforts of Dravid indicating the batting strength surrounding him.

And finally a bonus. Summary tables of the double hundreds scored by batsmen. The qualification criteria is 5 or more double hundreds.

12. Summary tables of double hundreds

Batsman           Cty  200s 300s 400s 

Bradman D.G       Aus   12   2
Lara B.C          Win    9   1    1
Sangakkara K.C    Slk    8
Hammond W.R       Eng    7   1
Atapattu M.S      Slk    6
Sehwag V          Ind    6   2
Javed Miandad     Pak    6
Jayawardene M     Slk    6   1
Tendulkar S.R     Ind    6
Dravid R          Ind    5
Ponting R.T       Aus    5

Batsman           Cty Inns 200s  Freq

Bradman D.G       Aus   80  12    6.8
Hammond W.R       Eng  140   7   20.0
Sangakkara K.C    Slk  173   8   21.6
Lara B.C          Win  232   9   24.7
Sehwag V          Ind  156   6   26.0
Atapattu M.S      Slk  156   6   26.0
Javed Miandad     Pak  189   6   31.5
Jayawardene M     Slk  207   6   34.5
Tendulkar S.R     Ind  300   6   50.0
Ponting R.T       Aus  265   5   53.0
Dravid R          Ind  275   5   55.0

Batsman           Cty 200s Runs   Avge

Jayawardene M     Slk   6  1581  263.5
Sehwag V          Ind   6  1577  262.8
Lara B.C          Win   9  2339  259.9
Bradman D.G       Aus  12  3033  252.8
Hammond W.R       Eng   7  1702  243.1
Javed Miandad     Pak   6  1431  238.5
Sangakkara K.C    Slk   8  1871  233.9
Dravid R          Ind   5  1142  228.4
Ponting R.T       Aus   5  1121  224.2
Tendulkar S.R     Ind   6  1324  220.7
Atapattu M.S      Slk   6  1297  216.2

Bradman leads the table of 200s with 12 and has a mind-blowing frequency of 4.3 Tests per 200. Would Sangakkara have a chance of overhauling him ? Most probably not. He needs to play in about 50 Tests more even to equal Bradman. That is about 6 years of Test Cricket. Quite tough. However he is very likely to overtake Lara. Look at the average of the 200 scores of the modern batsmen, Jayawardene, Sehwag and Lara. All have scored big 200s and their average of 200s is around 260. Tendulkar's 220 is not surprising considering that his highest score is 248. Atapattu is the surprise presence in this elite group.

To download/view the document containing all the 11 complete tables please click/right-click here.

A few months back I had come out with an article on Test batsmen by bowling quality, in groups. This was one of the best received of all my articles since the analysis took Test batting into hitherto unchartered seas. Many new insights were drawn from the analysis. I think it is time I do a similar analysis for ODI batsmen also since the bowling quality varies considerably across teams and years. The average runs scored by batsmen in their careers is also quite high and an analysis like this will let us look at the batsmen with a new perspective.

This analysis has come out partly because a single number indicating the weighted average bowling quality faced by a batsman across the career hides many truths. This is based on the Arjun Hemnani's suggestion. This is a quasi-rating work based on the most important of parameters, viz., the Bowling quality.

I have summarized below all relevant facts related to this analysis. First let me emphasize that this is not a ODI innings Ratings analysis. There are many other relevant factors which would have to be considered in such an analysis. I have not done so in this analysis which is centred on Bowler quality. I would appreciate if the readers do not keep on repeating again and again that other relevant factors such as Pitch type, Innings status at entry, Result, Match importance, Bowler recent form, Innings target et al, have not been included. That would be counter-productive.

1. The Bowling quality index (BQI) is based on Career-to-date values. This is the most dependable and accurate of the bowling measures. There is no situation where the Ctd figure is not the appropriate one. Coupled with the fine-tuned handling of established bowlers described later, this works very well. This takes into account the way a bowler's career shaped up.

2. The BQI is based on the Bowling average. In Test matches the bowling strike rate has greater relevance. However in ODIs, both strike rate and bowling accuracy (RpO) have equal importance and the Bowling Average is a perfect representation of this. Very good averages of say, 25.0, can be reached by a combination of 60 and 0.41 or 50 and 0.5 or 40 and 0.62. All these, patently different, bowlers are considered similar in this analysis. Individual match circumstances might require bowlers with varying attacking and accuracy-related skills, but, in general the average takes care of all conditions.

3. The BQI is based on the actual bowlers who bowled in the particular innings. This is very important. If Imran Khan played as a batsman, to that extent, the bowling attack would be less strong.

4. The BQI is determined using the modified reciprocal method suggested by Arjun Hemnani which irons out the imbalance created by weak fifth bowlers.

5. I have taken care of top bowlers during their initial Initial figures for bowlers with career haul of 100+ wickets. Whatever be the Ctd figures for these qualifying bowlers, their Ctd bowling average will be fixed at their career bowling average levels. This takes care of both situations: Walsh capturing 10 wickets at 50+, nearly 20 more than his career average and Mendis, at one point capturing 25 wickets at 9.83. Of course once any bowler crosses 50 wickets, their Ctd figures will apply.

For the bowlers who have not captured 100 career wickets, their Ctd bowling averages below 50 wickets is pegged at a minimum of 40.0. Makes eminent sense.

6. The computed BQI values will be used only for innings of 10 overs or more. For shorter innings the minimum BQI value is pegged at a minimum of 30.0. This is to prevent situations like Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis bowling 6 overs between them. The BQI would be a very low number.

7. The BQI is reduced by 5% for Home games and increased by 5% for away games. Reader should remember that the lower the BQI, the more potent the attack is. 5% either way is ample and provides some compensation for batsmen playing away. In general this concept is fine and works well in most cases.

It is possible that the visiting team has the right bowlers and can exploit the "away" bowling conditions. However there is no denying that, in most cases, the home bowlers would have the advantage of familiarity with and knowledge of local conditions. Great examples are the recent whitewashes in England and India and the way West Indies are struggling in Bangladesh.

8. No period-based adjustment is done. Such adjustment is relevant only for determining team strength values. If the period was a great one for the bowlers, as the 1971-84 was, it was a tough one for the batsmen and this is taken care of by leaving the relatively lower BQI values as they are. It is obvious that the runs scored during 1971-1984 were more valuable than the runs scored in more batting-friendly conditions later.

Finally the bowling attacks are classified into 5 groups, as described below. The fifth group was necessary to separate the really weak bowling attacks.

There have been 6302 qualifying innings until the fifth ODI between India and England which was played on October 25. The underlying idea is that the middle group should have about a third and the other groups symmetrically lower. In view of the profusion of weak bowling attacks, the first and the last would not necessarily have similar % shares. There may be a subjective element in this part of the exercise but that cannot be avoided. Around 28% for the first two groups means that at any time there are 2-3 really good bowling attacks makes eminent sense. The other cut-offs follow logically. The group cut-off details are given below.

Group     B Q I   # of Inns   % 

  1    21.30-27.99:   709  11.25 %  Very good bowling attack. 
  2    28.00-30.99:  1070  16.98 %  Good bowling attack.      
  3    32.00-35.99:  2104  33.38 %  Average bowling attack.   
  4    36.00-39.99:  1203  19.09 %  Passable bowling attack.   
  5    40.00-57.98:  1216  19.30 %  Poor bowling attack.  

The best bowling attack ever, BQI of 21.32, was fielded by Pakistan against New Zealand. All 5 bowlers who shared the 30 overs between them, Akram, Younis, Akhtar, Saqlain and Razzaq had Ctd bowling averages of below 25.

Pakistan has a few bowling attacks around the 23 mark, as also West Indies of the 1980s and Australia of the 2000s.

The average BQI for this huge sample is 34.4 and the median is at 33.6. This indicates a fairly balanced distribution of values. The Standard Deviation is 5.87. I have explained the whole concept of determining the BQI with the following examples.

First is Match 1833 between Pakistan and New Zealand, played at Karachi during 2002. In the New Zealand innings, Wasim Akram (Ctd 456 @ 23.86) bowled 7.0 overs, Waqar Younis (Ctd 372 @ 23.54) bowled 6.0 overs, Abdul Razzaq (Ctd 136 @ 24.68 (but career 31.84!)) bowled 4.0 overs, Shoaib Akhtar (Ctd 99 @ 20.68) bowled 9.0 overs and Saqlain Mushtaq (Ctd 270 @ 20.90) bowled 4.0 overs. Through the reciprocal method, the the weighted BQI starts life at 22.44. This is multiplied by 0.95 (this being a home game for Pakistan). The final BQI value is 21.32 which places this attack as the best ever one. Any runs scored in this particular innings will get into the highest classification. Astle's 25 (out of 122) might not figure in anyone's list of the best ODI innings. However it was made against the best ever bowling attack which took the field.

The second is Match 132 between West Indies and Pakistan, played at Sydney. Holding (Ctd 41 @ 18.44, taken as career 21.37), Roberts (Ctd 55 @ 18.96), Marshall (14 @ 24.14, taken as career 26.96), Garner (Ctd 35 @ 25.31, taken as career 18.85) and Richards (Ctd 21 @ 37.57, taken as career 35.83) all bowled 10 overs each. The base BQI is 22.98. This is multiplied by 1.00 (this being a neutral ODI). The final BQI value is 22.98 which puts this attack into the top drawer. Any runs scored in this particular innings, say Imran's 62 will get into the top classification.

I have got into details here so as to give the readers a clear idea of the calculations. I have selected two of the best ever bowling combinations put on the field. I have also selected one in which all five bowlers had crossed 50 wickets and their Ctd values were impeccable and another attack in which four bowlers (three greats amongst them) had just started their careers. This will show that the great bowlers have always been given their due credit.

There is so much data available that even the organization of the article is getting into trouble. I can only present in the article a certain amount of data. The serious reader should download the complete files and read the same. I have given below what I would be presenting within the article.

1. Top 20 batsmen for group 1, the top one. Ordered by batting average.
2. Top 20 batsmen for group 2, the second best one. Ordered by batting average.
3. Top 20 batsmen for groups 1/2, the groups which matter. Ordered by batting average.
4. Top 20 batsmen for group 3, the middle and most-populated. Ordered by batting average.
5. Top 10 batsmen for groups 4. Ordered by batting average.
6. Top 10 batsmen for groups 5, the weakest one. Ordered by % of career runs scored.
7. For selected batsman, their group-wise distribution of runs scored and % of career.

For all the above, complete files are available for downloading/viewing.

Let us look at the tables. First the Group tables based on Batting average. The batsman should have scored a minimum of 750 for Group 1, 1000 for Group 2, 2000 for Group 3, 1000 for Group 4 and 1000 runs for Group 5 to be considered. I cannot use the same cut-offs across bowler groups since the population sizes vary considerably. For instance, taking 1000 as cut-off for the group 1 will let us have only 13 entries. It should also be noted that Runs scored should not be a criteria for ordering since that is a measure of longevity.

This analysis covers all matches upto ODI # 3210, the fifth ODI between India and England. While a few days have passed since the third ODI between Saf-Aus was played, it was too much of an effort to re-do all tables and article.

Batsman             Team BG CRuns  Inns Nos Runs   %     Avge

Richards I.V.A       Win  1  6721   19   3   870  12.9  54.38
Waugh S.R            Aus  1  7569   37  12  1330  17.6  53.20
Kirsten G            Saf  1  6798   30   7  1219  17.9  53.00
Pietersen K.P        Eng  1  3903   22   4   938  24.0  52.11
Ponting R.T          Aus  1 13675   34   3  1535  11.2  49.52
Bevan M.G            Aus  1  6912   25   7   891  12.9  49.50
Dhoni M.S            Ind  1  6497   23   6   799  12.3  47.00
Richardson R.B       Win  1  6248   33   7  1156  18.5  44.46
Imran Khan           Pak  1  3709   26   6   881  23.8  44.05
Rhodes J.N           Saf  1  5935   35  10  1094  18.4  43.76
Haynes D.L           Win  1  8648   28   4  1043  12.1  43.46
Cronje W.J           Saf  1  5565   25   5   868  15.6  43.40
Dravid R             Ind  1 10889   52   5  1992  18.3  42.38
Atapattu M.S         Slk  1  8529   50   5  1837  21.5  40.82
Ganguly S.C          Ind  1 11363   41   4  1502  13.2  40.59
Border A.R           Aus  1  6524   33   6  1053  16.1  39.00
McMillan C.D         Nzl  1  4707   39   4  1271  27.0  36.31
de Silva P.A         Slk  1  9284   52   6  1661  17.9  36.11
Hooper C.L           Win  1  5761   31   7   846  14.7  35.25
Tendulkar S.R        Ind  1 18111   71   7  2250  12.4  35.16

Richards suffers a little bit since the best bowling attacks during his time were from his part of the woods. He still has done very well and averaged 54.38 against the top group. The runs are low but that is an indication of the number of matches played. However it should be seen that he has scored 12.9% of his runs against the top group. Steve Waugh and Gary Kirsten have averaged over 50 and have also scored more than a sixth of their career runs against the top group. It helped that the other respective bowling attacks were very good.

Pietersen is a revelation. Nearly a quarter of his runs have been against the top attacks at an average of 52.11. This single fact is enough ammunition to show the futility of using Batting average as an omnipotent analysis factor. Pietersen has a batting average barely reaching 50 but his runs seem to have a much higher value. Ponting has a lower % but a near-50 average.

Imran Khan's 23.8% of his runs against the top group is nearly as much as that of Pietersen and that too at an average of 44.1. This deserves a special mention especially as he was not the leading batsman of Pakistan.

Dhoni has not scored many runs but he has scored 12.3% of his runs at a high average of 47 against the top bowlers. He is no doubt helped by a slew of not outs. Dravid clocks in with a very respectable 18.3% and average of 42.38. Ganguly has a similar average but lower %. The surprise is that Tendulkar has just about crossed the datum % of 11.25% but a reasonably low average of 35.16. This is possibly because of his opening the batting. However it must be remembered that Ganguly was also in a similar position.

Batsman             Team BG CRuns  Inns Nos Runs   %     Avge

Symonds A            Aus  2  5088   28   5  1188  23.3  51.65
Sangakkara K.C       Slk  2  9540   51  11  2001  21.0  50.02
Dhoni M.S            Ind  2  6497   35  10  1235  19.0  49.40
Bevan M.G            Aus  2  6912   38  12  1270  18.4  48.85
Hayden M.L           Aus  2  6133   33   4  1358  22.1  46.83
Tendulkar S.R        Ind  2 18111   91   5  3961  21.9  46.06
Sarwan R.R           Win  2  5644   33   4  1317  23.3  45.41
Marsh G.R            Aus  2  4357   31   3  1233  28.3  44.04
Kallis J.H           Saf  2 11318   54  11  1831  16.2  42.58
Chanderpaul S        Win  2  8778   46   5  1689  19.2  41.20
Jones D.M            Aus  2  6068   38   5  1348  22.2  40.85
Trescothick M.E      Eng  2  4335   28   2  1053  24.3  40.50
Ponting R.T          Aus  2 13675   65   5  2421  17.7  40.35
Lamb A.J             Eng  2  4010   33   4  1153  28.8  39.76
Haynes D.L           Win  2  8648   48   5  1701  19.7  39.56
Gayle C.H            Win  2  8087   49   3  1769  21.9  38.46
Inzamam-ul-Haq       Pak  2 11739   62   5  2178  18.6  38.21
Lara B.C             Win  2 10405   65   3  2351  22.6  37.92
Javed Miandad        Pak  2  7381   34   5  1095  14.8  37.76
Hooper C.L           Win  2  5761   47   9  1431  24.8  37.66

Symonds has scored 23.3% of his runs at a very high average, a late-order batting benefit, of 51.65. Sangakkara has done very well, scoring over 2000 runs, 21.0% of his runs, at a very creditable 50+ average. Dhoni also has a near-50 average, slightly below his career average. as does Bevan. Tendulkar has asserted his class against this strong bowling group, scoring nearly 4000 runs, 21.9% of his career runs at an average of 46.83, better than his career average.

Batsman             Team BG CRuns  Inns Nos Runs   %     Avge

Bevan M.G            Aus 1/2  6912   63  19  2161  31.3  49.11
Dhoni M.S            Ind 1/2  6497   58  16  2034  31.3  48.43
Ponting R.T          Aus 1/2 13675   99   8  3956  28.9  43.47
Kirsten G            Saf 1/2  6798   62   7  2286  33.6  41.56
Tendulkar S.R        Ind 1/2 18111  162  12  6211  34.3  41.41
Haynes D.L           Win 1/2  8648   76   9  2744  31.7  40.96
Rhodes J.N           Saf 1/2  5935   79  17  2401  40.5  38.73
Sangakkara K.C       Slk 1/2  9540   92  13  3024  31.7  38.28
Kallis J.H           Saf 1/2 11318   82  13  2592  22.9  37.57
Chanderpaul S        Win 1/2  8778   82   7  2790  31.8  37.20
Hooper C.L           Win 1/2  5761   78  16  2277  39.5  36.73
Dravid R             Ind 1/2 10889  135  15  4283  39.3  35.69
Lara B.C             Win 1/2 10405  114   8  3762  36.2  35.49
Atapattu M.S         Slk 1/2  8529   94   9  3016  35.4  35.48
Richardson R.B       Win 1/2  6248   78  11  2324  37.2  34.69
Gilchrist A.C        Aus 1/2  9619   92   5  3009  31.3  34.59
Fleming S.P          Nzl 1/2  8037  113  12  3459  43.0  34.25
Waugh S.R            Aus 1/2  7569  100  18  2803  37.0  34.18
Inzamam-ul-Haq       Pak 1/2 11739  103   9  3201  27.3  34.05
de Silva P.A         Slk 1/2  9284  111  12  3371  36.3  34.05

Now for a special table, the elite group table. In this I have considered the top two bowling groups and selected players who have crossed 2000 runs against the two groups together. This table is ordered by the batting average. As such it represents a table of quality batsmen against quality bowlers.

Bevan and Dhoni are in the top two positions. But they have been helped by a high number of not outs. Hence we should take Ponting as the real top batsman. He has scored near;y 4000 runs, which is 29% of his career runs at an average of 43.47. Truly outstanding batting. Gary Kirsten has averaged 41.56 and scored nearly a third of his career runs against this double group. Tendulkar makes up for his group 1 under-performance and clocks in with a creditable 41.41, while scoring over 6000 runs and just above a third of his career runs. This indicates that both Ponting and Tendulkar have done very creditably against top quality bowling. Haynes is the only other batsman to cross 40. Readers may wonder where Richards, who topped Group 1 is. The fact is that he does not meet the higher cut-off point of 2000 runs for Groups 1 & 2 combined.

Batsman             Team BG CRuns  Inns Nos Runs   %     Avge

Hussey M.E.K         Aus  3  4817   58  21  2183  45.3  59.00
Richards I.V.A       Win  3  6721   63  15  2720  40.5  56.67
Bevan M.G            Aus  3  6912   80  26  2979  43.1  55.17
Clarke M.J           Aus  3  6596   74  16  2926  44.4  50.45
Kallis J.H           Saf  3 11318  132  24  5243  46.3  48.55
Tendulkar S.R        Ind  3 18111  149  14  6292  34.7  46.61
Mohammad Yousuf      Pak  3  9720   94  16  3623  37.3  46.45
Dhoni M.S            Ind  3  6497   70  15  2525  38.9  45.91
Gayle C.H            Win  3  8087   67   3  2845  35.2  44.45
Kirsten G            Saf  3  6798   79   7  3031  44.6  42.10
Lara B.C             Win  3 10405   92  13  3308  31.8  41.87
Symonds A            Aus  3  5088   74  17  2358  46.3  41.37
Javed Miandad        Pak  3  7381   71  11  2467  33.4  41.12
Saeed Anwar          Pak  3  8824   85   6  3173  36.0  40.16
Chanderpaul S        Win  3  8778   86  13  2932  33.4  40.16
Shoaib Malik         Pak  3  5204   68  10  2315  44.5  39.91
Dilshan T.M          Slk  3  5616   62   9  2115  37.7  39.91
Gibbs H.H            Saf  3  8094   96   7  3471  42.9  39.00
Boon D.C             Aus  3  5964   62   5  2218  37.2  38.91
Hayden M.L           Aus  3  6133   55   3  2016  32.9  38.77

Hussey and Bevan, no doubt aided by a high number of not outs, are in the top three positions in this staple group. Richards averages 55+. Michael Clarke is the only other batsmen with a 50+ average. Note the very high % of career runs for all these players. Tendulkar's group 3 performance is almost identical to his groups 1/2 performances, at a higher average.

Batsman             Team BG CRuns  Inns Nos Runs   %     Avge

Dhoni M.S            Ind  4  6497   31  12  1382  21.3  72.74
de Villiers A.B      Saf  4  4523   29   6  1453  32.1  63.17
Ganguly S.C          Ind  4 11363   42   7  2138  18.8  61.09
Astle N.J            Nzl  4  7090   29   3  1541  21.7  59.27
Javed Miandad        Pak  4  7381   31   7  1267  17.2  52.79
Dravid R             Ind  4 10889   40   6  1791  16.4  52.68
Shakib Al Hasan      Bng  4  3340   30   6  1235  37.0  51.46
Clarke M.J           Aus  4  6596   49  12  1882  28.5  50.86
Hayden M.L           Aus  4  6133   33   4  1455  23.7  50.17
Tendulkar S.R        Ind  4 18111   68   9  2907  16.1  49.27
Lara B.C             Win  4 10405   39   6  1586  15.2  48.06
Chanderpaul S        Win  4  8778   40   7  1516  17.3  45.94
Kallis J.H           Saf  4 11318   61  10  2339  20.7  45.86
Mohammad Yousuf      Pak  4  9720   53  11  1921  19.8  45.74
Waugh M.E            Aus  4  8500   41   3  1727  20.3  45.45
Cronje W.J           Saf  4  5565   29   5  1076  19.3  44.83
Tharanga W.U         Slk  4  4064   36   2  1516  37.3  44.59
Richardson R.B       Win  4  6248   31   5  1146  18.3  44.08
Gambhir G            Ind  4  4286   26   3  1010  23.6  43.91
Ponting R.T          Aus  4 13675   74   6  2976  21.8  43.76

Now we get into the weaker bowling groups. Note the number of 50+ averages. Many modern batsmen have feasted on these below-average bowling attacks.

Batsman             Team BG CRuns  Inns Nos Runs   %     Avge

Otieno K.O           Ken  5  2016   33   1  1094  54.3  34.19
Shahriar Nafees      Bng  5  2162   29   4  1129  52.2  45.16
Tikolo S.O           Ken  5  3421   60   8  1722  50.3  33.12
Odoyo T.M            Ken  5  2418   50   9  1133  46.9  27.63
Zaheer Abbas         Pak  5  2572   22   2  1098  42.7  54.90
Tamim Iqbal          Bng  5  3111   43   1  1300  41.8  30.95
Shakib Al Hasan      Bng  5  3340   46   9  1362  40.8  36.81
Wright J.G           Nzl  5  3891   47   0  1536  39.5  32.68
Jones A.H            Nzl  5  2784   27   2  1085  39.0  43.40
Mohammad Ashraful    Bng  5  3397   58   7  1306  38.4  25.61
Srikkanth K          Ind  5  4091   40   1  1368  33.4  35.08
Taylor B.R.M         Zim  5  3985   28   4  1316  33.0  54.83
Crowe M.D            Nzl  5  4704   42   5  1528  32.5  41.30
Sidhu N.S            Ind  5  4413   32   3  1234  28.0  42.55
Ijaz Ahmed           Pak  5  6564   45  13  1678  25.6  52.44
Jones D.M            Aus  5  6068   28  10  1500  24.7  83.33
...
Dravid R             Ind  5 10889   44  11  1549  14.2  46.94
Jayasuriya S.T       Slk  5 13430   51   3  1799  13.4  37.48
Atapattu M.S         Slk  5  8529   29   7  1135  13.3  51.59
de Silva P.A         Slk  5  9284   23   3  1104  11.9  55.20
Kallis J.H           Saf  5 11318   27   6  1145  10.1  54.52

The last group is the buffet-lunch group. I have ordered this in a different sequence, the % of career runs. This figure is essential to see how much the batsmen got against the really weak bowling attacks.

As could be expected the top of the table is dominated by players from weaker countries who almost always play against weaker attacks. The top three players have got more than 50% of their runs against very weak attacks. The real surprise is Zaheer Abbas, whose high batting average is now on shaky ground, he having scored 42% of his runs against the lowest group. Same with Srikkanth, whose bubble is blown a little, with over a third of his runs against the buffet-lunch bowlers. And Sidhu and Martin Crowe and Ijaz and Dean Jones.

At the other end, raise your hat for Dravid who has scored only 14% of his runs in this group. The three Sri Lankan stalwarts have got sub-14%. But let us all raise the hat and toast Kallis whose % here is the lowest amongst all established batsmen, a mere 10%. This should put to bed all theories on his scoring against minnows.

In terms of averages, Dean Jones has really feasted with an average of 80+. The average table is led by three Australians of the previous generation. Ganguly has not done his averages any damage by clocking in 60+ here. Tendulkar, with an average of 47 does not seem to have benefited much against these weaker bowling attacks. Lara does not even appear in the top-20 of the averages table.

Now for the group-wise runs and % of career runs for selected 25+ batsmen. The complete file is available for downloading.

Batsman    Team CRuns G1-Runs-%  G2-Runs-%  G3-Runs-%  G4-Runs-%  G5-Runs-%

Tendulkar   Ind 18111 2250(12.4) 3961(21.9) 6292(34.7) 2907(16.1) 2701(14.9)***
Ponting     Aus 13675 1535(11.2) 2421(17.7) 4706(34.4) 2976(21.8) 2036(14.9)
Jayasuriya  Slk 13430 1759(13.1) 1944(14.5) 4493(33.5) 3435(25.6) 1799(13.4)
Inzamam     Pak 11739 1023( 8.7) 2178(18.6) 4211(35.9) 2265(19.3) 2062(17.6)
Ganguly     Ind 11363 1502(13.2) 1875(16.5) 3289(28.9) 2138(18.8) 2559(22.5)
Kallis      Saf 11318  761( 6.7) 1831(16.2) 5243(46.3) 2339(20.7) 1145(10.1)
Dravid      Ind 10889 1992(18.3) 2291(21.0) 3266(30.0) 1791(16.4) 1549(14.2)
Lara        Win 10405 1411(13.6) 2351(22.6) 3308(31.8) 1586(15.2) 1750(16.8)
Jayawardene Slk  9913 1307(13.2) 1535(15.5) 3084(31.1) 2456(24.8) 1531(15.4)
Mohd Yousuf Pak  9720  818( 8.4) 1608(16.5) 3623(37.3) 1921(19.8) 1751(18.0)
Gilchrist   Aus  9619 1289(13.4) 1720(17.9) 3837(39.9) 1375(14.3) 1398(14.5)
Sangakkara  Slk  9540 1023(10.7) 2001(21.0) 2950(30.9) 2141(22.4) 1425(14.9)
Azharuddin  Ind  9378  928( 9.9) 1818(19.4) 3462(36.9) 1573(16.8) 1597(17.0)
de Silva    Slk  9284 1661(17.9) 1710(18.4) 2858(30.8) 1951(21.0) 1104(11.9)
Saeed Anwar Pak  8824  512( 5.8) 1231(14.0) 3567(40.4) 1939(22.0) 1574(17.8)
Waugh M.E   Aus  8500  891(10.5)  876(10.3) 3555(41.8) 1727(20.3) 1451(17.1)
Sehwag      Ind  7760  876(11.3) 1393(18.0) 3209(41.4) 1151(14.8) 1131(14.6)
Waugh S.R   Aus  7569 1330(17.6) 1473(19.5) 2761(36.5) 1257(16.6)  748( 9.9)
J Miandad   Pak  7381  840(11.4) 1095(14.8) 2467(33.4) 1267(17.2) 1712(23.2)
Bevan       Aus  6912  891(12.9) 1270(18.4) 2979(43.1)  894(12.9)  880(12.7)
Flower A    Zim  6786  565( 8.3) 1183(17.4) 2086(30.7) 1577(23.2) 1374(20.2)
Richards    Win  6721  870(12.9)  861(12.8) 2720(40.5) 1334(19.8)  936(13.9)
Dhoni       Ind  6497  799(12.3) 1235(19.0) 2525(38.9) 1382(21.3)  556( 8.6)
Hayden      Aus  6133  588( 9.6) 1358(22.1) 2016(32.9) 1455(23.7)  715(11.7)
Hussey      Aus  4817  215( 4.5)  947(19.7) 2183(45.3) 1129(23.4)  343( 7.1)
Crowe M.D   Nzl  4704  219( 4.7)  775(16.5) 1554(33.0)  628(13.4) 1528(32.5)
Gooch G.A   Eng  4290  502(11.7)  827(19.3) 1796(41.9)  727(16.9)  438(10.2)
Shakb AlHsn Bng  3340  206( 6.2)  115( 3.4)  422(12.6) 1235(37.0) 1362(40.8)

Tendulkar seems to have mirrored the overall % pattern, as has Ponting. Note Inzamam's figures. Possibly because the best bowling attack in the world was his team's, he has a lop-sided bottom-heavy distribution. Kallis has scored lower % both against the best and worst attacks and he has a centre-heavy distribution. Dravid has scored fair bit against top attacks while Lara's follows Tendulkar's pattern. Surprisingly, as has Richards. Intriguingly, Hussey's figures against top bowling attacks has been quite below-average. Flower and Shakib-Al-Hasan have low numbers against top attacks since they, Shakib especially, play quite often against weak sides.

This is not an analysis from which the analyst could make finite conclusions. The readers should read and understand the methodology and tables and then come with their views. To view/down-load the complete Team Strength related tables, please click on links given below.

Group tables - by Batting average: please click/right-click here.
Group tables - by Runs scored: please click/right-click here.
Batsman table - by Group (for all 2000+ batsmen): please click/right-click here.
BQI table - ordered by Group/BQI (for all 6302 innings): please click/right-click here.
Batsman-Bqi average across career: as required by Arjun (for all 2000+ batsmen): please click/right-click here. These are in fact the Test tables.
This time the ODI tables. Batsman-Bqi average across career: as required by Arjun/Mahendran (for all 2500+ batsmen): please click/right-click here.