tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53196247939096720422024-03-18T20:00:24.542+01:00DW on SportIan Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.comBlogger331125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-11933670669014052182021-03-01T15:04:00.001+01:002021-03-01T15:04:45.608+01:00The Changing Approach of Batsmen to the Nineties<p>Cricket always puts a lot of emphasis on milestone achievements and none more so than scoring a century. The television graphics always show the number of hundreds that a batsman has scored, there is always discussion about conversion rates of fifties to hundreds and it is always celebrated by a batsman when he reaches that milestone. Last week, I ran a poll on Twitter that asked which of two batsman - both with the same number of runs and the same average, but one with 43 100s and the other with 0 100s - would be perceived as the better batsman.</p><p><br /></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqVThFTq1mmxMpa8Z5OKE2IxNgF3IFpIETCksxrZCRkeLxpiN9UdJhT7JrKffZ2zKxSrVMkIoz5N1sCkI3SurYKx87QFz9ARsD3d1olNYWoZjKAjkaNc-G_GOlSe_apxW0y7z6FMbAJKE/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="416" data-original-width="306" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqVThFTq1mmxMpa8Z5OKE2IxNgF3IFpIETCksxrZCRkeLxpiN9UdJhT7JrKffZ2zKxSrVMkIoz5N1sCkI3SurYKx87QFz9ARsD3d1olNYWoZjKAjkaNc-G_GOlSe_apxW0y7z6FMbAJKE/" width="177" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The results came out in favour of the player with more centuries as one might have expected. I will admit that I expected it to be even more in favour of player 2, but various alternative theories were mentioned that did explain why some people voted for the former. In reality, the two batsman were created by simply taking Virat Kohli's career innings, but for player 1, every century was replaced with him being dismissed on 99 and for player 2, he was dismissed on 100 (and a few extra runs were scattered around for player 1 to ensure the averages were the same). All that player 2 achieved was to scored one extra run in 43 innings, but he is perceived as comfortably the better player.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">This brings us to the question of whether the considerable emphasis on the century milestone changes how batsmen approach batting when they are closing on that milestone. There is always mention among cricket traders of the idea of a century slowdown, where a player plays more risk averse in the nineties to give himself a better chance of reaching his century, potentially to the detriment of the team. It would be entirely understandable why players might react this way - as long as there is emphasis on the milestones when it comes to player evaluation and team selection, it is beneficial for an individual player to maximise their chances of reaching that milestone.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">As a very simple first step in looking at what happens when players are close to their century, we can look at their average and strike rate when they are on a score of 80-89, 90-99 and 100-109 to try and identify any obvious changes. In this article, we will exclusively focus on 50 over cricket.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjN8Y0ujQsc5QG8TxLKKl4rpX0tvm-HxezqMeo8IocMNy62hSlKvRSUt9fJeVAso2RWF0d-04fXy2o91OSeqgpTLmqh3VGEBQxSqt2gCiOilCzTce5uC3icRFwi4VMO4uOUZcV_MAi9E-s/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="83" data-original-width="420" height="63" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjN8Y0ujQsc5QG8TxLKKl4rpX0tvm-HxezqMeo8IocMNy62hSlKvRSUt9fJeVAso2RWF0d-04fXy2o91OSeqgpTLmqh3VGEBQxSqt2gCiOilCzTce5uC3icRFwi4VMO4uOUZcV_MAi9E-s/" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Across all 50 over matches in the past five years, we can see that both the average and the strike rate for batsmen drops when they move into the nineties. Interestingly, this might suggest that players both look to play slightly more conservatively, but that change could also lead to an increased chance of being dismissed. Once they reach their hundred, the average does increase a touch, but the most striking difference is the change in strike rate. It would appear that almost immediately after reaching their century, players really go on the attack.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">So, on the whole, it would appear that there is a bit of an effect of the approaching milestone. The next thing to look at is how that varies across teams - do players from certain countries put different emphasis on milestones? </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhO1XwN0iWoPPJ14wI6oFMLTaDyiKJZZOGFRNvQL-HPNzsG-ipmnhRJuclHkw0ELm-14QOZz7ih9sNUgoSmr1AF_fuaA11awmA5-3lJFmlbyKTTSyLymtSpvWTHnuqGHl4Fp0G6D4nvx8Y/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img data-original-height="382" data-original-width="748" height="326" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhO1XwN0iWoPPJ14wI6oFMLTaDyiKJZZOGFRNvQL-HPNzsG-ipmnhRJuclHkw0ELm-14QOZz7ih9sNUgoSmr1AF_fuaA11awmA5-3lJFmlbyKTTSyLymtSpvWTHnuqGHl4Fp0G6D4nvx8Y/w640-h326/image.png" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Focusing on countries at this stage, we can see a few interesting things in this table. The majority of countries see a slowdown when players move into the 90s, although the drop for the West Indies in particular is notable. England, South Africa, New Zealand and Afghanistan are the countries that see a continued increase in strike rate as players move into the 90s and they also all see a significant increase in the average during that period.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The West Indies demonstrate the unfortunate pairing of a significant slowdown in scoring as players go into the 90s, combined with a much reduced average. Either West Indian players have a big problem with nerves as they approach their century or they change their style of play in a way that leads to an increase in the likelihood of being dismissed. India also see a reasonable drop as players close on their century, but their players are far less likely to be dismissed in this period.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Looking at what happens after the players reach their hundred is also interesting. Almost across the board, we see a fall in average after reaching the century - whether this is due to greater risk taking or whether players lose concentration after reaching the milestone can be debated - however batsmen from different countries attack differently. We can see that England, India, West Indies and South Africa batsmen really accelerate after reaching their milestone, although with varying rates of success. English batsman really look to attack, but we can see that the average falls dramatically, suggesting that they really take risks to up the run rate potentially to their own personal detriment. Conversely, we can see that there is no obvious rapid increase in scoring from Australian, Pakistan and Sri Lankan batsmen, who appear to revert to their scoring rates from the 80s, although that doesn't always appear to reduce the chance of being dismissed compared to the more attacking approach of other countries.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">So, can we look at some of the individual players to try and spot players that really slow down approaching their century or players that continue to attack?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiz2rDscv2mujM_Tb0UoSHVIqUK9hMhZVEYuXFl53IDECpvMe43Oc_3lIK8cT64qvnE7bCbyQwxJ43MMAJE8S9BSXlXDsVAh8xn8RfF5JU4z_RvKPIZkVRky2ysLMBYJeDPxUFjy8j42Y0/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img data-original-height="356" data-original-width="520" height="438" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiz2rDscv2mujM_Tb0UoSHVIqUK9hMhZVEYuXFl53IDECpvMe43Oc_3lIK8cT64qvnE7bCbyQwxJ43MMAJE8S9BSXlXDsVAh8xn8RfF5JU4z_RvKPIZkVRky2ysLMBYJeDPxUFjy8j42Y0/w640-h438/image.png" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div>These are a selection of the players with the biggest increase in their strike rate between the 80s and the 90s. Top of the list is AB de Villiers, whose strike rate approaching his century is quite ridiculous, although that applies to his strike rate at all stages around the milestone. Having noted before that English batsmen do not appear to generally show a slowdown around the milestone, it is no surprise to see Malan, Morgan and Stokes all appearing close to the top of this list. England have had great success in ODI cricket over the past five years and maybe some of that is down to players being confident of their place in the team, so not feeling the need to play for personal milestones?<br /><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDWS3ELF7j_gruEkB4sGNHfsCIVvUwDnO75nehAwACYT5HskquCVqPvI5m5iRgj4l4Xk0LPT5EeWXqUkrvMKfqDAaCfcRRW9EFsEsJM1tpQVE_ngZr-6OJRe7oLqXALclmZlQVhnsZD6A/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img data-original-height="382" data-original-width="521" height="470" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDWS3ELF7j_gruEkB4sGNHfsCIVvUwDnO75nehAwACYT5HskquCVqPvI5m5iRgj4l4Xk0LPT5EeWXqUkrvMKfqDAaCfcRRW9EFsEsJM1tpQVE_ngZr-6OJRe7oLqXALclmZlQVhnsZD6A/w640-h470/image.png" width="640" /></a></div><br />At the other end of the scale, we can see the players that show a big century slowdown. It is also noticeable how many of these batsmen return to a rapid scoring rate once they reach their hundred, suggesting the slowdown is a fairly deliberate decision to attempt to reach the milestone. For example, Rohit Sharma, one of the very best limited overs batsmen, scores at 133.5 during the 80s, before slowing right down to 92.9 during the 90s. Once he reaches his century, he immediately returns to scoring at 131.5, almost exactly the rate he was scored at in the 80s.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Ultimately, this slowdown in the 90s might not have too much of an impact in the bigger picture. Taking Rohit Sharma again as the example, the change in SR means that he is expected to spend around 10.8 balls to score the 10 runs to take him from 90 to 100 rather than 7.5 if he had continued at the same rate. Whether the difference of those roughly 3 balls actually makes an impact in the majority of ODIs can be debated - clearly in the tightest of matches, those balls may make the difference, but I'd estimate that the majority of ODIs do not come down to that sort of margin. However, it does give an interesting insight into potentially different views on milestones between different batsmen.</div></div></div><p></p>Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-54702999073791306822021-02-17T14:38:00.004+01:002021-02-17T14:55:07.379+01:00Using Machine Learning to Identify T20 Opener Styles<p>There is little doubt that getting off to a good start in T20 cricket, as in any format, is crucial to being a successful team. Teams often look to get their best batsmen opening to ensure that they face as many balls as possible in the shortened format. However, history will show us that there are several different types of successful T20 opener - Virat Kohli and David Warner play a very different style of innings than Sunil Narine, but given the right balance around them, there is little doubt that all three of those players are very effective opening batsmen.</p><p><br /></p><p>I wanted to look at finding a way to identify these different styles of opening batsmen using a simple machine learning technique. The important thing here is that I am looking to identify the styles of opening batsmen, not necessarily the quality of the batsman. Whilst that may come through within some of the styles, that is not the direct purpose of this. A certain style of opener may work well in certain teams based on their particular balance of other players whereas another team may be looking for something different. If you have a team of big hitters, an opener that plays as more of an accumulator might be what you are looking for to provide the stability for those other hitters. If you have accumulators in the middle order, you might want a more aggressive opener.</p><p><br /></p><p>To achieve this, we will use K-means clustering. I will not go into the details here, but at a basic level, this simply looks to find groups in the data. For the data used, I took every player that had opened the batting in at least 10 innings in a decent standard T20 league (IPL, Big Bash, T20 Blast, PSL, CPL, BPL, Super Smash and internationals) since the start of 2018. For players that have batted in multiple positions, I only took their stats for those matches where they opened. This gave us a dataset made up of 128 batsmen. So, let's take a look at what we got from the algorithm.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQKGDFw_WBNkaczwX_8A51UlPYdq2Jb3BlqttnDKOVMyA0-Td0u-837G_mAU3rxH49-BTl4Hwu2Ru_I_erH6w7GXUYvvknSZEFSNl6HgVFOlbAjYdCvSMBhAc2asX1VsGYUK0M8eyNs7M/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="962" data-original-width="1918" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQKGDFw_WBNkaczwX_8A51UlPYdq2Jb3BlqttnDKOVMyA0-Td0u-837G_mAU3rxH49-BTl4Hwu2Ru_I_erH6w7GXUYvvknSZEFSNl6HgVFOlbAjYdCvSMBhAc2asX1VsGYUK0M8eyNs7M/s16000/image.png" /></a></div><p><br /></p>Each cluster is represented by a different colour, the shapes mark the boundaries of each cluster and each cluster has a central point that represents it. We can see that we have six different clusters, although there is some overlap between three of the clusters. Hopefully we can see some similarities between the styles of the players in each cluster.<p></p><p><br /></p><p><b><u>Cluster 1 (The Power Hitters)</u></b></p><p><b><u><br /></u></b></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; font-weight: bold; text-align: center; text-decoration-line: underline;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUjSz8vz0rzxfV9CsVnFiPlIRN1-tkia563xNofxL8a6-Xev9CdO4U6RhRVx_wzyockD6xcIqhXcyrnGDe_KlswupdBodWep6ySn14NedOFpXqJC6WDQgkMhtY-H1SZv3GDpMwZOnYEuY/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="49" data-original-width="609" height="26" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUjSz8vz0rzxfV9CsVnFiPlIRN1-tkia563xNofxL8a6-Xev9CdO4U6RhRVx_wzyockD6xcIqhXcyrnGDe_KlswupdBodWep6ySn14NedOFpXqJC6WDQgkMhtY-H1SZv3GDpMwZOnYEuY/" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; font-weight: bold; text-align: center; text-decoration-line: underline;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b>Players:</b> Sunil Narine, Ed Pollock, Rahkeem Cornwell, Moeen Ali and Finn Allen</div><br />The first cluster represents the pure immediate power hitters. There are only 5 players in this cluster, but the most identifying feature is their incredible strike rate right from the very start of their innings. Their innings do not necessarily tend to be the longest, but they are not going to waste any balls, they have the power and the freedom to find the boundary regularly and they can get your team off to a blistering start, although you may also lose early wickets.<p></p><p><br /></p><p><b><u>Cluster 2 (Powerplay Specialists)</u></b></p><p><b><u><br /></u></b></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; font-weight: bold; text-align: center; text-decoration-line: underline;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuZv0sQGv4qT-prL9quSROb8p_SSpU41Qnval34cK33hYawx3LSu-tRUJh1HGm80q_M4UdtTtm3e8QJFVqo7PRKyxpwSNpqUa4em7feuH2mW5l_BKVq-BUxgRgeX_nGyLE3l0SFNly5qg/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="49" data-original-width="529" height="30" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuZv0sQGv4qT-prL9quSROb8p_SSpU41Qnval34cK33hYawx3LSu-tRUJh1HGm80q_M4UdtTtm3e8QJFVqo7PRKyxpwSNpqUa4em7feuH2mW5l_BKVq-BUxgRgeX_nGyLE3l0SFNly5qg/" width="320" /></a></div><br /></div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b>Players: </b>Jason Roy, Parthiv Patel, James Vince, Usman Khawaja, Suryakumar Yadav, Liton Das, Joe Clarke, Adam Rossington, Steven Davies, Neil Broom, Neil Dexter, George Worker, Mark Cosgrove, Afif Hossain, Ken McClure, David Lloyd, Junaid Siddique, Tim Seifert, Johnson Charles, Sam Heazlett and Mehidy Hasan</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The obvious feature of the second cluster is their struggles outside of the powerplay overs. They consist of players that are relatively capable of picking the gaps during the powerplay as shown by a reasonably good fours percentage and a solid strike rate during this period, but lack the power to really push on once the fielding restrictions are relaxed. Having these players in your team is not a major problem, but you do run the risk of a real slowdown once the powerplay is over.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u>Cluster 3 (Attacking Openers)</u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u><br /></u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; font-weight: bold; text-align: center; text-decoration-line: underline;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzZZc13q5mrJ1tQlQpksakq28plLSRJTDu1r1ToObQUWRUTbnayereYes4BXxhokd-PkWg15MN0bWvSEA6Ql9jpbsSgKd9eDD0xVllHuhh99gxJMRAs2Yydt8GQJ4UOpIHyMwrIlmKhQU/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="49" data-original-width="551" height="28" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzZZc13q5mrJ1tQlQpksakq28plLSRJTDu1r1ToObQUWRUTbnayereYes4BXxhokd-PkWg15MN0bWvSEA6Ql9jpbsSgKd9eDD0xVllHuhh99gxJMRAs2Yydt8GQJ4UOpIHyMwrIlmKhQU/" width="320" /></a></div><br /><b>Players: </b>Jos Buttler, Aaron Finch, Colin Munro, Alex Hales, Phil Salt, Ben Stokes, Tom Banton, Mayank Agarwal, Luke Ronchi, Mohammad Shahzad, Chad Bowes, Graham Clark, Adam Wheater, Anton Devcich, Adam Lyth, Josh Inglis, Richard Levi, Johann Myburgh, Paul Sterling, Zak Crawley, Wriddhiman Saha, Hamish Rutherford, Ben Duckett, Rilee Rossouw, Miles Hammond, Aneurin Donald and Max Bryant</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">This is a cluster of attacking openers that are able to sustain that approach. They are certainly not quite as outwardly aggressive as the power hitters, but they are able to start attacking early in their innings and sustain that outside the powerplay. It is no surprise to see plenty of players in this group that would be considered as very good T20 openers that are capable of big scores. They may not necessarily have the range of shots to crank up the strike rate to insane levels, but they are very capable of starting well and continuing to score quickly once the fielding restrictions are relaxed.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u>Cluster 4 (Poor Openers)</u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u><br /></u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; font-weight: bold; text-align: center; text-decoration-line: underline;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4-cqYT8QRLEbnl-ybWVQ8I1CxSKGmTJTxsGpo7jItIh4hr8vYmV5sh4fUwA1HZ4V3ewF002oHXuXtaFVHTjHB8sRRuHD-fmmsBFlKSoNoj_p-6VzXh4yFGX4uXuIBxxWkyls0BFQuu4w/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="49" data-original-width="556" height="28" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4-cqYT8QRLEbnl-ybWVQ8I1CxSKGmTJTxsGpo7jItIh4hr8vYmV5sh4fUwA1HZ4V3ewF002oHXuXtaFVHTjHB8sRRuHD-fmmsBFlKSoNoj_p-6VzXh4yFGX4uXuIBxxWkyls0BFQuu4w/" width="320" /></a></div><br /><b>Players: </b>Shaun Marsh, Faf du Plessis, Hashim Amla, Andre Fletcher, Michael Klinger, Max Holden, Michael Pollard, Dom Sibley, Tamim Iqbal, Sean Solia, Chadwick Walton, Chandrapaul Hemraj, Daniel Hughes, Marcus Harris, Ben Dunk, Dane Cleaver, Harry Swindells, Mackenzie Harvey, Anamul Haque, Ahmed Shehzad, Luis Reece, Chris Nash, Jack Edwards and Nic Maddinson</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I know I said that the aim of this was not to make judgments on the quality of players, but this cluster has all the hallmarks of those that you do not really want to be opening the batting for your T20 team. They are very slow starters, struggling to find the boundary and tend not to have the power to push on once they are settled. They are capable of making decent scores, but they would often be the likes of 60 off 50 balls-type scores that look at and think they are likely to be match-losing innings given the circumstances, regardless of what the commentators may claim.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u>Cluster 5 (The Accumulators)</u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u><br /></u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; font-weight: bold; text-align: center; text-decoration-line: underline;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOOTBPQGSU_w45T3n1xCBtnZmHtUS9LYqJgREyk8ZHryGIICQIpyYg9sr1BU1yrIXiR6ehyphenhyphena6ldN1B4ABUqmnoct4lduXYibgPEWu3C3gH2tONuRekdVNH7IH8Hak3tzrausitAfuWdEE/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="49" data-original-width="626" height="25" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOOTBPQGSU_w45T3n1xCBtnZmHtUS9LYqJgREyk8ZHryGIICQIpyYg9sr1BU1yrIXiR6ehyphenhyphena6ldN1B4ABUqmnoct4lduXYibgPEWu3C3gH2tONuRekdVNH7IH8Hak3tzrausitAfuWdEE/" width="320" /></a></div><br /></div><b>Players: </b>Virat Kohli, KL Rahul, Quinton de Kock, David Warner, Shikhar Dhawan, Babar Azam, Matthew Wade, Tom Latham, Stevie Eskinazi, Tom Kohler-Cadmore, Devon Conway, Josh Philippe, Tom Westley, Ian Bell, D'Arcy Short, Daniel Bell-Drummond, Scott Steel, Marcus Stoinis, Luke Wright, Ajinkya Rahane, Imam-ul-Haq, Alex Carey, Rahul Tripathi, Joe Denly, Alex Davies, Davdutt Padikkal, Shubman Gill, Varun Chopra and Billy Godleman</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The clear standout feature of this cluster is the average number of balls faced - the 25.5 balls is more than five more than any other cluster. These players are those that play long innings in this format and do it at a reasonable rate. They may not have the power to really go crazy, but they are good anchor players to build your power players around that will not prove too much of an issue until the late stages of the innings.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u>Cluster 6 (The Accelerators)</u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u><br /></u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center; text-decoration-line: underline;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDy-EKdmNxQ2f-wGQ95yBJVgnz2DZwMXV4FrwCtudkqmHhh-DgKUjye6NCG4cyzO0ZifPeZH_w0klaiNK18BcPpAGPkhMK142zRUcyFt4wYpifdmNZ6wSfTw0xR3os32wJLrEMKGDn8hY/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="49" data-original-width="626" height="25" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDy-EKdmNxQ2f-wGQ95yBJVgnz2DZwMXV4FrwCtudkqmHhh-DgKUjye6NCG4cyzO0ZifPeZH_w0klaiNK18BcPpAGPkhMK142zRUcyFt4wYpifdmNZ6wSfTw0xR3os32wJLrEMKGDn8hY/" width="320" /></a></div><br />Players: </b>Chris Gayle, Jonny Bairstow, Chris Lynn, Rohit Sharma, Martin Guptill, Brendon McCullum, Evin Lewis, Dawid Malan, Liam Livingstone, Kamral Akmal, Brandon King, Cameron Delport, Will Jacks, Glenn Phillips, Prithvi Shaw, Riki Wessels, Shane Watson, Sharjeel Khan, Lendl Simmons, Ambati Rayadu, Fakhar Zaman and Jake Weatherald</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">This is a cluster of players that can both frustrate and excite. Only cluster 4 start their innings slower than this group, but only the pure power hitters score faster once they have their eye in. They know that they have the power to clear the boundary when they get going and take their time early to ensure that they are seeing the ball well. This can lead to problematic innings if they are dismissed around the 10-15 ball mark, but if they bat long, you can be pretty certain of a rapid acceleration.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b><u>Team Structure</u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Each cluster has its distinguishing features and they each have their positives and negatives. As good as some of the players in group 5 are, ideally you might not want two openers of that style unless you have an outstanding bowling attack. The players in group 6 give you excellent upside, but if you had two players from that cluster, you run the major risk of getting off to a very slow start that could be fatal if you lose wickets at the wrong time. Group 1 will undoubtedly get you off to a rapid start, but you have to accept the fact that you are also likely to lose early wickets.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Ahead of writing this, I asked around on Twitter as to who people considered to be the 'best' T20 opening batsmen in recent years. The four most mentioned players were KL Rahul, Jos Buttler, Chris Gayle and David Warner - all very valid answers. However, the most interesting aspect of that is that these four players fall across three different clusters, further showing that the style of opener alone on the whole does not make a batsman 'good' or 'bad'.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Knowing the different types of opener allow you know how to structure the opening pair and the rest of your team. Knowing the quality of players within each of these styles clearly requires a different way of analysing the data though. Whilst Virat Kohli and Billy Godleman are classified into the same style of play, nobody would argue that Kohli is not a far superior player. However, the balance of styles within a team is crucial and you could actually weaken your overall team by just crowding in the 'best' players if their styles do not mesh well within the greater team structure. This is something that it is worth considering for the IPL teams ahead of tomorrow's auction.</div><p></p>Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-70827178827198233672020-09-16T11:37:00.002+02:002021-02-17T14:49:40.360+01:00How do ATP players react in high stress situations?<p>It is almost impossible to follow tennis, particularly on social media, without seeing players being accused of choking. In just the last few days, over the course of the five sets of the US Open final between Dominic Thiem and Alexander Zverev, both players were accused of choking on the big stage. Indeed, if you believe social media, pretty much every time that a player loses serve or fails to break serve, they have 'choked'.</p><p><br /></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQqdW-FNRZ_gmGjJOn3P8IGtiCSbp0NwCIv3LkcULCFU78tBpjHCOTXNY2mW6trcEvAqFP5ucaR_aRcS8MXsWRw0xzvwqYhDx5mwoewTBlSJEi2ke_ZHVKO4sRjeY8uedAxADVAWLHy3c/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1173" data-original-width="2048" height="367" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQqdW-FNRZ_gmGjJOn3P8IGtiCSbp0NwCIv3LkcULCFU78tBpjHCOTXNY2mW6trcEvAqFP5ucaR_aRcS8MXsWRw0xzvwqYhDx5mwoewTBlSJEi2ke_ZHVKO4sRjeY8uedAxADVAWLHy3c/" width="640" /></a></div><br />Obviously, that is nonsense, but the concept of choking in tennis is a very real phenomenon. An <a href="http://www.tennisserver.com/wildcards/wildcards_98_12.html" target="_blank">article</a> by Karlene Sugarman, a sports psychology consultant describes it as stemming 'from your need for psychological safety. The more threatening a competitive event is to your psychological safety, the more stressful and disruptive the situation will seem'.<p></p><p><br /></p><p>One would expect that different players react differently to stressful situations and potentially that the same players react differently to different types of stressful situation. Actually determining what is a stressful situation is not as easy as it sounds, but for the purposes of this, we will look at two different types of situation - serving to win a set and serving to stay in a set. Clearly, there are many other scenarios that could be looked at, but we need to start somewhere, so this is what I have settled on.</p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>Methodology</b></span></p><p>The way that I will investigate how different players respond to these stressful situations is relatively simple. It is easy to get the percentage of occasions that a player successfully held serve when serving in these situation, so this gives us a starting point. However, simply looking at that percentage will not give us a clear indication of how they deal with pressure. Players like Isner and Raonic will always have a high hold percentage simply because of their serve, but that does not mean that they serve well under pressure. Similarly, if every time that you are serving for a set is against Novak Djokovic, you would expect to have a relatively low hold percentage as he is arguably the best returner in the history of tennis, so that does not really tell us anything.</p><p><br /></p><p>To get a better indication, we need to calculate how likely a player is to win their service game in each situation. We can take the betting starting price to give us a good estimate of the chance of each player to hold serve at the start of the match. This is a good starting point, but it can be improved further. By the time that we get to one of our pressure situations, we have additional information as to how the two players are playing. If a player has held to love in every service game up to the point where they are serving for the set, we want to take this information into account. The predicted hold percentage for that player at the start of the match is almost certainly not the best estimate of his predicted hold percentage now - given his success on serve, we would want to increase this estimate. Similarly, if a player has been broken to love in every service game, we would probably want to decrease our current estimate.</p><p><br /></p><p>I am not going to go into depth on how precisely we would update these estimates, but for each of our pressure situations, we can generate an estimate on how likely a player is to hold their serve given the progression of the match up until that stage.</p><p><br /></p><p>Furthermore, at this stage, I am not going to distinguish between situations where players may have a double-break advantage or disadvantage. It is definitely something that is worth drilling down into in more detail at a later stage as having the additional cushion of an extra break certainly reduces the pressure on that particular game.</p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>Serving for the set</b></span></p><p>Of our two stressful situations, this is probably the less stressful of the two. If you fail to serve out the set, you are still in the set and still have opportunities to win the set. However, we still see players often changing how they approach points in stressful situations. I have written in the past about how players often approach their first serve differently on break points, either serving more aggressively to try and increase their ace percentage or dialing back their serve to ensure that they have a better chance of landing their first serve.</p><p><br /></p><p>Using data from the past 2 years on the ATP tour, we have a set of 79 players that have served for a set on at least 50 occasions. Unsurprisingly, Novak Djokovic is the player that has served for a set on the most occasions, followed by the new US Open champion Dominic Thiem, Daniil Medvedev, Stefanos Tsitsipas and Roger Federer. Now, let us have a quick look at which players hold their serve most often when serving for the set.</p><p><br /></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixgDw5YdJ_WfDoX0Go3kGaP-5on7PchyrWeuySnShwvolFV3gFRYJg_GOvDJQuDz2nWyOAdiG_1gaZdOnGW8GjKhTvBtNmTwQ5lh-DCLvBBZ7rOnw_AYY5McLMGiY7nUgrXtNLDTsj6vg/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="531" data-original-width="863" height="394" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixgDw5YdJ_WfDoX0Go3kGaP-5on7PchyrWeuySnShwvolFV3gFRYJg_GOvDJQuDz2nWyOAdiG_1gaZdOnGW8GjKhTvBtNmTwQ5lh-DCLvBBZ7rOnw_AYY5McLMGiY7nUgrXtNLDTsj6vg/w640-h394/image.png" width="640" /></a></div>We can see that no player holds serve more regularly when serving for the set than Roger Federer, who holds serve a remarkable 97.4% of the time in this situation. The likes of Reilly Opelka, John Isner and Milos Raonic are also not surprising given they are three of the biggest servers in the game. So, this chart does not necessarily tell us that much. Now, let us look at which players have the biggest positive difference between their actual hold percentage and their expected hold percentage.<div><br /><p></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjruhdLUPWVG72MdpNgrXLu4ruEKxuYb-LTCp0qM6YpBKVx6bkv0aArq-MCbIXfWIBpADRh04H3O4npQbGaabR03-L8_cMM-EoYldIjRd3K3hd2nktpRZz9b3Mno1Mer-mNSfAXQ4mvjMM/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="533" data-original-width="857" height="398" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjruhdLUPWVG72MdpNgrXLu4ruEKxuYb-LTCp0qM6YpBKVx6bkv0aArq-MCbIXfWIBpADRh04H3O4npQbGaabR03-L8_cMM-EoYldIjRd3K3hd2nktpRZz9b3Mno1Mer-mNSfAXQ4mvjMM/w640-h398/image.png" width="640" /></a></div><br />Once we control for expected hold, we can see some different names appear at the top of this list. Casper Ruud and Fabio Fognini are the two players that see the biggest increase in their serve hold percentage compared to expectation when serving for the match. Now let us look at the other end of the scale.</div><div><br /><p></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVi8M5sqmCzRsPaGgoDezSofxv-nLQQwFzXJ0IRa642Fj8QPQ_RxshFCnvl4FzoUT1o5ixYSQM7Uf_Gj7vMgIvz9yhopzczRDnc5Mbq2ujTx5r2DaOD4Kjw-86ENhfsNHnwZT7baoQDZM/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="537" data-original-width="856" height="402" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVi8M5sqmCzRsPaGgoDezSofxv-nLQQwFzXJ0IRa642Fj8QPQ_RxshFCnvl4FzoUT1o5ixYSQM7Uf_Gj7vMgIvz9yhopzczRDnc5Mbq2ujTx5r2DaOD4Kjw-86ENhfsNHnwZT7baoQDZM/w640-h402/image.png" width="640" /></a></div><br />Here, we can see a number of players that have spent plenty of time near the top of the rankings that can struggle to successful serve out sets. Indeed, we saw Alexander Zverev unsuccessful attempt to serve for the US Open title in the 5th set on Sunday night, so maybe we should not be surprised that he was unsuccessful, given his clear under-performance in far less stressful scenarios. Similarly, I imagine few regular tennis watchers will be that surprised at the appearance of the French trio of Gilles Simon, Benoit Paire and Pierre-Hugues Herbert in this list.</div><div><br /><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>Serving to stay in the set</b></span></p><p>Attempting to stay in a set is arguably a more stressful scenario than serving for the set given that you do not have a chance to rectify the situation in the set if you fail. Based on the hypothesis that players struggle more in higher pressure situations, we would expect to see more players under-performing expectations in this scenario.</p><p><br /></p><p>However, let us first look at those players that actually seem to thrive under the pressure of serving to stay in the set.</p><p><br /></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqHczsBl-abL-mPCzfnm23modyYhbebA4I0eK1S8AJOYsKn-KiLZ-3TYaY4IUMNHmEUsIdLHe_KuP2A9tDFbLuUJ9W-Sh7zEjkNoA7Kl3wf2vr8K8QVhQzIW8CKmTOOxRSlffyLIWyF5M/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="533" data-original-width="872" height="392" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqHczsBl-abL-mPCzfnm23modyYhbebA4I0eK1S8AJOYsKn-KiLZ-3TYaY4IUMNHmEUsIdLHe_KuP2A9tDFbLuUJ9W-Sh7zEjkNoA7Kl3wf2vr8K8QVhQzIW8CKmTOOxRSlffyLIWyF5M/w640-h392/image.png" width="640" /></a></div><br />Interestingly, none of the top 10 players in over-performance here appeared in the top 10 of over-performance when serving for the set. It raises some interesting questions about whether players are mentally strong or weak in general or whether the personalities and mental approach of players mean that they feel different types of pressure in different ways. Let us now look at the biggest under-performers in this situation.</div><div><br /><p></p><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAWlpD9V5tsg85IhmGJiMkV5fa5tzHhYM0VTVlpFsEd9NldR65mSqf3ytKVzBVr3YRJugSnzZ9kyvp3ERaBwiWMCieGnqnpc0nqk9kGrnKc-ZPL8Ro9BYN73sluJ7yktmGcbo_MVr8TW4/" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="535" data-original-width="852" height="402" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAWlpD9V5tsg85IhmGJiMkV5fa5tzHhYM0VTVlpFsEd9NldR65mSqf3ytKVzBVr3YRJugSnzZ9kyvp3ERaBwiWMCieGnqnpc0nqk9kGrnKc-ZPL8Ro9BYN73sluJ7yktmGcbo_MVr8TW4/w640-h402/image.png" width="640" /></a></div><br />As we hypothesized, the drop-off in actual hold percentages when serving to stay in the set are significantly larger than for serving for the set.</div><div><br /></div><div>This does not make good reading for Kei Nishikori. When serving to stay in a set, he managed to hold serve just 57.4% of the time compared to an expected hold percentage of 80.0%. He also appeared toward the bottom of the serving for the set numbers, which suggests that he really does struggle with his serve when the pressure is on. Precisely how this manifests itself is potentially something to look at elsewhere - does he struggle to get his serves in or does he change how he plays in the rallies themselves?</div><div><br /></div><div>Fabio Fognini is an interesting one having been one of the biggest over-performers when serving for the set. Clearly he reacts to the different types of stress in very different ways. Alexander Zverev and Benoit Paire also appear in the bottom 10 of both charts.</div><div><br /></div><div>The final player to note in this chart is the world number one, Novak Djokovic. While he tends to serve to stay in sets on fewer occasions than most players due to his general quality, he does tend to under-perform in these situations.</div></div>Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-90918216137360212422018-11-24T15:51:00.000+01:002018-11-24T15:51:24.864+01:00"Getting Your Eye In" - How long does it take?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
There has been various discussions over the years as to the importance of wickets in T20 cricket. Way back in 2008, an article on Cricinfo stated that "wickets don't mean much in T20. This fact doesn't seem to be widely recognised, but the whole concept of the 20-over game relies on it. If wickets were important, then batsmen wouldn't blaze away at 8 or 9 an over." Manish Verma wrote in an article in 2014 on the Red Bull website that "it is wickets that are best at slowing down the scoring rate, even in the shortest form of the game." An article by Tim Wigmore last year spoke about Leicestershire approach to bowling early in the game, explaining how "with the ball, Leicestershire attacked early on, even if it meant leaking boundaries, recognising that ultimately the best way to contain a T20 innings was to take regular wickets." Tim also wrote later in the year about the West Indies approach to batting, explaining that "wickets have been systematically overvalued in T20, holding totals back."<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-t_jg-PNLDCFMMRdf-imhtcR7aEtMNb_3ZeFiInqQfFfc7ZWJA-MLTIJ6uGW8ticL3DPljgZQnuZPcOAuLPR9mBJEPp95z1oJ79JviasOIMWvgkd788jZG2z2iiIfy2oJqPqqoKn8O3o/s1600/malinga.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="697" data-original-width="900" height="308" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-t_jg-PNLDCFMMRdf-imhtcR7aEtMNb_3ZeFiInqQfFfc7ZWJA-MLTIJ6uGW8ticL3DPljgZQnuZPcOAuLPR9mBJEPp95z1oJ79JviasOIMWvgkd788jZG2z2iiIfy2oJqPqqoKn8O3o/s400/malinga.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Wickets are generally met with great celebrations from the bowling team</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
It is interesting how the discussion has gone from feeling that wickets are relatively unimportant in T20 to how they are the best way to limit the run-rate, whilst also recognising that their impact on restraining the run-rate is itself only based on flawed strategy from the batting teams. Wickets may only be important in containing T20 innings because teams think that wickets are important in containing their innings. If teams moved toward a mindset, as the West Indies have done for periods, that wickets are less important and having hitters down throughout the order means that you can sacrifice wickets with little slowdown in scoring, then wickets may well become relatively unimportant.<br />
<br />
There are obviously caveats to that. It is important to remember that, regardless of how a player coming in to replaced a dismissed batsman approaches his innings, if that player is substantially less able than the batsman that he is replacing, that is a blow. For example, if Andile Phehlukwayo comes in to replace AB de Villiers, that wicket is important.<br />
<br />
Regardless of the importance of wickets themselves, the topic that I wanted to look at for this article is how long it takes a new batsman to 'get his eye in' following a wicket. For each ball in a T20 innings, I currently generate an 'expected runs' value that indicates what one would expect the average batsman to score off that ball. This is calculated by looking at the average runs that particularly ball at that stage of the innings, then adjusting that based on the ground and the bowler. For example, in the 2017 T20 Blast match between Durham and Nottinghamshire at Trent Bridge, the final ball of the powerplay with Durham batting was bowled by Jake Ball to Michael Richardson and was given an expected value of 1.50 runs. The final ball of the powerplay with Nottinghamshire batting was bowled by Ryan Pringle to Alex Hales, a far superior batsman, and this was given an expected value of 1.61 runs.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEho9vjuGouxfVb6_OSARlI6UqtXCZyMgzKT7DRi7hykqYLlA9421uC7GOENV2KrvqfAblQ8fbApMdvg0vzNlrpy_AfTjhf9Fh9p0bX8axnvqamqZS-JxtOkt3ac_J0ow4h5SMQFipnWuWo/s1600/runspb.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="507" data-original-width="568" height="285" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEho9vjuGouxfVb6_OSARlI6UqtXCZyMgzKT7DRi7hykqYLlA9421uC7GOENV2KrvqfAblQ8fbApMdvg0vzNlrpy_AfTjhf9Fh9p0bX8axnvqamqZS-JxtOkt3ac_J0ow4h5SMQFipnWuWo/s320/runspb.jpg" width="320" /></a><br />
Using these expected runs values, we can look at how batsmen perform compared to expected runs when having faced certain numbers of balls. For example, across my entire database, batsmen facing their first ball would be expected to score 1.25 runs, but in actuality, they only score 0.75 runs. From this, we can see that they score 0.5 runs less than what we would expect. The table shows the values for the first 20 balls of a batsman's innings. We can see that averaged across the entire database, it takes roughly 15 balls faced for batsman to reach the average scoring rate (in this case, given it includes the entire database, this average would be 0.00).<br />
<br />
However, one might ask the valid question of whether elite or very good batsmen are likely to get scoring at a quicker rate? If we narrow the focus down to those batsmen with a rating of 1.10 or greater in my rating system, we do indeed find that it takes these batsmen quicker to reach the scoring of an average batsman - just 6 balls for this group of players. Similarly, for poorer batsmen with a rating of 0.9 or lower, it takes them roughly 24 balls to reach this scoring rate.<br />
<br />
Now this is not particularly surprising. What is interesting is that if we look at how quickly each group reaches the expected scoring rate for that specific group, rather than for the average player. For example, for the elite group, they have an overall expected scoring rate of 0.10 runs above average per ball faced, for the very good group, this is 0.05 and for the poor group, this is -0.15. In other words, the elite batsmen are worth 0.25 runs per ball more than the poor batsmen. However, whichever group we look at, we find that it takes 7 balls faced to reach the expected scoring rate for that group.<br />
<br />
We also find that for both the elite and very good groups of batsmen, the scoring rate levels out at between 0.05 and 0.1 runs above the expected rate for that group from around balls 10 to 30, then we find it tends to take off again around the 30 balls faced mark, which suggests this is the point when the batsmen feel properly settled and confident to launch their attack. For the poor batsmen, we again see the levelling out after around ball 10 at 0.05 to 0.1 runs above the expected rate for the group, but there is no sign of any acceleration again after that stage.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKjLIhRcfya7tcyF_6Nope4fUD2jnhyphenhyphenzg8lRizuRIIHYo_aYdPlovEhAah8TdDYKvK_7H8_StIIp9no4-PNxGeLOjYNTh_tsZ35VI-_AKywErWDO1c0HVPz1fa8kwaeXxHbc6BGpzTK-Y/s1600/kohli.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="652" height="245" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKjLIhRcfya7tcyF_6Nope4fUD2jnhyphenhyphenzg8lRizuRIIHYo_aYdPlovEhAah8TdDYKvK_7H8_StIIp9no4-PNxGeLOjYNTh_tsZ35VI-_AKywErWDO1c0HVPz1fa8kwaeXxHbc6BGpzTK-Y/s400/kohli.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Do batsmen consciously play more defensively during the first few balls faced?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
From this, we can see that it is not only the fact that they have a higher scoring rate during the middle parts of their innings that sets the top T20 batsmen apart from the rest. It is also the fact that they have an additional gear to step up into once they are settled that the lesser batsmen do not appear to have. However, it seems that it takes almost the exact same number of balls for all batsmen to 'get their eye' in and reach the rate that we would expect them to score.<br />
<br />
Returning to the initial discussion, what does this mean about the importance of wickets in T20s? Well, clearly it shows that dismissing an elite batsman and replacing him with a lesser quality batsman is important, but it did not really require any analysis to realise that. However, it does show that taking wickets is currently important to restrain the scoring due to this 'getting their eye in' period that all batsmen appear to perform. However, we cannot really tell from this whether this is a conscious action on the part of batsmen (i.e. they are actively taking less risks at the start of their innings) or whether it simply does require time for a batsman to up his scoring rate and there is nothing that can be done.<br />
<br />
One way of looking deeper into this might be to look at whether we see more wickets than expected in these early balls of an innings. Logically, one might expect settled batsmen to be dismissed less than expected, while new batsmen might be dismissed more quickly. This is something that I will return to in a future article.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com16tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-77111431230510303782018-11-20T11:56:00.000+01:002018-11-21T17:02:04.334+01:00Predicting the Future of the ATP Rankings<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
So much can change in tennis over the course of just a couple of months. Even more can happen over the course of a year. To try to predict what might happen in five years time is arguably almost impossible. In the last few days, an old prediction made by L'Equipe has surfaced again and has been fairly widely mocked for how bad it has turned out.<br />
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbHJ7SA5DP-pT5EhbERuqYEY7jvRlYa9ylya5S6o_5HeHKcPlLYTqwbEgrcql6p8-EzDh2VnWE_9p-L7RZ8vH0MWa8NaEYmRvjGyeHM4FhyphenhyphenPXROJUim91opIGWgyoDTYRxVHonESMPki0/s1600/l%2527equipe.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="287" data-original-width="285" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbHJ7SA5DP-pT5EhbERuqYEY7jvRlYa9ylya5S6o_5HeHKcPlLYTqwbEgrcql6p8-EzDh2VnWE_9p-L7RZ8vH0MWa8NaEYmRvjGyeHM4FhyphenhyphenPXROJUim91opIGWgyoDTYRxVHonESMPki0/s1600/l%2527equipe.jpg" /></a></div>
<div>
Their prediction, made in 2013, was for the top 10 ranked players at the end of 2018. As the image above shows, just two of their predicted players ended up in the actual top 10, with 6 of their picks not even ranked inside the top 50 in the world.</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Rather than just deriding their efforts, closer inspection suggests that some of the picks are not as ridiculous as they might seem. Grigor Dimitrov has never made it to #1, but if we go back twelve months, he had just reached a career high ranking of #3 and only dropped out of the top 10 in the world at the start of November. Were it not for injury, Andy Murray would almost certainly be ranked inside the top 10 and it would not have been a surprise if he was actually ranked at #3 behind Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal. Until his injury-problems, Milos Raonic spent the best part of three years as a top 10 player. Jack Sock has been dreadful in singles this year, but it is worth remember that it was only twelve months ago that he broke into the top 10 for the first time.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
There are admittedly some major misses in their list. Benoit Paire has barely even threatened the top 20, let alone reaching #2. If we are being completely honest, it is difficult to look back and even spot anything that might have suggested he would go on to achieve the success that L'Equipe expected. It is easy to suggest that Bernard Tomic's attitude problems were clear, even back in 2013, and maybe his current plight might not be all that surprising.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Ernests Gulbis had just had a season where he raised his ranking from #138 to #24 with titles in Delray Beach and St Petersburg, a victory over Andy Murray and twice pushing Nadal deep into deciding sets in Indian Wells and Rome. He would start 2014 with titles in Marseille and Nice before that run to the French Open semi-final. That was obviously as good as it got and he seemingly lost interest in tennis after that, but again, it was maybe a slightly risky pick, but not completely ridiculous.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Jerzy Janowicz has not even played a match this year, but having burst onto the scene with a final at the 2012 Paris Masters, a QF in the Rome Masters in 2013 and pushing Andy Murray in the 2013 Wimbledon semi-final to close the year just outside the top 20 at the age of 23, a top 10 prediction doesn't seem an absurd suggestion. Injuries have derailed his career, although whether he would have gone on to become a top 10 player, who knows.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Looking at the actual 2018 top 10, there are a number of obvious names missing - Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Juan Martin Del Potro being the most glaring omissions. I am not going to mock L'Equipe for excluding Roger Federer, given that back in 2013, I myself wrote:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica neue" , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">"It could well be that Roger Federer has played his last ever match as a top two player. </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica neue" , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">His victory at Wimbledon was a glorious reminder of why we should not write him off, but could it be a final hurrah?"</span></i></blockquote>
<div>
At the time, he had just dropped down to #7 in the world following a year where he had lost to the likes of Sergiy Stakhovsky, Daniel Brands and Federico Delbonis. To suggest that he would not still be in the top 10 five years later was not ridiculous.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
One assumes the exclusion of Nadal was based on the assumption that his body would have finally succumbed to the many injuries that he would suffer, although that has clearly not been the case.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The exclusion of Del Potro is a slightly strange one though. At the time, he had been a fixture in the top 10 for almost 18 months. It seemed as though he had overcome his first wrist injury and whilst he might not have been looking as though he could return to the very top, a top-10 ranking seemed quite likely.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
However, overlooking the likes of Marin Cilic, John Isner and Kevin Anderson seems entirely plausible. Isner had generally lurked around the #20 spot in the rankings and would be 33 in 2018. Cilic had never reached the top #10 and had just returned from a doping suspension - I suspect few would have predicted that he would become a fixture in the top 10 and a Grand Slam champion. Kevin Anderson had only just peaked at the #20 spot by late 2013 and there was little sign that he would become an established top 10 player at the age of 32 five years later.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So, whilst it is easy to look at L'Equipe's prediction now and mock it, at the time, it may not necessarily have looked the worst prediction.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
And I suppose that no article about this would be complete without opening myself up to future ridicule, so it only seems right to make a prediction for my ATP top 10 at the end of 2023. No doubt I will look back in five years time and wonder what on earth I was thinking, but here it is:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigJNW0pS-Pr5rKXKS1EU4euCMaHToGYzeot9SF9QsBmd-fDTuS95CwcCs62Sqyyc5q2WLs37yP1fLFjsGZnxkEgBaqeJXVCUOSE5mV9YB5ZcttIu6GS2uXtWMis_trlMhZnhweImaaMpk/s1600/top10.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="228" data-original-width="185" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigJNW0pS-Pr5rKXKS1EU4euCMaHToGYzeot9SF9QsBmd-fDTuS95CwcCs62Sqyyc5q2WLs37yP1fLFjsGZnxkEgBaqeJXVCUOSE5mV9YB5ZcttIu6GS2uXtWMis_trlMhZnhweImaaMpk/s1600/top10.JPG" /></a></div>
</div>
</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-49460195023942160292018-05-09T10:10:00.000+02:002018-11-21T17:01:58.050+01:00Opening Batsmen in T20 Cricket<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Delhi Daredevils have struggled thus far in the 2018 IPL with just 3 wins from their 10 matches so far. One issue has been the apparent struggles of their two overseas opening options of Colin Munro and Jason Roy, who in their eight combined innings thus far have managed just one score of over 35 and have no fewer than five scores of five runs or less. They have chopped and changed in those 10 matches, picking Colin Munro for two matches, then Jason Roy for three matches, then neither for a match, then Munro again for three matches, then neither again in their most recent match.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLqf-7JpLAhzElgm5GuCWz2Rg9C7p7bny93yEuTuTcGsvcWnmDFzdXPBRRDRkur-EWvSIzJpk2QyHUYtwP4URgyHSJ4iU2qpmKL6tPOrAVsQaHJ7MgXzlJOj-Igbbl2GQzzO7EN_RABcc/s1600/munro.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="369" data-original-width="826" height="177" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLqf-7JpLAhzElgm5GuCWz2Rg9C7p7bny93yEuTuTcGsvcWnmDFzdXPBRRDRkur-EWvSIzJpk2QyHUYtwP4URgyHSJ4iU2qpmKL6tPOrAVsQaHJ7MgXzlJOj-Igbbl2GQzzO7EN_RABcc/s400/munro.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">On his day, there are few more destructive batsmen in T20 cricket than Colin Munro</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Some people might make an argument for dropping out-of-form players, which both Colin Munro and Jason Roy, with the exception of his match-winning innings in his first match, have appeared to be. However, there is also an argument that this effectively misunderstands what Jason Roy and, in particular, Colin Munro actually bring to the team in terms of what they are able to produce.<br />
<br />
There are two types of T20 opening batsmen that I want to discuss in this article. The first category are the reliable, but non-explosive openers, while the second category are the explosive, but unreliable openers. In an ideal world, you would want a reliable, explosive opening batsman, but for obvious reasons, there are very few of those around and they are often incredibly difficult to obtain, whether it be sheer cost or due to them usually being retained by their current teams.<br />
<br />
For the purposes of this article, I have taken all batsmen in my database that have faced at least 1000 balls in T20 cricket, then filtered out all those players with fewer than 30 innings that have started in the first two overs. This should give us players that have opened the batting on a regular basis and with a decent sample size. This left a total of 105 batsmen.<br />
<br />
Before we start on the two categories that I want to focus on in this article, there are a couple of players that deserve a bit of recognition. Virat Kohli's numbers are quite simply incredible - he scores fewer than 10 runs in just 18.9% of his innings when opening, which is the lowest of any player in the sample, he scores 50+ in 32.9% of those innings, which is #3 in the sample and he scores 75+ in 12.2%, which is #6 in the sample. In other words, he rarely gets out early and there are few players that hit big scores more regularly. Another figure that stands out is the recently retired Kevin Pietersen, who scored 30+ runs in an incredible 62.2% of innings, which was #1 in the sample, and 75+ in 10.8%, which puts him at #12 as well.<br />
<br />
Moving on, the first category of openers to look at are the reliable, but non-explosive openers. The table below show a couple of these:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZ-RA2hRhNrZfwQ9dBC7yA5TiXPs2SLGrzhonO4dsR6K4W9k7TGaIRr6S9WDjBAnYWzKzl7Qy7CKIpzJmTiOOUfBiVEqgp1Oh33-OjUboJHDK7gh4joCc7ki_yc8ECXk0VGPl-9Uue58s/s1600/cat1.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="179" data-original-width="509" height="140" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZ-RA2hRhNrZfwQ9dBC7yA5TiXPs2SLGrzhonO4dsR6K4W9k7TGaIRr6S9WDjBAnYWzKzl7Qy7CKIpzJmTiOOUfBiVEqgp1Oh33-OjUboJHDK7gh4joCc7ki_yc8ECXk0VGPl-9Uue58s/s400/cat1.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
The five batsmen listed here are all among some of the very best at avoiding low scores. For example, of the 105 players in the sample, Ian Bell is #10 for percentage of scores of at least 30. Similarly, Brad Hodge is top 15 and you can see that Bell, Uthappa, Tendulkar and Sangakkara are all top 15 in terms of avoiding scores in single figures. On the face of it, these players rarely appear to fail terribly, but we can also see that you are not going to get the big potentially match-winning innings of 75+ from these players.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSCl4A2TVxWBtYZBWMBIGn-3KIhToqK1gzZ7SVXmTzjY2RqnHqhClrqtMNSyRe04oq3mD1NNuO8ZNa98V7921IRIAOuP6P58sxZM9H7pUONLP4sHJvM8cUMnorQcR_padhTNt0N2zGB4M/s1600/bell.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="539" data-original-width="810" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSCl4A2TVxWBtYZBWMBIGn-3KIhToqK1gzZ7SVXmTzjY2RqnHqhClrqtMNSyRe04oq3mD1NNuO8ZNa98V7921IRIAOuP6P58sxZM9H7pUONLP4sHJvM8cUMnorQcR_padhTNt0N2zGB4M/s400/bell.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ian Bell is one of the best opening batsmen at avoiding single figure scores</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
On the other hand, we have the explosive, but often unreliable opening batsmen. The following table shows a couple of these:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiY623yOMwZILT21hR4RigZmxvz_P4nKGRq9OZKrjyhPy0dXS4N0R66NsL7kjB6hbM0J_e6ug9DNY_1Vvn2eBTBXezYQSiSUj0VSr77rQESUy4GGBfSRXA-ceF2kHjCYuMmebuWaXAO4Zk/s1600/cat2.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="177" data-original-width="518" height="136" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiY623yOMwZILT21hR4RigZmxvz_P4nKGRq9OZKrjyhPy0dXS4N0R66NsL7kjB6hbM0J_e6ug9DNY_1Vvn2eBTBXezYQSiSUj0VSr77rQESUy4GGBfSRXA-ceF2kHjCYuMmebuWaXAO4Zk/s400/cat2.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>
These are some of the batsmen that can almost single-handedly win a match if they get going. Colin Munro, who we discussed briefly earlier, is 93rd of the 105 players for scores of less than 10, with almost 4 in 10 of his innings ending in single figures. However, we can see that he is also #3 in terms of the percentage of his innings that end in scores of 75+. These big scores are also scored at a rapid rate, which will give the team a very good chance of posting a huge score or chasing big targets.<br />
<br />
These batsmen are going to have a lot of failures and will often have a number of back-to-back failures as a result. However, they have the potential to have that big innings as well.<br />
<br />
In terms of what is desirable for a team, there are various arguments that can be made. With several of the reliable batsmen, it is unlikely that you are going to end up with too many small totals. On the flip side, you are also unlikely to post any huge totals as well. For a team like Sunrisers Hyderabad this year, Kane Williamson has been pretty effective as he has scored well and consistently, even whilst not posting any huge innings. With the bowling attack that they have, reliably setting or being able to chasing mid-range totals may be a good strategy, but it does mean that they might struggle to chase any big totals.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibiC-M3KEqyAkR_ubxzz9CS0xJUDy0ZzzF_rZbxyPlsuT4vC887HqaVOa9F4aG4ftxZ9TVQtHDcIbfYjEZMWN0hWvK_XrflQMob7prE_XNyuhbQWiCKCKOpAJ4Tun4zPSnKT2m8qzB_is/s1600/kane.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="678" data-original-width="725" height="299" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibiC-M3KEqyAkR_ubxzz9CS0xJUDy0ZzzF_rZbxyPlsuT4vC887HqaVOa9F4aG4ftxZ9TVQtHDcIbfYjEZMWN0hWvK_XrflQMob7prE_XNyuhbQWiCKCKOpAJ4Tun4zPSnKT2m8qzB_is/s320/kane.jpeg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Kane Williamson has worked well given the strengths of the Sunrisers team this year</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
However, if you are going to sign the explosive, high-risk batsmen, then you really need to stick with them through the failures. For example, if Delhi Daredevils know that Colin Munro is going to score less than 10 in almost 40% of innings, but that in just over 30% of innings, he will score 50+, then dropping him after two failures arguably demonstrates a lack of understanding of the type of player that they have. You can frame the argument in that he needs to play a number of innings to find his confidence and form, but in reality, that type of batsman will simply fail a lot of times whether confident or not.<br />
<br />
The key is to find the right parts around this type of batsman. If you have a team where other players can provide runs around him, even if not necessarily at as rapid a rate, you can afford to absorb the failures and benefit from the handful of key innings that they are likely to play during the course of a tournament.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com33tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-16299356983602824762017-08-20T23:18:00.000+02:002018-11-21T17:02:11.060+01:00How To Fix a Tennis Match (by Alexandr Dolgopolov)<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
The campus of Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem is the final stop for ATP player that are looking to pick up a few wins in the run-up to the final major of the year. In 2016, the tournament was even named as the '250 Tournament of the Year' in the ATP awards. However, the first main draw match of the 2017 edition has garnered attention for an entirely unwanted reason.<br />
<br />
The match was between the Ukrainian former world #13, Alexandr Dolgopolov, and the Brazilian Thiago Monteiro. Monteiro was playing in his eighth hard court match at this level and was still looking for his first ATP main draw win on the surface. Alexandr Dolgopolov was coming off qualifying in Cincinnati, where he beat the in-form Kevin Anderson before losing to Nick Kyrgios. The opening odds with Pinnacle had the Ukrainian as the 1.36 favourite, implying a 73.5% chance of winning the match, while Monteiro was priced at 3.28, a 30.5% chance (the 104% total is due to the overround applied by bookmakers).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEir_ULgo6SrbyYVfAwKKdtkakjOQ9EU6J77QeCqVoIuyIBUlF3uaCqBfxJlVBGviBkEBlGHkmuJw60truFxZdqRKwEl5sP_N2aPEW58Sp3_nA2gOsOXct1BKNIDttU5Fpml53btpDeFKyI/s1600/dolgo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEir_ULgo6SrbyYVfAwKKdtkakjOQ9EU6J77QeCqVoIuyIBUlF3uaCqBfxJlVBGviBkEBlGHkmuJw60truFxZdqRKwEl5sP_N2aPEW58Sp3_nA2gOsOXct1BKNIDttU5Fpml53btpDeFKyI/s400/dolgo.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
The odds remained steady from their opening price shortly after 1pm on Saturday afternoon (all times are UK time) until around 6:20pm on Sunday evening, just under two hours before the match was due to begin. The next 20 minutes would see Dolgopolov's price at Pinnacle drift dramatically, reaching 1.63 at 6:40pm from 1.37. At this point, Pinnacle would remove betting on the match, signifying that they were seeing something untoward in the market.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Dolgopolov's price on Betfair... <a href="https://t.co/nZbiFcQXDc">pic.twitter.com/nZbiFcQXDc</a></div>
— jimmy soixante-dix (@hotdog6969) <a href="https://twitter.com/hotdog6969/status/899333992792682496">August 20, 2017</a></blockquote>
<br />
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
Bet365, a major UK bookmaker, would continue offering the match up until 7:34pm, by which time, the price on Dolgopolov had drifted further, reaching a price of 2.37, implying just a 42.2% chance of winning the match. Coral, another UK bookmaker, offered it until 7:39pm, stopping their market once the price had reached 2.50, a 40.0% chance of winning.<br />
<br />
The drift did not stop there as Dolgopolov's price continued to rise on the Betfair Exchange. We can see that 15 minutes before the start of the match, the prices had almost flipped entirely from the initial starting price, with Dolgopolov available to back at a price of 3.15, implying just a 31.7% chance of winning the match, compared to his initial 73.5% chance. At this stage, we were still 15 minutes away from the players even going onto court.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsxLmT18kTzlh5Wpv5lw3YtMGj8LVL6aqTvXO5TT0vrgDnAWFtVD5YDLEk-OMoCaXvhMCNLin7YxiOOO7_Z4j1jjYWTSiff6yhLOskE-a0T9N2TPE__VkG6RXXkxDFWggQ3uqXVCTCnAQ/s1600/betfair1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="305" data-original-width="480" height="253" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsxLmT18kTzlh5Wpv5lw3YtMGj8LVL6aqTvXO5TT0vrgDnAWFtVD5YDLEk-OMoCaXvhMCNLin7YxiOOO7_Z4j1jjYWTSiff6yhLOskE-a0T9N2TPE__VkG6RXXkxDFWggQ3uqXVCTCnAQ/s400/betfair1.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
As the match started, plenty of tennis traders and followers had noticed the highly unusual odds movements and were watching streams of the match. Several bookmakers had decided to not even offer the match at all, which is unusual for an ATP match on the main show court. When he was broken in the fourth game of the match following back-to-back double faults, Bet365 decided that they did not trust the match and removed betting on the first set and slashed the limits for what could be staked on the match.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Ukrainian power in action today : Dolgopolov and Bondarenko having "funny" odds (Bet365 just removed 1st set market and has low ML limits) <a href="https://t.co/3HJw8gXFyU">pic.twitter.com/3HJw8gXFyU</a></div>
— Stefano Berlincioni (@Carretero77) <a href="https://twitter.com/Carretero77/status/899351425414819840">August 20, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<br />
As the match progressed, it became clear that there was little chance of Dolgopolov winning the match. Monteiro was priced sub-1.20 after winning the first set and when he broke early in the second set, he shortened to 1.07. Those that were watching the match seemed in little doubt as to what they were witnessing:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
We're possibly witnessing the most obvious match fix of all time.</div>
— Game Set Profit (@GameSetProfit) <a href="https://twitter.com/GameSetProfit/status/899351060908830720">August 20, 2017</a></blockquote>
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Dolgopolov not hiding this very well at all. Extremely suspicious ground stroke errors, no injury and betting patterns all over the board.</div>
— Fight_Ghost (@Fight_Ghost) <a href="https://twitter.com/Fight_Ghost/status/899361336685060096">August 20, 2017</a></blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Dolgo with one of the most blatant fixes that I can remember seeing.</div>
— Igor Puschkin (@Kalarou) <a href="https://twitter.com/Kalarou/status/899361873170247685">August 20, 2017</a></blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
If the ATP are serious re fixing that should have been Dolgopolov's final match</div>
— jimmy soixante-dix (@hotdog6969) <a href="https://twitter.com/hotdog6969/status/899362329925734400">August 20, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
By the end of the match, Dolgopolov had not created a single break point chance on the Monteiro serve. In the past two season, there have been just two matches where Dolgopolov has not created a single break point chance - at the 2016 Australian Open and Wimbledon 2017, both against Roger Federer. It is the first time in Monteiro's entire career that he has not faced a single break point on a hard court. In his previous 7 hard court matches at ATP level, he had been broken no fewer than 31 times.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/uQxpFzZkRcw/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uQxpFzZkRcw?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />
Now, it is true that Dolgopolov did have some strapping just above his ankle, which could have signified some form of injury. However, he did also have that strapping on last week and it did not seem to affect him then. Even if it was a more serious issue, one has to wonder how anyone found out less than two hours before the match and was so confident that it was serious enough to push his price from 1.37 out to 3.15. That sort of move is almost unprecedented and, in this scenario, suggests that someone knew of an injury so severe that it almost certainly meant that Dolgopolov had very little chance of winning the match. And that they only found out this information less than two hours before the start.<br />
<br />
An alternative is that the match was fixed. It would take relatively significant money to move the Pinnacle market by such a significant margin and for them to decide to take the market down. The fact that every major bookmaker decided to suspend betting before the match started indicates strong suspicions among those companies that are able to see the bets being placed. The fact that several decided to not offer the match in-running only emphasises this fact.<br />
<br />
From the outside, it is very difficult to determine what precisely has happened. However, what we can say is that the odds movements on this match are hugely suspicious. There are very few believable explanations for what might cause movements such as this and to this magnitude. It is important to note that there is no indication that Thiago Monteiro had any knowledge of anything that was occurring during the match. However, while there may be a valid explanation for what happened, it is impossible to deny that there are questions that need to be asked of Alexandr Dolgopolov.<br />
<br />
Over the past 18 months, there have been a number of grand statements from the tennis authorities and the Tennis Integrity Unit about tackling the problem of fixing in tennis. If they are seriously about living up to those statements, then this is a match that they should be taking a very close look at. The TIU has said that it does not regard unusual betting patterns as an indication of corruption. However, to ignore them completely is to disregard one of the clearest indications of something amiss.<br />
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com197tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-31687433675511317912017-07-04T21:21:00.000+02:002018-11-21T17:01:46.164+01:00Potential Solutions for Grand Slam R1 Retirements<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
With eight retirements, seven on the men's side, in the opening round of Wimbledon, the debate over whether injured players are simply turning up for their first round prize money when they are clearly not fit enough to play has reared its head again.<br />
<br />
There are two real concerns that people have with all of the retirements. Firstly, many fans seem to object to players simply turning up to collect their money with no real intention of being able to play a proper match. Secondly, there is the issue of not being able to see full matches of tennis being played. This second issue was particularly pertinent today with two of the retirements coming in back-to-back matches on Centre Court, where people had paid expensive prices for tickets or queued for huge periods of time to get those tickets.<br />
<br />
Let us first address a couple of suggested solutions for the first of those issues. There have been suggestions that players should not be given any prize money if they do not complete their first round match. This would probably solve some of the retirements, but it is likely to simply lead to players just hanging around on court to see out the rest of the match without putting up any challenge. This would likely just lead to those same people that complained about the retirements complaining about players not putting in the effort. It also seems to unfairly penalise those players that suffer genuine injuries during a match. It seems quite harsh to take away the £35k prize money that Anastasia Potapova would get after she had a nasty fall when leading by a break in the second set. For a player that has a total career prize money of just under $16k, the prize money from Wimbledon is a huge deal.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjr1RRRbPfEyQ0BQGSTcWtmknhTql5tm7P98c4voXfrCm3P9m006c_n8MyNkm37ALsX5KaEnmEal8PMYAH8-YXSQRzNaIn2yUXXMAY1e_GEbaA0WP6_RyFcjEYlVBqDBGWYwMYX7smVkZ4/s1600/IMG_7596.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1067" data-original-width="1600" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjr1RRRbPfEyQ0BQGSTcWtmknhTql5tm7P98c4voXfrCm3P9m006c_n8MyNkm37ALsX5KaEnmEal8PMYAH8-YXSQRzNaIn2yUXXMAY1e_GEbaA0WP6_RyFcjEYlVBqDBGWYwMYX7smVkZ4/s640/IMG_7596.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Injuries happen in tennis matches and financially penalising players for them is a tricky question</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
There have also been suggestions of deducting a portion of prize money if you withdraw and also deducting prize money for tanking. In a perfect world, this could work, but how you would decide how much prize money to withdraw for a retirement would be tricky. Do you withdraw the same amount for a retirement in the second set as one in the fourth set? What if a player is leading by two sets, but gets injured? In addition, I am strongly against the idea of deducting prize money for tanking, simply due to the difficulty of determining whether a player is tanking. If a player is struggling with injury and decide that they cannot run to retrieve balls, is that tanking? If they decide that the best strategy given their injury is to look to hit winners early in every point and miss a lot of them, is that tanking? Something that could be the best strategy, but which is executed poorly, can easily look like a player does not care.<br />
<br />
There is the argument that players should just withdraw before the match if they are not certain that they can finish the match. Again, that is a lovely idea, but players work for a year to earn their ranking and, for many players, the aim is to get their ranking to the point that they gain direct entry into the slams for the prize money that comes with that.<br />
<br />
Let us take Janko Tipsarevic. He has been grinding away on the Challenger Tour for much of 2017, playing events in places like Bangkok, Qingdao and Anning to get his ranking up to the point where he can get direct entry into Wimbledon. He has played 32 matches in 2017 to earn his ranking and has earned $160k (around £120k). He stated that he felt pain in practice and was assured by the doctors that the injury was not serious. He was given injections and the injury felt better. He then went out on court today and the pain came back in the third game of the match.<br />
<br />
The idea that he should have withdrawn beforehand because he had some pain that might have caused issues in the match and forgo the prize money that is equivalent to over 25% of what he has earned in the six months leading up to this is crazy. However, when there is pain during a match, there is always the question of whether playing on might aggravate the injury and extend any period of recovery.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8ndbn0Vsgzwo-tG8pmyhEPT436G25d9OKtHJOkC_h6Capjjd0khDRm4E9NN3hLjterFxqGek3FFQg887Z3bb8T5hZiae8tLroBDosHcTgEHFxPfprpp6THCmxRGK1DbntAQ9_cqpjfZQ/s1600/kyrgios.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="576" data-original-width="1023" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8ndbn0Vsgzwo-tG8pmyhEPT436G25d9OKtHJOkC_h6Capjjd0khDRm4E9NN3hLjterFxqGek3FFQg887Z3bb8T5hZiae8tLroBDosHcTgEHFxPfprpp6THCmxRGK1DbntAQ9_cqpjfZQ/s640/kyrgios.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Nick Kyrgios has been attempting unsuccessfully to play through injury, yet people still criticise him for it</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Another solution that has been suggested is to reduce the prize money for the first round to reduce the temptation to simply turn up for the money. Ignoring the fact that the tour would almost certainly face a player mutiny if they tried to significantly reduce first round prize money, it arguably penalises a significant number of players that rely on the money for their career for the sake of solving a small issue.<br />
<br />
In 2017, the ATP have been trialling a new system on the tour. This is where a player that withdraws before a first round match is still given the prize money and is replaced in the draw by a lucky loser. The lucky loser does not get any prize money if they lose in the first round, but if they progress, they gain whatever points and money they would expect from progressing through the rounds. The idea is that players that have an injury that might prevent them from completing the match have the incentive to withdraw and it gives the crowd an increased opportunity to see a full match, while it give the opportunity to a lucky loser that would not have otherwise been the case.<br />
<br />
The restructuring of the lucky loser system was important alongside this to prevent the highest ranked player in qualifying from simply tanking his final qualifying match knowing that he was already in the main draw though. This system also helps to add a potential layer of protection against corruption as it lessons the chance that a player goes onto the court knowing that they cannot win.<br />
<br />
Has this had much of an impact? Excluding the slams, there have been 18 first round retirements in 556 matches so far in 2017, meaning that there is a retirement in 3.2% of matches. In the past three seasons (2014-2016), there were 106 retirements in 2740 first round matches, which works out at 3.9% of matches ending in retirement.<br />
<br />
It is a valid argument that there may be more retirements later in the season, so comparing the first half of this season to full seasons previously is not fair. If we simply look at all of the tournaments pre-Wimbledon in the past three seasons, the rate of retirements does drop slightly from 3.9% to 3.6%, but still higher than in the current season.<br />
<br />
Is this enough of a change to say that the system is working? Probably not at this stage, but it is a promising start and there is an argument to suggest that this could be implemented in slams. You will still get people complaining that players are collecting prize money without even picking up a racket, but they have earned their place in the draw through the past year's tennis and it can be argued that they have earned the prize money.<br />
<br />
It should also lead to fewer retirements and more tennis for the spectators at the event and for fans watching on television. The matches may not be any more competitive, particularly against the top players, but at least there is a significantly higher chance of getting more tennis played.<br />
<br />
Is it an ideal solution? Maybe not. Is there an ideal solution? Almost certainly not. Every solution that has been raised has flaws and there is no solution that everyone will be happy with. Ultimately though, the chief aim for tournaments and the ATP really should be to maximise the tennis product that they offer and a solution that gets more healthy players on court and more tennis played surely must be an improvement?</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-15357130707969359742017-05-17T16:30:00.002+02:002018-11-21T17:01:39.898+01:00Mark Lawrenson, Bakery Products and the Serena Slam<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<h2 style="text-align: left;">
Is Mark Lawrenson a genius?</h2>
<div>
As is usually the case at this stage in the season, we start getting a range of articles on the 'lad banter' websites making fun of Mark Lawrenson and poking fun at how ridiculous his predictions and final league table are. Indeed, when he even gets teams in the correct position in the league, the fact that he has not predicted their actual points correctly is the next target.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZeuH8dgPW05SIJvhHBj8fChf7V-xA1tqJ3a6zsR0tFwE1VEb5kCe2iMHDCmsJ-QMLGzOCFO0D1I13GWa0UHBLQOgQiJdgn7Rx0IleLDE7fcQ0LK4qCYxE8ql4MFpUuKD7KJ6vx2z_3qQ/s1600/lawro.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZeuH8dgPW05SIJvhHBj8fChf7V-xA1tqJ3a6zsR0tFwE1VEb5kCe2iMHDCmsJ-QMLGzOCFO0D1I13GWa0UHBLQOgQiJdgn7Rx0IleLDE7fcQ0LK4qCYxE8ql4MFpUuKD7KJ6vx2z_3qQ/s400/lawro.jpg" width="395" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
However, how bad really are his predictions? We can take every match prediction that he has made this season and put a hypothetical £10 on the result that he predicts. With one week left in the season, he has made 365 predictions thus far, giving a total amount staked of £3,650. Using the Pinnacle closing odds from football-data.co.uk, Mark Lawrenson would actually have made a profit of £602.20 this season, giving him an impressive return of 16.5%.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
This analysis has been done for previous seasons as well elsewhere. Using the analysis predominantly from wearepremierleague.com, we can see that he has done well in the past as well, recording a 17.5% return in 2012/13, 11.0% return in 2013/14 and 7.2% in 2015/16. The only season in the past five in which he has recorded a loss was the 2014/15 season, where he lost at 3.7%.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
This means that if you had put £10 on every prediction from Mark Lawrenson in the past five seasons, you would have made £1,419 at a return of 8.6%. Almost any professional gambler would be happy with that return - maybe Mark Lawrenson is far smarter than we all realise...</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h2 style="text-align: left;">
Nadal, Carreno Busta and Tomic - the ATP bakery</h2>
<div>
Recently, I have been looking at how many bakery sets (6-0 bagels or 6-1 breadsticks) various players in the ATP have won in the past 12 months. One interesting stat is that Gael Monfils has won the same number of bagel sets as Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic combined. However, what I was really looking into was what percentage of sets each player won by one of these dominant scorelines. Of those players with at least 100 sets played in the past 12 months, here are the top players:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5Kov5P4AxurNv8oZGqTOkgrJuu_OzEfdyL5VPY3TQDWCEVIC3tXbxctHuFhFj-UE4uxU9tY5jd-g0rjup_thMuzs4T-nvCxFymUuo7IQASP2BFmoktEZGy1W18M708XhMhsM9THqICI8/s1600/bakeryfor.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5Kov5P4AxurNv8oZGqTOkgrJuu_OzEfdyL5VPY3TQDWCEVIC3tXbxctHuFhFj-UE4uxU9tY5jd-g0rjup_thMuzs4T-nvCxFymUuo7IQASP2BFmoktEZGy1W18M708XhMhsM9THqICI8/s1600/bakeryfor.jpg" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
This is obviously dependent to an extent on the quality of opponents - a few matches against local wildcards gives a real opportunity for bakery sets, but what really stands out is how many dominant sets Rafael Nadal wins. Interestingly, he actually wins very few bagel sets - just three in the past 12 months, which is less than the likes of Pablo Carreno Busta, Gilles Simon and Benoit Paire. However, he has no equal when it comes to 6-1 sets. He has won 24 6-1 sets in the past 12 months in just 135 sets, meaning that 17.8% of the sets that he has played have finished with this scoreline.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRI6OIsQ8SEIxgLGnSkd7Uo5Q2dRT2uhcG544HNLEyysogkyfQOFuneb5FnJycW_SPLVok9S7IJttiEASTro9nE6nCQjjUUGpRLR0ev99OqHM5AsgncBw0AIcgszNkRP1PI2yJbiS9N5U/s1600/bakeryfor.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRI6OIsQ8SEIxgLGnSkd7Uo5Q2dRT2uhcG544HNLEyysogkyfQOFuneb5FnJycW_SPLVok9S7IJttiEASTro9nE6nCQjjUUGpRLR0ev99OqHM5AsgncBw0AIcgszNkRP1PI2yJbiS9N5U/s1600/bakeryfor.jpg" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
At the other end of the scale, it is no surprise to see the big servers like Karlovic and Isner. Given the quality of their return games, it would be quite the shock if they were to win dominant sets, even against weaker opposition. However, they are both better than Bernard Tomic, who has just the one 6-1 set in the past 12 months, which came against Thomaz Bellucci at the Australian Open.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
One interesting thing to note is that when it comes to opening set bagels, nobody has more in the past 12 months than Pablo Carreno Busta. The Spaniard, who has made great strides up the rankings in the past 12 months, has won no fewer than four opening set bagels, twice as many as any other player.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h2 style="text-align: left;">
Serena Slam</h2>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSftv-fz4buA6pmj_AggGnj5LYF0b5bHKF6CqTqKQ-8drjG-lnBBZN0HjlmMZNFMSMJLo819d8UTg8xmQfxstxcvkJ65W3WSMWN_u5rG01spHqnADgVgS57qhPIpu6AomQXAZ7YaOjzAs/s1600/SerenaCombined.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="326" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSftv-fz4buA6pmj_AggGnj5LYF0b5bHKF6CqTqKQ-8drjG-lnBBZN0HjlmMZNFMSMJLo819d8UTg8xmQfxstxcvkJ65W3WSMWN_u5rG01spHqnADgVgS57qhPIpu6AomQXAZ7YaOjzAs/s400/SerenaCombined.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
In the wake of Serena's pregnancy and the question over whether she will return to tennis, I thought I would take a look at her level over the past seven years. If we use her combined score (% points won on serve + % points won on return), we can get a proxy for the quality of her game over this period.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We can see the incredible rise through the middle and end of 2012 and the peak in the 2013 US Open final against Victoria Azarenka, where her combined score came perilously close to hitting the 120 mark, which is simply unbelievable. As a comparison, at his most dominant last year, Novak Djokovic's combined score just rose above 115, so to come close to 120 is almost beyond comprehension. It is testament to Azarenka's quality that she was able to live with Serena for so long in that US Open final.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Unsurprisingly, that level was unsustainable as she aged and we see her drop down to the 112-114 range, which is still elite. It is interesting to note how much her level had dropped from its peak during the period in which she won the Serena Slam for the second time. While she was clearly still dominant, she was being pushed more than before in those matches.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
For a number of years, the numbers have suggested that Serena Williams has been in decline as I have written about previously. The common response to this has usually been that she is still number #1 and is still winning slams. The simple reality is that her level was so unbelievable high before that she can decline a long way before any other players start to come close to her. That she is in decline and that she is still the best player can both be true.</div>
</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com61tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-54825992005387374932017-04-16T14:43:00.002+02:002018-11-21T17:01:04.279+01:00T20 Cricket - A Few Thoughts<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<b style="font-size: x-large;"><u>James Faulkner's Hitting</u></b><br />
<br />
During the strategic timeout in the Rising Pune Supergiants against Gujarat Lions, the pundits were discussing potential changes for the Gujarat Lions and, in particular, the option of James Faulkner. One of the benefits of Faulkner was supposedly that he is 'capable of hitting big shots in the middle order'.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyvJ0ith7FDCSMqGs6FgHiMV0UobNfjh1IyUHOqK96g3PWHaEZxl3UlAiB-oYRbI02RPY8q1LkcygtZ-A4-A8t1uPgMcoKO6CMaEmJjdVDXkowj7irCD7ERpaYqpbHjG3uyrc_aYA_Jtw/s1600/ballsboundary.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="318" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyvJ0ith7FDCSMqGs6FgHiMV0UobNfjh1IyUHOqK96g3PWHaEZxl3UlAiB-oYRbI02RPY8q1LkcygtZ-A4-A8t1uPgMcoKO6CMaEmJjdVDXkowj7irCD7ERpaYqpbHjG3uyrc_aYA_Jtw/s400/ballsboundary.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
While there are a number of areas that James Faulkner is strong in, big hitting is certainly not one of those. Indeed, of all the players that have scored at least 1000 runs in T20 cricket, James Faulkner actually requires the most balls per boundary hit. Faulkner is elite at avoiding dot balls and rotating the strike, but hitting boundaries is really not his strong point. Just as knowledge of exactly how some players play does not appear to be the strong point of certain pundits.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>Keeping Wickets in Hand</u></b></span><br />
<br />
We always hear commentators talking about how teams should not take risks early on in order to keep wickets in hand for later in the innings. However, how much does keeping wickets in hand actually help?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3EiuUevXbHfIdwkyhFQ0jPk5z6N15xnQULBjE1dZ_lbsKjjtpu76thCmzxXzXMIkUth6nEXdYZEuRaZgHUMEcVvjmvJ3kRVW-K5rcLxVBRFeLa0fvUZyzaiizl9VZZdNPnT4gha0vgVE/s1600/last5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3EiuUevXbHfIdwkyhFQ0jPk5z6N15xnQULBjE1dZ_lbsKjjtpu76thCmzxXzXMIkUth6nEXdYZEuRaZgHUMEcVvjmvJ3kRVW-K5rcLxVBRFeLa0fvUZyzaiizl9VZZdNPnT4gha0vgVE/s400/last5.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
The chart shows the number of runs scored in the final 5 overs of a T20 innings based on the number of wickets that have fallen by the start of this period. As we can see, each extra wicket in hand is generally worth around an additional 2 runs during the final 5 overs, although this does drop off dramatically if you have lost most of your wickets, but this is hardly a surprise. In reality, it seems that conserving wickets at the expense of scoring runs earlier might not necessarily be the best plan.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>Use of Jason Roy</u></b></span><br />
<br />
There were a few raised eyebrows at Jason Roy being brought in way down the order at #6 for the Gujarat Lions against the Mumbai Indians. Whilst it is understandable having Dwayne Smith and Brendon McCullum opening the batting, particularly given their long history of opening together for the Chennai Super Kings, it was a strange decision to not bring him in at the fall of the opening wicket.<br />
<br />
Jason Roy is a player that scores 45.0% of his runs from fours, whilst not necessarily being a big six hitter. This is one reason why he is a very strong player in the powerplay overs, where there are limited players allowed outside the circle, and he is able to pick the gaps well and pick up the fours. Outside of the powerplay, there are less gaps to find those boundaries. We can see in his stats that during the powerplay, he hits a four every 5.07 balls compared to every 11.1 balls outside of the powerplay.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEif-ywRP1d0lbnEXNFmCdeOjP4ybLVjqRuczKiNfgWXkyZjUIOEzD5zaOs1uoAV8f1bKGgXgOKEsJEuxTA810AaDriDgYqYvEV_XJjGlcjb_wwqkU9f8uo8a0qobwYaDLTY344atazR1-I/s1600/jasonroy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="51" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEif-ywRP1d0lbnEXNFmCdeOjP4ybLVjqRuczKiNfgWXkyZjUIOEzD5zaOs1uoAV8f1bKGgXgOKEsJEuxTA810AaDriDgYqYvEV_XJjGlcjb_wwqkU9f8uo8a0qobwYaDLTY344atazR1-I/s640/jasonroy.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Jason Roy has a strike rate of 147.3 during the powerplay compared with 142.6 outside of it. In contrast, Suresh Raina, who came in at the fall of the opening wicket, has a strike rate of 127.0 during the powerplay compared to 139.1 outside of it. So, Gujarat effectively brought in a player that scores better once the fielding restrictions are relaxed during the powerplay, rather than a player that thrives under those conditions.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com18tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-74935130766454602972017-04-06T21:08:00.000+02:002021-02-17T14:50:36.747+01:00IPL Preview - Gujarat Lions<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>The Overseas Players</u></b></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br /></u></b></span>
The pick of the overseas players that Gujarat Lions have signed for this season is undoubtedly Jason Roy. My model has him as the 5th ranked batsman in global T20 cricket with a rating of 1.26, which is outstanding. A strike rate of 146.0 as an opening batsman is excellent and, as I have written about previously, he is also one of the fastest starting opening batsmen in T20 cricket. Another interesting aspect of Roy's game is that while he is a decent six hitter, he is one of the best players at hitting fours - his average of a four every 6.14 balls faced is almost unparalleled. The only potential concern may be his ability against spin bowling, where his strike rate is 136.6 and he is dismissed every 17.1 balls faced against spinners, compared to every 23.3 balls against non-spin, but he is undoubtedly going to be a key player for the Gujarat Lions in 2017.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiyQ9aRg31hoDEuZmBBEM13_mhpKXxVm4RZRHMqwFKZKMs_wvwzWSUsNYn6MRdHxsGodUoIdnSEq8gaaEgf0J06mZhOOZDd5ewcx_XDADfyOoxWPUTtPWpEisRbnaFMjflpdSHIorTN60/s1600/roy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiyQ9aRg31hoDEuZmBBEM13_mhpKXxVm4RZRHMqwFKZKMs_wvwzWSUsNYn6MRdHxsGodUoIdnSEq8gaaEgf0J06mZhOOZDd5ewcx_XDADfyOoxWPUTtPWpEisRbnaFMjflpdSHIorTN60/s400/roy.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The IPL could be the stage that Jason Roy needs to prove his quality</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
The potential of Jason Roy alongside Aaron Finch and Brendon McCullum makes for an incredibly exciting top order for the Gujarat Lions. Finch (1.18 rating) and McCullum (1.17 rating) are both top class batsmen in their own right. In addition, they are both also among the fastest starting opening batsmen in T20 cricket, which raises the possibility of some huge powerplay scores for Gujarat if they all click on any given day.<br />
<br />
They also have Dwayne Smith as a potential option to open the batting, but with a batting rating of 1.01, it is tough to make an argument for him over the other three. Whilst he does also provide an option with the ball, a bowling rating of 0.87 suggests that it is probably not a particularly good option.<br />
<br />
The hugely experienced duo of James Faulkner and Dwayne Bravo provide all-rounder options among the overseas players. Faulkner has a bowling rating of 0.99, but is an above average death bowler, which does provide options. In terms of his batting, a rating of 0.83 is not particularly impressive, he has a fairly low strike rate and does not hit too many boundaries, but he does face very few dot balls, which can be useful with bigger hitters around him. Dwayne Bravo is virtually the most experienced T20 cricketer in the game, but a batting rating of 0.83 and a bowling rating of 0.91 does not really back up the fact that he is an overly useful player.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLq30QvCIOLxmgFct7lregvWiTp4S21U-HicW5EWc7Nio2Q1is4XQ7gRghyT-Tq7l1f13V-IhBqB4EIHorxRRFpUqPXqOkeoNNdpoNxw1KERqgCtwYhJ_I_a1z6v4UPWkR92IFgHaLQlw/s1600/faulkner.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLq30QvCIOLxmgFct7lregvWiTp4S21U-HicW5EWc7Nio2Q1is4XQ7gRghyT-Tq7l1f13V-IhBqB4EIHorxRRFpUqPXqOkeoNNdpoNxw1KERqgCtwYhJ_I_a1z6v4UPWkR92IFgHaLQlw/s400/faulkner.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">James Faulkner ability with the ball at the death will be important for Gujarat</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
They also have the option of Andrew Tye, an Australian bowler that tends to bowl at the death on a regular basis. However, a death bowling rating of 0.84 suggests that he is not as good as people think that he is and it is tough to really make any argument for him in this team.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>The Indian Players</u></b></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br /></u></b></span>
With a batting rating of 1.09, Suresh Raina provides another high quality batting option for Gujarat Lions. He has a reasonable strike rate, but he is very effective at not losing his wicket and is pretty adept at rotating the strike. As a foil to the big hitting overseas trio of Roy, Finch and McCullum, it gives Gujarat as good a top four as any team in the tournament.<br />
<br />
In Dinesh Karthik, Gujarat have a wicket-keeper that is solid as a batsman as well. While his batting rating of 0.99 puts him almost perfectly at the global average, there are far worse options when it comes to keeping and, as an Indian player, it does not count toward their overseas quota.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqJGDd6KYOSTHNHImGsBLU56awmPJTWFqVkkkiuCmU9_ZeeX2Efmxlcc7OUWP2HPxjyBRP0eYFDR-4ciVy3C3R841Xv9GEJlzzXL_qGvHbQKhcGJ7_b0fXkIFX0lzbwPV_lk_lW6irFzU/s1600/raina.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqJGDd6KYOSTHNHImGsBLU56awmPJTWFqVkkkiuCmU9_ZeeX2Efmxlcc7OUWP2HPxjyBRP0eYFDR-4ciVy3C3R841Xv9GEJlzzXL_qGvHbQKhcGJ7_b0fXkIFX0lzbwPV_lk_lW6irFzU/s400/raina.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">It is important to have high quality Indian players and Suresh Raina is certainly that</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
However, bowling options are where there could be problems for the Gujarat Lions. Praveen Kumar is quite simply not good enough with a bowling rating of just 0.88. His economy rate is not too bad, but he just does not take wickets. My data shows him with 69 wickets compared to an expected 104.8 wickets, which is just not good enough. Shadab Jakati is another bowling option, but again, with a rating of just 0.90, he is not a bowler that is likely to be a major positive for Gujarat.<br />
<br />
Whilst Ravindra Jadeja has proven himself to be a very decent test bowler, my model still feels that he has plenty to prove in the shortest format. A bowling rating of 0.93 suggests that he has some issues in T20 cricket and if you look at the batsmen that have thrived against him, the big hitters have tended to have a lot of joy with the likes of AB de Villiers (179 SR), David Miller (191 SR), Kieron Pollard (222 SR) and Andre Russell (250 SR) all being able to score rapidly against him.<br />
<br />
Munaf Patel is a better option with a bowling rating of 1.02. He is particularly strong in the powerplay and the middle overs, but his death bowling rating of 0.81 suggests that, if he is selected, Gujarat would be best off using his overs earlier in the innings, rather than using him at the end.<br />
<br />
The best bowler in this squad would appear to be Dhawal Kulkarni with a bowling rating of 1.04. He has shown in the past that he is an excellent bowler in the powerplay overs, particularly with regard to taking wickets, and with the limited bowling options, he may be relied on to get early wickets if Gujarat are not to find themselves chasing some big targets.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSvOOE_2yN72iRIKUG8zhRdJ5gNzkT9BemPPlMviQRSnflYkQcA5qwdThd_vKAj29qN0dV020HBIt0gqFxeksP_aiS8ax5svtcOkXCUyr7zSNGVjCPOA2jlkYY55M6zDddhg3a9kaJZyI/s1600/kulkarni.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="221" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSvOOE_2yN72iRIKUG8zhRdJ5gNzkT9BemPPlMviQRSnflYkQcA5qwdThd_vKAj29qN0dV020HBIt0gqFxeksP_aiS8ax5svtcOkXCUyr7zSNGVjCPOA2jlkYY55M6zDddhg3a9kaJZyI/s400/kulkarni.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Gujarat will need Dhawal Kulkarni to perform well early in the innings</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Based on this, Gujarat Lions will be hoping that one of their younger Indian bowlers can stand out and make a name for themselves, but Shivil Kaushik (0.81 rating) does not appear to be a likely candidate. The other two options could be Nathu Singh or Basil Thampi, but I have no data on them, so it is impossible to know whether they might be what Gujarat could need.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>Final Thoughts</u></b></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br /></u></b></span>
Gujarat have invested heavily on the batting side and they will relying on the batsmen to score enough runs to make up for the weaknesses with the ball. Roy, Finch and McCullum have the potential to form a devastating top order, but given the lack of bowling options, it may be that they can only afford to play two of those and need both Faulkner and Bravo to cover as bowling options. However, with Suresh Raina and Dinesh Karthik, they do have some decent batting to cover the loss of one of the star openers. The other area that will be interesting is that, outside of the top order, there does not appear to be a great deal of power hitting. Neither Bravo or Faulkner are particularly big hitters of the ball and none of the bowlers are particularly reknowned as lower order hitters. It may well be that they rely on the top order to get them off to a rapid start, but slow down as the innings progresses.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-91347607120571863182017-04-03T17:27:00.001+02:002018-11-21T17:00:22.302+01:00IPL Preview - Sunrisers Hyderabad<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<b style="font-size: x-large;"><u>The Overseas Players</u></b><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br /></u></b></span>
In their captain, David Warner, Sunrisers Hyderabad have one of the best T20 batsmen in global cricket. With a batting rating of 1.24, he is ranked as the 6th best batsman in my ratings and there are very few signs of any weaknesses in his game. He scores significantly faster than the average batsman, whilst being dismissed significantly less regularly. He has a strike rate of 139.0 against spin bowling and 142.6 against non-spin bowling and is also a player that is a fast starter at the beginning of his innings, with a strike rate of 122.0 in the 1st 10 balls that he faces. Whilst he does sometimes have a tendency to be dismissed early with 30.9% of his innings having between 0 and 9 runs scored, if he reaches 20 runs, he converts that into at least a half century over 50.0% of the time.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiK7vGnCvPRTGVT7Dek9-VDKy_MNBs3_fLJ4MnOgXnX8hLd8xShp_IJL2mJD5GFhvcdLyGEyzZFBuWRz8naxIejUG9qvmBsTkhoFnw8KPvlZMDBk2kRALjE36M1-ZwfM8VLEofGk_YQmek/s1600/warner.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="227" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiK7vGnCvPRTGVT7Dek9-VDKy_MNBs3_fLJ4MnOgXnX8hLd8xShp_IJL2mJD5GFhvcdLyGEyzZFBuWRz8naxIejUG9qvmBsTkhoFnw8KPvlZMDBk2kRALjE36M1-ZwfM8VLEofGk_YQmek/s400/warner.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">David Warner will need to have an excellent tournament for Sunrisers</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Kane Williamson is the other overseas batsman in their line-up and despite his excellent test record, his T20 rating of 1.08 means that, while comfortably above average, he is far from an elite performer in this format. He is a player that does not really have the ability to score significantly above average with a strike rate of 123.5, which is only fractionally above what one would expect from an average batsman in his position.<br />
<br />
Among the overseas bowling options, Sunrisers Hyderabad have recruited well. In Mustafizur Rahman, Rashid Khan, Chris Jordan and Ben Laughlin, they have four bowlers that can be very effective when used correctly. 18-year old Rashid Khan has a bowling rating of 1.12 for the middle overs and 1.08 for the death overs and is a very dangerous wicket-taking bowler as well as having above average economy. Mustafizur Rahman has an incredible 1.41 rating for the powerplay overs, driven in particular by an outstanding economy rate. He is not a huge wicket-taking bowler, but he is very difficult to score off. He could potentially form a decent partnership with Ben Laughlin, whose powerplay rating of 1.22 is driven more by wicket-taking than by economy. However, it would be advised not to use Laughlin toward the death, where a rating of 0.91 is pretty poor and he both takes fewer wickets and concedes more runs than might be expected. Chris Jordan is another player with a reputation as a death bowler, but his most effective use might appear to be as a wicket-taker during the middle overs, where he has taken 20 wickets compared to an expected 16.4 during his career.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDGsG4x6JWV4Awpk7LNKQkLsO3c37aQZiOkL2OwSYKC8-21OBzi3IsPO6UPqWGIPlU9REqVb0IIMkUWZLgUJASRW1q6KsUz_xktZsXw0A6wiNRgr_44Y0R40gGy6sOV5PQrSxRBMIggK0/s1600/rashid.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDGsG4x6JWV4Awpk7LNKQkLsO3c37aQZiOkL2OwSYKC8-21OBzi3IsPO6UPqWGIPlU9REqVb0IIMkUWZLgUJASRW1q6KsUz_xktZsXw0A6wiNRgr_44Y0R40gGy6sOV5PQrSxRBMIggK0/s400/rashid.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Rashid Khan could be a breakout star of this tournament</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Among the all-rounders, Ben Cutting is just about fine as a lower order hitter, but his bowling rating of 0.87 suggests that he is probably not really the best option. In addition, a real struggle against spin bowling means that the IPL may not be the best place for him to make an impact. A couple of recent innings against Ireland have suggested that Mohammad Nabi might be another option as a lower order hitter, although that has been somewhat at odds with the rest of his career. Similar to Cutting, his bowling rating of 0.90 is not great either. Moises Henriques is a significantly better batsman than either Nabi or Cutting and has a better bowling rating as well, so he is really the all-rounder option that you would look at among the overseas players if required.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>The Indian Players</u></b></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br /></u></b></span>
In Ashish Nehra and Bhuvneshwar Kumar, the Sunrisers Hyderabad have two slightly above average bowling options. Kumar is similar to Mustafizur Rahman in that he relies more on a good economy rate than wicket-taking, while Nehra is more rounded, but they give the team two solid fast bowling options. Barinder Sran played plenty of matches last year, but a bowling rating of 0.96 suggests that there are better options in the squad. Spinner Pravin Tambe burst onto the scene in 2013 and 2014 (albeit at the age of 41) and while his rating has dropped since then, he still has an overall bowling rating of 1.12 and is a wicket-taker during the middle overs.<br />
<br />
Whilst the overseas all-rounders did not really have any obvious standouts, Bipul Sharma looks a very tempting option among the domestic players. While he has limited batting experience at this level, he looks a serviceable lower order hitter with a strike rate of 160.6 and his bowling rating of 1.04 makes him an option with the ball. On the other hand, Deepak Hooda has a batting rating of 0.90 and a bowling rating of 0.82 meaning that he really should not be getting much game time in this team.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhqwqXtoSBdn3pNQC45j-jZ_sWB8rJNKkcOexjaqM7D-u2M3OcM0_gMT0sRJM27KzymPZ-nQ2mk3s_K9_FB-ZMnIXUJ4UuPC3iG-eZwQz0SF2zW0LW713_Pxqk8s5UttVlWLGJdlYLiIK0/s1600/bipul.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhqwqXtoSBdn3pNQC45j-jZ_sWB8rJNKkcOexjaqM7D-u2M3OcM0_gMT0sRJM27KzymPZ-nQ2mk3s_K9_FB-ZMnIXUJ4UuPC3iG-eZwQz0SF2zW0LW713_Pxqk8s5UttVlWLGJdlYLiIK0/s400/bipul.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Bipul Sharma could be a useful all-rounder for the Sunrisers</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
With a batting rating of 1.03, Shikhar Dhawan looks to be a very similar player to Kane Williamson. He is not a particularly rapid scorer with a strike rate of just 121.6, but he is capable of hanging around and holding up an end. With other more attacking batsmen around him, he is a useful player, but Sunrisers Hyderabad do run the risk of ending up with Dhawan and Williamson batting too long together while scoring too slowly if they find themselves at the crease together.<br />
<br />
Naman Ojha seems likely to be the keeper for Sunrisers Hyderabad, but with a batting rating of 0.78, he is not a player that they are likely to want to rely on for too many runs.<br />
<br />
That leaves Yuvraj Singh, whose batting rating of 0.93 suggests that he is well past his prime and, whilst his record of 14.7 balls per six is solid, he also faces too many dot balls (36.7%), which does not help when they do not have too many other boundary hitters in their squad.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>Final Thoughts</u></b></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br /></u></b></span>
The bowling options for Sunrisers Hyderabad look very solid with Nehra, Kumar, Tambe and Sharma giving them options among the Indian players and plenty of talent to supplement among the overseas recruits. However, they are going to need to rely on the bowlers in plenty of their matches this year as the batting looks worryingly short. While there may be a lack of real top quality death bowlers on this team, they have wicket-taking options in both the powerplay and middle overs and two very economical bowlers in Mustafizur Rahman and Kumar to build the pressure.<br />
<br />
David Warner is the real standout in this team and they are going to need him to be at the absolutely top of his game. Kane Williamson and Shikhar Dhawan are solid options and, if their bowlers can restrict opposition teams to manageable totals, they should be adequate. However, they do not seem to have the players that are likely to be able to set or chase large totals, which could be an issue if the bowlers do not live up to expectations.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>Random Player Stats</u></b></span><br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Bhuvneshwar Kumar has conceded just 77 runs in 108 deliveries to Dwayne Smith, Brendon McCullum and Quinton de Kock, but has conceded 145 runs in 96 deliveries to Chris Gayle and AB de Villiers</li>
</ul>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>The three batsman that Mustafizur Rahman has bowled the most deliveries to in T20 cricket are Virat Kohli, Kane Williamson and AB de Villiers. He has dismissed all of them once and has conceded just 63 runs in 64 balls against the trio</li>
</ul>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>The only two bowlers that David Warner has faced more than 30 deliveries from with a strike rate of sub-100 are Dwayne Bravo and James Faulkner. However, he enjoys facing Yuzvendra Chahal, who he has hit 5 sixes off in just 38 balls</li>
</ul>
</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-71356538490414446552017-02-20T22:03:00.000+01:002021-02-17T14:50:26.560+01:00IPL Auction Review<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Today saw the auction for the 2017 edition of the Indian Premier League (IPL) and it came with the usual fanfare. We saw two English players in great demand, a couple of potential bargains and some rather questionable purchases. On the flip side, there were players that one might have expected to be signed that were overlooked, some correctly and some could have provided good value to franchises. This article will look at a selection of players and look to classify them in terms of whether they were smart signings or not, or whether they should have been signed or not.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLF7zrJw-8LYsLqZ5jhkdzS85yULFZHR88xGr4y-MMT5q6d1gDaZFKpau0YC_WpsIQfjK5VRbVV_vmLPrOplZfSR17wpGRAAZcEzRy57Wz7Mq-3UA9Ut-Vo3Fjr843EWAhxYcs12i6vYg/s1600/ipl.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="271" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLF7zrJw-8LYsLqZ5jhkdzS85yULFZHR88xGr4y-MMT5q6d1gDaZFKpau0YC_WpsIQfjK5VRbVV_vmLPrOplZfSR17wpGRAAZcEzRy57Wz7Mq-3UA9Ut-Vo3Fjr843EWAhxYcs12i6vYg/s400/ipl.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
To achieve this, I will be using the ratings generated by my T20 model. I will not go into too much detail as to how it works in this article, but further information can be found by following the links at the bottom of the page.<br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
Smart Signings</h3>
<div>
Anyone that has followed this blog before will know that my cricket model rates Tymal Mills very highly indeed. This table was from mid-January and shows the best and worst death bowlers in T20 cricket:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSYXiAIoc99J0L7Meq9wagARJ4z_wIPTIfQlR5ghx5Nj1ecxAF3gUcQyI4FYAfTI0VsEgQ-qUjNcPWXGumkeh2EOm_W-nsOHUIG8KqIRy_z25XcHEjVSqkivQGq-7EtCQ9P1ikoBCZb6A/s1600/C3GKfTXW8AI-p3J.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSYXiAIoc99J0L7Meq9wagARJ4z_wIPTIfQlR5ghx5Nj1ecxAF3gUcQyI4FYAfTI0VsEgQ-qUjNcPWXGumkeh2EOm_W-nsOHUIG8KqIRy_z25XcHEjVSqkivQGq-7EtCQ9P1ikoBCZb6A/s400/C3GKfTXW8AI-p3J.jpg" width="357" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div>
His performances in the last month in both the international matches against India and the Pakistan Super League have actually boosted his death rating further to 1.20, securing his spot as the top death bowler in T20 cricket. At 12 crore, it might be thought that he is expensive, but I would class this as a very good signing by Royal Challengers Bangalore, although it will be interesting to see how he deals bowling many of his overs at the very bowler-unfriendly ground in Bangalore.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBQ3yPPuBKy4cpUO-gQ3jtXoB3ETDQssk6MpwsfxXNzAmxxkwE2iezkGM2sXxa-FTnkqw8CmOEoHmjX-2H37B7Y82QfsjZpq1-VW1iaqzWZXJF32xT9aXfRDalXYMJYEUtDAmIdncqSzE/s1600/mills.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBQ3yPPuBKy4cpUO-gQ3jtXoB3ETDQssk6MpwsfxXNzAmxxkwE2iezkGM2sXxa-FTnkqw8CmOEoHmjX-2H37B7Y82QfsjZpq1-VW1iaqzWZXJF32xT9aXfRDalXYMJYEUtDAmIdncqSzE/s400/mills.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
Kagiso Rabada is a bowler that did not appear on the previous death bowling table due to inadequate overs, but a death bowling rating of 1.12 shows that he is another very good bowler in one of the most important periods of the innings. A rating of 1.10 in the powerplay overs also show that he is a real threat throughout the innings and he could be a very smart signing for the Delhi Daredevils.<br />
<br />
Rashid Khan is a name that may well be unknown to many, but he was one of the surprise signings of auction day after being signed by Sunrisers Hyderabad for 4 crore. The 18-year old Afghan could turn out to be an inspired signing though. A middle overs rating of 1.16 is excellent and he is both economical and a wicket-taker during this period, while he has also been used in the death overs at times and has returned an excellent 1.16 rating. How much he will be used by Sunrisers Hyderabad remains to be seen, but he looks a smart signing.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhe9PZfO6WNqhWonkUAg994t697zDSehsBDhrcyLzaGv0euTES-CYy4BGl1RauybNaCg8FQsc0pQVqF8CiXlK4ssImPqPkbap1-J1leGJFhRx-jfYbWjxS1aO90mgEPA5sr-0P54XMps3Y/s1600/khan.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhe9PZfO6WNqhWonkUAg994t697zDSehsBDhrcyLzaGv0euTES-CYy4BGl1RauybNaCg8FQsc0pQVqF8CiXlK4ssImPqPkbap1-J1leGJFhRx-jfYbWjxS1aO90mgEPA5sr-0P54XMps3Y/s400/khan.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
Jason Roy and Martin Guptill are both smart signings as opening batsmen with batting ratings of 1.26 and 1.18 respectively. Gujarat already have Brendon McCullum, Aaron Finch and Suresh Raina, but the addition of Jason Roy gives them a very dangerous top 4 if they choose to play all of those players and alongside McCullum, they have two of the fastest starting opening batsmen in this format of the game.<br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
Poor Signings</h3>
</div>
<div>
Nathan Coulter-Nile was picked up by the Kolkata Knight Riders, but it is tough to see the logic behind this signing. He is a good powerplay bowler with a rating of 1.12, but this drops to 0.98 during the middle overs and 0.90 during the death overs, which combined with a batting rating of 0.72, means that he is only really a feasible option if you bowl three of his overs during the powerplay.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Corey Anderson is another all-rounder that is a strange signing. A batting rating of 1.03, a powerplay bowling rating of 1.02, middle overs rating of 0.78 and a death rating of 0.85 really means that he does not really excel anywhere. There is a group of all-rounders that seem to be picked up regularly, despite not really being good enough at either batting or bowling to fully justify their place - Anderson is joined in this group by the likes of Darren Sammy and Dan Christian.</div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVc0zVwLTAKBcOKtGai21CRiBTdgreH9fagKOJmbKSXuSaFzi5KU_sIo8ALxPbgkOcAv0D7R4I778Hh-6nXSOpYsFx1GyhpW00W7kC5igPcyQqOssawJ8L_b3YGJod6kkeIgyUm3LLaks/s1600/stokes.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVc0zVwLTAKBcOKtGai21CRiBTdgreH9fagKOJmbKSXuSaFzi5KU_sIo8ALxPbgkOcAv0D7R4I778Hh-6nXSOpYsFx1GyhpW00W7kC5igPcyQqOssawJ8L_b3YGJod6kkeIgyUm3LLaks/s400/stokes.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
</div>
<div>
This may be a slightly controversial view, but I would class Ben Stokes as a poor signing, particularly given the money that was spent on him. His bowling ratings are 0.72 in the powerplay, 0.83 in the middle overs and 1.00 in the death overs, none of which are really anything to write home about. His batting rating of 1.05 is fine, but nothing more than that, so while he is not a terrible option, there is little to justify his billing as the most expensive foreign player in IPL history.</div>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
Unsigned Players</h3>
<div>
While there are plenty of good opening batsmen already signed in the IPL, the quartet of Alex Hales (1.24), Michael Klinger (1.19), Evin Lewis (1.12) and Mohammad Shahzad (1.08) might all feel slightly unfortunate to have been overlooked. However, one batsman that has been rightfully overlooked after many years of playing in the IPL is Ross Taylor, whose batting rating of 0.97 is just not good enough to justify a place in the elite competition.</div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPqP-oWOBwczZ4biwj_rXJ8SCsglu2ZdaQWvIbqRwy_Pq-gL9HXS_llELVXmnlesDdN99nqIkj3NlRe71tGHlPNr0YEkmWamIb3H1nz_wBsFewmYwGh7hLlvATxCjBBmVeqTiWTRnwWs8/s1600/hales.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPqP-oWOBwczZ4biwj_rXJ8SCsglu2ZdaQWvIbqRwy_Pq-gL9HXS_llELVXmnlesDdN99nqIkj3NlRe71tGHlPNr0YEkmWamIb3H1nz_wBsFewmYwGh7hLlvATxCjBBmVeqTiWTRnwWs8/s400/hales.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
</div>
<div>
Two all-rounders that were surprisingly, but correctly, overlooked were Irfan Pathan and Thisara Perera. Two players that have played in the IPL for many years, they have been living on their past reputations and potentially undeserved reputations as dangerous big hitters, but their stats do not really show anything to suggest that they would add to any of the current IPL franchises.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Moving onto the bowlers, there was surprise at the fact that Imran Tahir was overlooked. He only really bowls in the middle overs and a rating of 1.02 for that period suggests that he is a decent bowling option, but no more than that. He may have been unfortunate to be overlooked, but it is not necessarily the biggest oversight.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Ishant Sharma is one of the worst death bowlers in T20 cricket and it is smart by franchises to overlook him. He is not good enough in the powerplay to justify picking him and bowling him through the powerplay, so there is not a role for him in a good T20 team.</div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh947cAtoQ5XMMgNjO-jYjo69z863pHrtw-5BZknRKaDGUMlUW3u4IncFfD9NVXOY_wes7Oy1ZaH5M6C5qvlTBIp4vwa0c8BU9ShCzKKeKS9MvYqZjCwwmEnlHRI1W9LRPCalt2dj-mFZU/s1600/sodhi.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh947cAtoQ5XMMgNjO-jYjo69z863pHrtw-5BZknRKaDGUMlUW3u4IncFfD9NVXOY_wes7Oy1ZaH5M6C5qvlTBIp4vwa0c8BU9ShCzKKeKS9MvYqZjCwwmEnlHRI1W9LRPCalt2dj-mFZU/s400/sodhi.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
</div>
<div>
One player that can feel aggrieved to have missed out is New Zealand's Ish Sodhi. A rating of 1.30 in the middle overs is genuinely world-class and on potentially spin-friendly wickets in India, he could have been a big player at potentially a low price.<br />
<br />
<b><u>More Information on the Model</u></b><br />
<a href="http://www.sportdw.com/2016/08/best-t20-cricket-batsmen.html">Finding the Best T20 Batsmen in World Cricket</a><br />
<a href="http://www.sportdw.com/2016/09/best-t20-cricket-bowlers.html">Who are the Best T20 Bowlers in World Cricket</a></div>
</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com35tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-58151851324306464002017-01-08T11:38:00.000+01:002018-11-21T16:56:54.467+01:00Death Bowling in the Big Bash<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
The death overs in a T20 match can often be crucial in determining which side wins the match. In the first innings, a batting team can seize control of the match by piling on the runs in this spell, while the bowling team can bring their side back into it with a couple of tight overs. Similarly, in the second innings, the match is literally decided in these overs. We have already seen in the Big Bash what can happen when a poor death bowler is tasked with defending even a relatively high number of runs in the final over when Eoin Morgan and Pat Cummins took 16 off a Ben Hilfenhaus over to win the match. So, let us take a look at some of the death bowlers in the Big Bash to see which teams have specialists in this situation and which teams could be in trouble.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjC9sTicmEQnupjfEtdaV2MYW0O4ZcQE4zTsuBwEZKrnTYFW76KS3o5qkouMROGjJZ8lkOw4JD5M81IeVsIWj-u_25rhf4vFGKG8TrSgltqaNf29XXkbfwvHa6ju_5pgb47lgVfwztDUdI/s1600/morgan.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjC9sTicmEQnupjfEtdaV2MYW0O4ZcQE4zTsuBwEZKrnTYFW76KS3o5qkouMROGjJZ8lkOw4JD5M81IeVsIWj-u_25rhf4vFGKG8TrSgltqaNf29XXkbfwvHa6ju_5pgb47lgVfwztDUdI/s400/morgan.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
In my model, the death overs are classed as the final four overs of the innings (i.e. the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th overs of a T20 innings). The model generates a rating for each bowler in this period by comparing their performance in terms of runs conceded and wickets taken to the global T20 average. If a bowler concedes fewer runs or takes more wickets than would be expected from your average T20 bowler, his rating goes up. Conversely, if he concedes more runs and takes fewer wickets, his rating will decrease. The expected runs are also scaled depending on the ground and the batsman to whom he is bowling.<br />
<br />
There are 25 bowlers that have bowled in the death overs in the Big Bash thus far for whom I have at least 10 death overs of data for. The top five rated death bowlers in that group are:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8LhAOpa6FyfFS983S0lhuISwPZm1-8OGez1IkyOqK_uIFxz0HhV1LC-ZLB-WukijSDGSzAusKkXN2QgnBMVj8MR-BxwkzXunGVEL_egoS1hH9oUFoGzhhwwl0d-ZoZk2yOss-uCsR4Jc/s1600/topdeathbowlers.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="135" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8LhAOpa6FyfFS983S0lhuISwPZm1-8OGez1IkyOqK_uIFxz0HhV1LC-ZLB-WukijSDGSzAusKkXN2QgnBMVj8MR-BxwkzXunGVEL_egoS1hH9oUFoGzhhwwl0d-ZoZk2yOss-uCsR4Jc/s320/topdeathbowlers.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
As we can see, Sunil Narine is well clear at the top of the death bowler ratings in the Big Bash. The issue with Narine is that he is the Renegades best bowler in every situation, so saving his overs for the death may not necessarily be the best strategy. It is another spin bowler in Johan Botha, who is in second place, followed by the pace trio of Tait, Bollinger and McKay. Interestingly, with the exception of Sunil Narine, all four of the other bowlers are aged 33 or older. This could be a coincidence or it could be that experience is valuable when it comes to death bowling.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiogCCVFGRLSAUR6nVTvESEmtj8P3DGJYvEM7bRSn0DGimoTjR-xaRotUf35AaJsGVTdTxZwR2GGvENk5BV-6zz8ZfUDYVhBneGgp448_Hr3myYQwi4n7M9_ahFOHeWAQsx9ZPvrWN27NM/s1600/worstdeathbowlers.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="135" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiogCCVFGRLSAUR6nVTvESEmtj8P3DGJYvEM7bRSn0DGimoTjR-xaRotUf35AaJsGVTdTxZwR2GGvENk5BV-6zz8ZfUDYVhBneGgp448_Hr3myYQwi4n7M9_ahFOHeWAQsx9ZPvrWN27NM/s320/worstdeathbowlers.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
At the other end of the scale, we can see that Ben Hilfenhaus is among the worst death bowlers in the competition, raising questions as to why the Melbourne Stars persist with bowling him for two overs during this period. Brisbane Heat are also in trouble with both Ben Cutting and Mark Steketee in the bottom five of the ratings.<br />
<br />
However, with the injury to Samuel Badree, there may be hope for the Brisbane Heat. They have signed the English fast-bowler, Tymal Mills, as his replacement and the Sussex player is actually an excellent death bowler. Indeed, his rating of 1.16 makes him the best death bowler in the entire competition, which is something that the Heat desperately need in case their power batting lineup fails and the bowlers are required to play their part. While not necessarily a great wicket-taker, Mills is excellent in terms of restricting runs at the death and an economy rate of 7.49 during the death overs is outstanding.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-33954691534216073322016-12-29T16:30:00.000+01:002021-02-17T14:50:11.532+01:00Perth Scorchers - a Batting Order Dilemma<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
After 17 overs of the second innings, this morning's Big Bash match looked to be all but over. Perth Scorchers required 18 runs off 17 balls and knew that one of the remaining overs would have to be bowled by Aaron Finch due to an injury to Dwayne Bravo. However, after the wicket of Michael Klinger, the Scorchers would somehow leave themselves needing 7 off the final 3 balls and ended up winning it with a six off the final delivery.<br />
<br />
The almost choke from Perth Scorchers led Dan Weston of CricketRatings.co.uk to tweet the following:<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
Interested to know who is deciding Perth's batting order.<br />
<br />
Whoever it is, he shouldn't be...<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/BBL06?src=hash">#BBL06</a></div>
— Dan W (@Cricket_Ratings) <a href="https://twitter.com/Cricket_Ratings/status/814433701237063680">December 29, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
This led me to wonder how the various options looked in the stats and what arguments we could make for each of the batsmen.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>Scenario</u></b></span><br />
<br />
Firstly, here is a quick overview of the situation. Michael Klinger's dismissal on the second ball of Sunil Narine's final over meant that the Scorchers required 18 runs off the final 16 deliveries. They had Mitchell Marsh at the other end on 25 off 16 balls. In terms of the remaining bowling, Sunil Narine had four balls left, Nathan Rimmington had one over remaining and either Aaron Finch or Tom Cooper were expected to bowl the final over in the absence of Dwayne Bravo.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYw-kNq1JB5SmxVr6h6pRupYnEsOG-CNNVs8EMI6NcXMgBjJYtk3BbScZ81Xh8CzzPZ2huaeen1wHrPznoAOpFSKTbGIh866l_TL-golM4T1CRJnQvm3G3BF2cJksXW7vw4lMwLk66Ll8/s1600/klinger.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYw-kNq1JB5SmxVr6h6pRupYnEsOG-CNNVs8EMI6NcXMgBjJYtk3BbScZ81Xh8CzzPZ2huaeen1wHrPznoAOpFSKTbGIh866l_TL-golM4T1CRJnQvm3G3BF2cJksXW7vw4lMwLk66Ll8/s400/klinger.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Which batsman should have replaced Klinger following his dismissal?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Perth Scorchers effectively had five options in terms of who they brought in to replace Michael Klinger - Ashton Turner, Adam Voges, Ashton Agar, David Willey or Sam Whiteman. Let us look at each of them individually before we derives potential strategies.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>Batting Options</u></b></span><br />
<b><u><br /></u></b>
<b><u>Ashton Turner</u></b><br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Batting rating of 0.91</li>
<li>7.79 balls per boundary hit</li>
<li>18.6% dot balls faced</li>
<li>9 runs off 12 balls with 0 boundaries in 7 innings when coming in during 18th over or later</li>
<li>SR of 97.8, 38.0% dot balls and 18.4 balls per boundary during first 5 balls faced</li>
<li>Explosive potential with SR of 160.7 in balls 6-10</li>
</ul>
<br />
<b><u>Adam Voges</u></b><br />
<div>
<ul>
<li>Batting rating of 0.99 (but drops to 0.82 when chasing)</li>
<li>8.62 balls per boundary hit</li>
<li>22.4% dot balls faced</li>
<li>6 off 4 (2012) and 19 off 9 (2014) when coming in during 18th over or later</li>
<li>SR of 106.1, 37.4% dot balls and 10.3 balls per boundary during first 5 balls faced</li>
</ul>
<br />
<b><u>Ashton Agar</u></b><br />
<div>
<ul>
<li>Batting rating of 0.83</li>
<li>6.73 balls per boundary hit</li>
<li>33.3% dot balls faced</li>
<li>6 off 4 and 7 off 6 when coming in during 18th over or later</li>
<li>SR of 86.3, 53.7% dot balls and 10.6 balls per boundary during first 5 balls faced</li>
</ul>
<br />
<b><u>David Willey</u></b><br />
<div>
<ul>
<li>Batting rating of 1.16</li>
<li>5.05 balls per boundary hit</li>
<li>29.8% dot balls faced</li>
<li>44 off 26 balls when coming in during 18th over or later (although skewed by 25 off 9 in one innings)</li>
<li>SR of 80.9, 50.8% dot balls and 13.8 balls per boundary during first 5 balls faced</li>
<li>Much lower SR against pace than against spin</li>
<li>Explosive potential with SR of 166.1 in balls 6-10</li>
</ul>
<br />
<b><u>Sam Whiteman</u></b><br />
<div>
<ul>
<li>Batting rating of 0.86</li>
<li>7.98 balls per boundary hit</li>
<li>26.6% dot balls faced</li>
<li>9 off 4, 10 off 8 and 0 off 1 when coming in during 18th over or later</li>
<li>SR of 76.0, 47.9% dot balls and 16.0 balls per boundary during first 5 balls faced</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>Potential Strategies</u></b></span><br />
<br />
The advantage that Perth Scorchers had in this situation was the fact that they had Mitchell Marsh settled at the other end with 25 off 16 balls. Marsh is a decent batsman and also a reasonably fast scorer once he is in. Needing just 18 off 16 balls also meant that they didn't necessarily need to do much other than keep the score ticking over with the odd boundary.<br />
<br />
Based on this, one potential strategy would be to look for a player to simply get singles to give Marsh the strike straight away. In this situation, we might look at Adam Voges and Ashton Turner as options given their 22.4% and 18.6% of dot balls faced, especially when you consider that this only goes up to 37.4% and 38.0% in their first 5 balls faced. Linked to this, they also have the highest strike rate during their first few balls. However, a concern around Ashton Turner might be the fact that he has struggled in the past when it comes to starting his innings in the closing overs with just 9 runs off 12 balls across 7 innings.<br />
<br />
Another strategy might be to look for a big hitter to come in and effectively look to end the match as soon as possible. David Willey (5.05) and Ashton Agar (6.73) are the two options with the lowest balls per boundary stats, although one might also look at Adam Voges who, despite the worst balls per boundary stat overall, actually has the best balls per boundary early in his innings.<br />
<br />
A third strategy could be to look for a player with explosive potential, particularly knowing that Nathan Rimmington is far from the best death bowler in the competition and that Aaron Finch or Tom Cooper would have to bowl the final over. In this situation, David Willey and Ashton Turner are the clear standouts - both have strike rates of over 160.0 for balls 6-10 once they have had a few balls to get their eye in.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>Conclusion</u></b></span><br />
I would suggest that we can rule out Sam Whiteman as an option in this situation. He is not the fastest starter, does not rotate the strike that effectively early on and does not have the explosive acceleration. Ashton Agar could have been an option, but I feel that even if you were looking for a hitter to end it quickly, there were better options.<br />
<br />
This leaves David Willey, Adam Voges and Ashton Turner. With Mitchell Marsh at the other end, Ashton Turner seems like a reasonable option. The stats suggest that he is able to effectively rotate the strike from the start of his innings and he has done this against spinners in the past as well. He also has the benefit of being able to provide the acceleration in the last over or two if Mitchell Marsh falls. The major concern would be that he has struggled coming in late in the past.<br />
<br />
David Willey gives the same potential acceleration as Turner, but may have run the risk of getting bogged down facing dot balls early on. This downside also means that if you do not bring him in at this stage, there might not be an optimal opportunity to use him. However, with Marsh at the other end and the upside once he gets his eye in, he is a solid option. Adam Voges brings plenty of experience and has performed well in this situation in the past and with what should be an easy chase from this point, his lack of explosive scoring was unlikely to be a real issue.<br />
<br />
There is no obvious correct decision here from the basic stats, but it would be difficult to argue against any of Willey, Turner or Voges. It all really depends on what strategy you feel would give yourself the best chance of winning.<br />
<br />
The results of a quick poll on Twitter suggested that people felt that Willey would have been the best option over Voges with just 10% agreeing on Ashton Turner, but that could potentially be affected by the actual outcome.<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
In the BBL match this morning, who would you have brought in at #5 when Michael Klinger was dismissed?</div>
— Ian DW (@sportdw) <a href="https://twitter.com/sportdw/status/814472554329083904">December 29, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>What actually happened?</u></b></span><br />
<br />
Perth Scorchers decided on Ashton Turner, who actually struggled to get off strike against Narine or Rimmington and was dismissed for a very disappointing 1 off 5. As it happened, it should not really have gotten to the 7 off 3 balls as Mitchell Marsh should have hit the ball on which he was dismissed for 6, but it was interesting that it was Voges, then Agar, then Whiteman that the Scorchers opted for as the wickets fell, ignoring David Willey.<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-2827364042509035822016-10-19T07:48:00.001+02:002016-10-19T07:49:33.594+02:00Fixing in Tennis - The Public Perception in 2016<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Twelve months ago, I ran a survey looking at the <a href="http://www.sportdw.com/2015/10/fixing-in-tennis-public-perception.html">public perception of fixing in tennis</a>. It asked people with a range of different interests in tennis, whether it being as a fan, as a trader, as a journalist or even as a current or former player, for their views on fixing in tennis, how it is being perpetrated and what could be done going forward to prevent it. Since then, fixing in tennis has hit the headlines several times - the Buzzfeed investigation in January and the reports that the Tennis Integrity Unit are investigating matches at both Wimbledon and the US Open in particular. Therefore, I thought it would be interesting to run the survey again to see whether the events of the past year have changed people's views. This article will focus on the responses to the set questions, while I will write a follow-up article based on a number of the excellent suggestions and replies in the additional comments section of the survey.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsBTtYBrogz_-XSBrnDMkkIiIUnzxBzMOQ8Mdtmmj8elFXnNo_Q_GmMsb-ZaL4xLRb-_zg4jwbGpo7lXDjZ4AfCEY63Vn7RyF-puottMMg-zMWz8-4PULq-FKF4ykJEP-0Fk6PaSJ9IPM/s1600/Vitalia_Diatchenko_-_Flickr_-_chascow.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="534" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsBTtYBrogz_-XSBrnDMkkIiIUnzxBzMOQ8Mdtmmj8elFXnNo_Q_GmMsb-ZaL4xLRb-_zg4jwbGpo7lXDjZ4AfCEY63Vn7RyF-puottMMg-zMWz8-4PULq-FKF4ykJEP-0Fk6PaSJ9IPM/s640/Vitalia_Diatchenko_-_Flickr_-_chascow.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Vitalia Diatchenko is under investigation around suspicious betting patterns during her US Open match this year</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
Once again, the response to the survey was excellent with 310 completed surveys. Although this was slightly down on last year, it still provides a decent sample to analyse. Of those 310 people that completed the survey, 48.4% identified themselves as tennis fans, 40.0% as tennis gamblers or traders, 6.5% as journalists, 2.6% as current or former players and 2.6% as 'Other'. In addition, there were completed forms from 49 different countries - the majority being from the USA, UK and Australia, but there were completed forms from plenty of other countries, ranging from Costa Rica to Venezuela and Bulgaria to the Philippines.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>How serious a problem is fixing?</u></b></span><br />
<br />
The first question was simple - how serious a problem do you believe that tennis has with match fixing. This was broken down into five sub-categories: ATP, WTA, Challenger, ITF (Men) and ITF (Women).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJFTP2zcL58Iu2j7qVXl6GXr35ZsgHCoBAZm0NTvTuKsrcAJviIt3WpKX5yV15vBjPthuO2CwH6T1RuMsSLeGpzMGyIbm3Cb7tL4DWK3I6wu8LHzHrsPdOB_hGz_KSPdWTy0Ikbuh4DVM/s1600/chart1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="310" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJFTP2zcL58Iu2j7qVXl6GXr35ZsgHCoBAZm0NTvTuKsrcAJviIt3WpKX5yV15vBjPthuO2CwH6T1RuMsSLeGpzMGyIbm3Cb7tL4DWK3I6wu8LHzHrsPdOB_hGz_KSPdWTy0Ikbuh4DVM/s640/chart1.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
The first thing to note is that the percentage of respondents that believe that there is no problem with fixing has decreased at every level of tennis this year. The WTA has the cleanest reputation it would seem, but there are still less than 20% of respondents that feel that it has no problem with fixing. At ATP and WTA level, it is also interesting that fewer people now believe that it has a serious problem, with more people moving to either minor or reasonable problem. The same is true at Challenger level with falls for both no problem and serious problem.<br />
<br />
However, the image of the ITF tour has clearly been tarnished over the past twelve months. Over 50% of respondents believe that the men's ITF tour has a serious problem with fixing, up from 47% last year, while the 34.3% that believe the women's ITF tour has a serious problem is well up from last year, where it was below 20%.<br />
<br />
What is relatively interesting is if we look at splitting it out based on how people classified themselves. Tennis fans seem to be more suspicious of the ATP and WTA Tours compared to tennis traders and gamblers, who are far more wary of the lower levels.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>How many players have been banned?</u></b></span><br />
<br />
The next question was simply to see if people were aware of how many players that have actually been banned for corruption offences since the TIU was established back in 2008. The responses are shown below:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_IeCNzhT7Ed5WKkpO6a6YBYH29QR13ZLRSD9W6BfttFYnabTrL9jy0g9FQj75BhDgTAw-3ev055XD2ZqjH9bFV7VzJcPkEqrQag21C0gnpGU_h4sX4gvmJaziC60eGteAlaBNdDRgn28/s1600/chart2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="316" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_IeCNzhT7Ed5WKkpO6a6YBYH29QR13ZLRSD9W6BfttFYnabTrL9jy0g9FQj75BhDgTAw-3ev055XD2ZqjH9bFV7VzJcPkEqrQag21C0gnpGU_h4sX4gvmJaziC60eGteAlaBNdDRgn28/s640/chart2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
In total, there have been 19 players that have been banned for corruption offenses, plus five officials. Of those 19 players, there have been six that have been banned for life (Koellerer, Savic, Krotiouk, Kumantsov, Jakupovic and Chetty) with a further five that have been banned for upwards of 18 months (Klec, Nalamphun, Olaso, Gadomski and Kocyla). The other eight players have been banned for periods of less than twelve months. The five officials that have been banned by the TIU have all been given life bans. Not all of the bans, particularly the shorter ones for the players have been for fixing matches, but they were all banned for what the TIU deemed as corruption offences.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>What type of fixes occur?</u></b></span><br />
<br />
The next question started to delve a little deeper into how tennis fixes were perceived to be carried out. While the most commonly known fix involves fixing the actual winner of the match, this arguably contains the greatest risk, given that the entirety of the match needed to be scripted. Whilst it may also be the easiest fix to hide due to the fact that there is more money in the betting market for this, it also generally marks the end of a player's involvement in the tournament and limits any further prize money from the event.<br />
<br />
There are a number of alternative types of fixes though that can earn an unscrupulous player additional money, whilst not guaranteeing that he loses the match. This could vary from fixing individual sets, particularly the first set, fixing correct scorelines in sets, fixing individual games or points, or if both players are involved in the fix, fixing the opening two sets of the match before playing out the third set to determine who progresses in the tournament.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW2kjVeG75RrChSCQRT2mm2fRJ8hhjNtTitVyCfQiz0wEGFCYuTDk7QzxZJQJFwGK2B70bLhxsJZ7CUixBRjAFGFw3eO9SnkCBjGREx5ggVNIMaR2FPRw6sLkh4k4LOaWzKTJB9wXqohA/s1600/chart3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="312" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW2kjVeG75RrChSCQRT2mm2fRJ8hhjNtTitVyCfQiz0wEGFCYuTDk7QzxZJQJFwGK2B70bLhxsJZ7CUixBRjAFGFw3eO9SnkCBjGREx5ggVNIMaR2FPRw6sLkh4k4LOaWzKTJB9wXqohA/s640/chart3.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
It is interesting to note that there are now fewer people that believe that the actual match winner is fixed either often or on a regular basis compared to last year. Instead, there is an increased belief that players are tending to fix specific sets and scorelines or individual games within the match. This suggests that people are beginning to acknowledge the idea that spot fixing is far more likely to be the biggest problem in tennis as opposed to the final outcome actually being scripted.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>Who is behind the fix?</u></b></span><br />
<br />
Having determined that the majority of people feel that fixing does happen in tennis, albeit to varying extents, the next question attempted to determine who was actually behind the fix. Obviously, the players on the court are the ones that actually carry out the fix, but who was the mastermind behind the plan? The percentages add up to greater than 100% because people were allowed to select multiple categories.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1VzrqB1eTYN-oX9Ki7LR1igYUQ_tR-ilpM0Egy-9aD3_OqSHAfqX0V6hcJ0IDUpkddXmYReNvQ779ZWyoosucjHgzP0vdUCFdyFo-9_nmF2xUILk3SkSHe_gATuAe1WjXMYJMSSW3tG4/s1600/chart4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="324" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1VzrqB1eTYN-oX9Ki7LR1igYUQ_tR-ilpM0Egy-9aD3_OqSHAfqX0V6hcJ0IDUpkddXmYReNvQ779ZWyoosucjHgzP0vdUCFdyFo-9_nmF2xUILk3SkSHe_gATuAe1WjXMYJMSSW3tG4/s640/chart4.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
This is a very interesting question to compare with twelve months ago. In 2015, the vast majority believed that it was the players alone that were behind the fixes. However, we can see a huge increase in the people that believe that organised crime syndicates are behind fixes in tennis to the extent that it was the most popular answer to this question. Betting syndicates also come out of this looking bad with over half of respondents believing that they are behind certain fixes.<br />
<br />
I would suggest that the changes in responses to this question may well have been significantly driven by the findings in the Buzzfeed investigation earlier in the year, which linked several groups based in Sicily, Northern Italy and Argentina to a number of fixes that took place around a decade ago. However, clearly people still believe that organised crime and betting syndicates are still behind fixing in tennis.<br />
<br />
As noted last year, one respondent actually suggested that umpires might be behind some fixes and that has been proven accurate with four umpires having been banned in September for manipulating scorelines for betting purposes.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>What would help to combat fixing?</u></b></span><br />
<br />
The next question focused on a number of potential ideas for combating the problem with fixing in tennis:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNTwwi4i7QLm5qBLU8J6uaWQrK9oir6hmzPwTAn1H4ATWhLA10opUKC7wlSCfMASN7aLo5f-PronPph_y93pfo-YVf-FJpJzC6nKDGW5DhMiGpFIpwWQBUWh0T7cAeNvazCtBTcGgiLA8/s1600/survey1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNTwwi4i7QLm5qBLU8J6uaWQrK9oir6hmzPwTAn1H4ATWhLA10opUKC7wlSCfMASN7aLo5f-PronPph_y93pfo-YVf-FJpJzC6nKDGW5DhMiGpFIpwWQBUWh0T7cAeNvazCtBTcGgiLA8/s640/survey1.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
The options that received the highest percentage of answers saying that they would definitely help were greater cooperation between the tennis governing bodies and bookmakers, approaching tennis traders to help identify fixes and increasing prize money on the minor tours.<br />
<br />
The first option of banning betting on minor tours saw almost identical responses to last year with 28.4% of answers suggesting that it would definitely help, but as mentioned last year, this is simply not a feasible options in the current day. The fact that only 15.7% believed that increased funding for the TIU would definitely help is a fairly damning reflection on the trust that the public have in the TIU, which will be further explored later.<br />
<br />
Logic would suggest that increasing prize money at the lower levels is likely to help reduce the incentives for fixing at that level. It would not eliminate fixing by any means as there are likely to still be plenty of players that choose to take the option of the additional income from fixing, but it might reduce the need that some players may feel to stray to that option. Indeed, some players have indicated that certain players have attempted to justify fixing due to the financial difficulties at the lower levels.<br />
<br />
The two options that are most supported are the same as those that were indicated last year and are those that look to use existing knowledge of the betting markets and tennis trading - using bookmakers themselves and traders that regularly trade on the tennis markets.<br />
<br />
As we learned in the Buzzfeed report earlier in the year, when the TIU was established, they decided not to employ any betting analysts and suggested that betting data and markets should not be treated as evidence of fixing. Given that fixing inherently involves the betting markets, it seems baffling that betting markets should almost be ignored according to the TIU and it seems that greater cooperation with the bookmakers could only help in terms of identifying suspicious matches. However, this has to be a two-way deal with the bookmakers looking to actively help the TIU by reporting suspicious matches, which they do not always appear to do.<br />
<br />
As one might expect, of those that identified themselves as tennis traders or gamblers were strongly in favour of approaching tennis traders to help identifying fixes, but all groups were in favour of this option, with not one group falling below 30% answering that it would definitely help.<br />
<br />
<b style="font-size: x-large;"><u>How much faith do you have in the TIU?</u></b><br />
<br />
The Tennis Integrity Unit describe themselves as being 'charged with enforcing the sport's zero-tolerance policy toward gambling-related corruption worldwide' and claims it has a 'global brief to protect the sport from all forms of betting-related corrupt practices.'<br />
<br />
However, they work in a very secretive manner and there appears to be little confidence in them to actually carry out this brief, not only among fans of the sport, but even among the players themselves. An unnamed player explained how he reported an approach to the TIU, but nothing ever came of it, while Peter Polansky said the following:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"From the chatter around the guys, it sounds like it's something that definitely happens, and quite often. It happens, and there's not a whole lot anyone can do about it"</blockquote>
When even the players do not believe that the TIU can do anything about fixing, it is difficult to see how the TIU can possibly act as a disincentive to fixing in its current form. This question was aimed at determining whether the public had any faith in the TIU to do their job:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfKRgrYpER73KsB8urajUfixjLzOBTAUnwF6hAZQOwTkfCJ44vDQkTdupIGi2yEQ37VyCFqX_e0WUm0ZKgwvrr7_KknuZeC3U2BdNhFXxd3MbMYJ6NmodNFYurrQ-xWOGfdsN1kUxb7Rk/s1600/survey2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="324" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfKRgrYpER73KsB8urajUfixjLzOBTAUnwF6hAZQOwTkfCJ44vDQkTdupIGi2yEQ37VyCFqX_e0WUm0ZKgwvrr7_KknuZeC3U2BdNhFXxd3MbMYJ6NmodNFYurrQ-xWOGfdsN1kUxb7Rk/s640/survey2.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
The answer would seem to be not. It is telling that exactly zero answers said that they had complete faith in the TIU to reduce the problem of fixing in tennis. At the other end of the scale, almost 30% had no faith whatsoever in the TIU and another 38.9% had little faith. For a body whose sole aim is to protect the sport from betting-related corrupt practices, it seems that virtually nobody has any faith in them to actually carry out their goal.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>Level of Proof</u></b></span><br />
<br />
The final question focused on the level of proof that should be required for the TIU to impose a ban on a player. The two options were taken from the legal system. The first was 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt', which is generally the level of proof required to validate a criminal conviction in most legal systems. It places the burden of proof on the shoulders of the prosecutor, who must prove that a player has fixed an outcome to the extent that there could be no reasonable doubt in the mind of a reasonable person. The second option was 'Balance of Probabilities', which is more commonly used in civil disputes, which requires that the dispute be decided in favour of the party whose claims are more likely to be true.<br />
<br />
To prove beyond reasonable doubt that a player has fixed an outcome is very difficult. Unless you have bank statements showing money from a bookmaker or phone or text records proving a fix took place, it is almost impossible to prove beyond reasonable doubt, even if the betting markets strongly suggest that the outcome was fixed.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjt3TTNFvi0I68X-ddJF-gf6vh4urpDUBtgfoJfUC-5qezZkJ_ZWV8YfcYYMfdGB8jtONZ0wWCQsGI1oRJprW-_lKfRC_qmI4EeaA1ragRa-TiKytoSxiBx_f34zUm25O8JwC9fQ-MO6c4/s1600/survey3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="324" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjt3TTNFvi0I68X-ddJF-gf6vh4urpDUBtgfoJfUC-5qezZkJ_ZWV8YfcYYMfdGB8jtONZ0wWCQsGI1oRJprW-_lKfRC_qmI4EeaA1ragRa-TiKytoSxiBx_f34zUm25O8JwC9fQ-MO6c4/s640/survey3.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
There has been quite a large increase in those answering 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt' with a rise of over 10% from last year. One can only speculate as to the reason for this, but one suggestion could be the issues around the Buzzfeed investigation that falsely flagged up the likes of Lleyton Hewitt as likely fixers. The embarrassing nature of that might have led people to feel that stronger evidence is needed before banning players for corruption offences.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-15630961979629407472016-09-22T23:13:00.000+02:002016-09-22T23:13:48.719+02:00Over/Under 2.5 Goals Betting Based on Managers<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
When it comes to managers, it is pretty well-known that different managers have different styles. There are those managers that like open attacking football and aim to score one more than their opponents, regardless of how many their opponents score, while others prefer to keep it tight at the back and grind out low-scoring wins. Obviously, bookmakers know this just as well as the punters do, but I thought it would be interesting to look at whether it would be possible to look at particular managers and back either over or under 2.5 goals on a regular basis and make a consistent profit.<br />
<br />
In this article, I am going to focus on La Liga in Spain. Using data from football-data.co.uk, I have taken every match since the start of the 2012/13 season up until the end of the 2015/16 season, so a total of four seasons of data. There are 34 managers that have managed for at least a season (38 games) in this period, so let us focus initially on those.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrM4Ul81REgA9qzEXt1jclnppOWS9BdTyqXcta5bm9R9OmiS_ZgyReXmk8Hpj6ajbacdGsITyXby47ueLluS-TVs65AE2cZO7ujVDFEbSdHu1ty8gODBqEwnZrmQ_7Q6ITLVDtajV6bdU/s1600/jemezsimeone.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="398" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrM4Ul81REgA9qzEXt1jclnppOWS9BdTyqXcta5bm9R9OmiS_ZgyReXmk8Hpj6ajbacdGsITyXby47ueLluS-TVs65AE2cZO7ujVDFEbSdHu1ty8gODBqEwnZrmQ_7Q6ITLVDtajV6bdU/s640/jemezsimeone.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Just two managers have managed for the entirety of the four seasons or 152 matches - Atletico Madrid's Diego Simeone and the former Rayo Vallecano and now Granada manager, Paco Jemez. As a contrast in managerial playing styles, there could not be a more divergent pair. In those 152 matches, Diego Simeone's matches have averaged 2.47 goals per game compared with 3.16 for Paco Jemez. 84 of the 152 matches that Diego Simeone has managed in this period went under 2.5 goals, while 95 of the 152 matches for Paco Jemez went over 2.5 goals. We would expect the bookmakers to know this though and adjust the odds. However, did they adjust the odds enough?<br />
<br />
It would seem that the answer is no. Had you backed Under 2.5 goals in every match that Diego Simeone had managed in La Liga since the start of the 2012/13 season, you would have made a 9.0% profit over the four seasons. Similarly, had you backed Over 2.5 goals in every Paco Jemez match, you would have made an impressive 15.0% profit in the same period.<br />
<br />
Looking in slightly more detail, the vast majority of the return for Diego Simeone actually came in away matches. Simeone has actually seen over 50% of home matches go over 2.5 goals during this period and backing Under 2.5 goals would only have returned 2.9% in home matches. However, away from home, it is a different story. In these matches, backing Under 2.5 goals would have returned a huge 15.1% profit, which suggests that the bookmakers have consistently underestimated Atletico Madrid's tendency to grind out low scoring results away from the Vicente Calderon.<br />
<br />
In contrast, backing Over 2.5 goals in matches involving Paco Jemez seems to show little difference whether the team is playing at home or playing away. At home, it would have returned an 18.2% profit, while away from home, it is slightly lower, but still an impressive 11.8%.<br />
<br />
Further down the list, a couple of names stand out. The former Villarreal manager, Marcelino, would have returned 15.1% from Under 2.5 goals, driven by low-scoring games both at home and away, while Fernando Vasquez, Joaquin Caparros and Eduardo Berizzo have also shown profits of above 10% from the Under 2.5 goals selection.<br />
<br />
In contrast, despite regular short-odds on Real Madrid scoring more than 2.5 goals, backing Over 2.5 during Carlo Ancelotti's reign would actually have returned 10.6% profit with 59 of 76 matches going over the line, while Unai Emery would have returned 7.7% profit from Over 2.5, driven particularly by matches at home.<br />
<br />
Fran Escriba is a particularly interesting case. The former Elche and Getafe manager, who is currently at Villarreal appears to be nothing notable when you look at the overall figures. Indeed, a very small loss on both Over and Under 2.5 goals almost suggests that his matches are priced up accurately. However, if you split it down to home and away matches, there is a big difference. Backing Under 2.5 goals in matches than Escriba has managed at home would have returned a massive 31.0%, but away from home, backing Over 2.5 goals would have returned a similarly huge 27.2%. It seems that he oversees high-scoring away matches, but keeps things very tight at home. It might be one to watch at Villarreal this season.<br />
<br />
This is obviously pretty basic analysis and it does not take into account anything apart from the manager. However, it throws up a few interesting angles that it might be worth thinking about when it comes to looking at the Over/Under 2.5 goals market in Spain.<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>The full table for all managers with 38+ matches is available <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1chybMv2KAn5rFy8AlkuZEu6mHBYC0bimNg-YZJM1pUI/edit?usp=sharing">here</a>. If you want information on any other managers from Spain during this period, I have the stats, so just let me know...</i></div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-3328096639798728582016-09-19T09:04:00.003+02:002016-09-19T10:21:26.104+02:00How do players approach break points on their own serve?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Tennis is a sport that is often decided by the finest of margin and many times, we will see a match where there are barely a handful of points that separate the two players. However, some points are clearly more important than others and break points are some of the most important points of all. I thought it would be interesting to look in more detail at how players deal with break points on their own serve and how they go about trying to save them.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguY3r3uy6NqW_wJx5sz9Fq9ldtjp4vTLrK_cRJIaSlSQRkydYESlByS_jLinKIaHwdXU64NtVF3XMYIDaM3X4BJO49qGHq03zviipxHS84ws6gt5E03OxIHCdPDQf6Zavythc5K231Zx0/s1600/tomic.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguY3r3uy6NqW_wJx5sz9Fq9ldtjp4vTLrK_cRJIaSlSQRkydYESlByS_jLinKIaHwdXU64NtVF3XMYIDaM3X4BJO49qGHq03zviipxHS84ws6gt5E03OxIHCdPDQf6Zavythc5K231Zx0/s640/tomic.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
The data for this comes from the <a href="http://www.tennisabstract.com/charting/meta.html">Match Charting Project</a> at TennisAbstract. Now, while this is not a complete record of all matches for all players, for a growing number of players, there are enough matches charted to be able to start to look in more detail and begin to draw some conclusions. In total, there are 15,885 break points across 409 players and 2,475 matches, which is certainly enough of a sample to get going with.<br />
<br />
The first thing to focus on is the first serve. Obviously, all players tend to win a higher percentage of points behind their first serve compared to the second serve. On a non-break point, the average first percentage of first serves in is 61.5%, which is higher than the 59.6% on break points, which is not really that surprising. We would expect the added pressure on break points to mean that players miss slightly more first serve. However, let us look in slightly more detail on a player-by-player basis:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZtvzjvjqZpPU0CA1zcETY-bbEwWdj6Ne6TBN9AvMG67Q9H7cE2g2DxH_o5rMFAJY6jRkMgwKh93Vfvk587PItRM56p_VyP47Ag4LbicFdx3naoTn4mVs52pxwpOPjEuMXEdPn28gv8BQ/s1600/bp1stserve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="154" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZtvzjvjqZpPU0CA1zcETY-bbEwWdj6Ne6TBN9AvMG67Q9H7cE2g2DxH_o5rMFAJY6jRkMgwKh93Vfvk587PItRM56p_VyP47Ag4LbicFdx3naoTn4mVs52pxwpOPjEuMXEdPn28gv8BQ/s640/bp1stserve.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
The table shows the change between a player's 1st serve percentage on a break point compared to a non-break point. We can see that David Goffin has the biggest difference, increasing his 1st serve percentage by 5.9% on a break point compared to a normal point, followed by Juan Martin Del Potro, John Isner, Thomaz Bellucci and Bernard Tomic rounding out the top 5.<br />
<br />
At the other end of the scale, we see Tomas Berdych at the bottom, with his first serve percentage dropping by 11.1% on break points. He is joined at the bottom by Viktor Troicki, Lleyton Hewitt, Fabio Fognini and Richard Gasquet.<br />
<br />
What is interesting to look at in conjunction with the first serve percentage is the change in those points actually won behind the first serve. Here, we see a few interesting differences. We can see that David Goffin, despite hitting significantly more first serves on break point, actually wins far fewer points behind that first serve. Based on this, one might conclude that he looks to take a bit off his first serve and ensure that he gets the ball into the court and hopes that his superior ability in rallies will make up for the decrease in cheap points on serve. Indeed, we see that the percentage of aces and unreturned serves falls for Goffin, but so does the percentage of doubles faults that he serves. Basically, he goes for a very risk averse approach to serving on break point.<br />
<br />
At the other end of the scale, we can look at someone like Viktor Troicki. We see that his first serve percentage drops by 7.3%, but he actually significantly increases the percentage of those points that he actually win. It seems as though Troicki is willing to risk going for a big serve on break point at the expense of missing a few and we do see that his ace and unreturned serve percentage does indeed increase on break points by 1.5%.<br />
<br />
So, let us now look at how players win break points on their own serve once they are in a rally:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXYQj2WdO1LDBn2PbvU_n6Tciw54NryQ1fgabY1ywj6nCgMIqDT5eVUWEQ2G0ni3j3GIdDfjwA_Vdb-9HbVm-A5phXUAcXa6R4Qdj_aQ22XBlh05HHDaHSKLpnzl3rp200vnkSn_abyt4/s1600/bprallywin.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="138" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXYQj2WdO1LDBn2PbvU_n6Tciw54NryQ1fgabY1ywj6nCgMIqDT5eVUWEQ2G0ni3j3GIdDfjwA_Vdb-9HbVm-A5phXUAcXa6R4Qdj_aQ22XBlh05HHDaHSKLpnzl3rp200vnkSn_abyt4/s640/bprallywin.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
While we hypothesised earlier that David Goffin was very risk adverse when it came to getting the ball in-play, we can see that he balances this out with a slightly more dominant strategy once he is in a rally. The percentage of points won by Goffin hitting a winner or forcing an error increases by 6.3% on a break point compared to a normal point, suggesting that he looks to dominate the rallies slightly more and look to decide the point himself.<br />
<br />
We also see Lleyton Hewitt, who appeared to look to go for a bit more on his first serve, presumably with the confidence that he would fancy himself in a rally if necessary on his second serve. We can see that Hewitt really boosts his percentage of winners on break point, suggesting that he prefers to decide break points himself, rather than rely on his opponent.<br />
<br />
At the other end of the scale, we see Roberto Bautista-Agut and Gilles Simon, who appear to prefer to simply get the ball into play and wait for the error from their opponent, rather than risk going for the big shot themselves. However, it appears that the two players have very different success rates here. Gilles Simon sees a big increase in the percentage of points won via opponent unforced error, while Roberto Bautista-Agut actually sees a decrease. One wonders then whether Bautista-Agut takes this risk averse strategy too far and actually makes it easier for his opponent to hit plenty of winners on the big points, rather than giving them time to make mistakes.<br />
<br />
We also see Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic at the bottom here - it appears that they both fancy themselves to outlast most players in a rally situation and are happy to cut down on any mistakes that they might make in exchange for waiting for their opponent to crack.<br />
<br />
Finally, let us look at how players tend to lose points when we are in a rally on break point:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFAN9MKRm2xCH_nVmbp0wtNBR-2PUYmgeVlDLIHAtpEn3-7YC2slasso-woZSDrw8mjaTihuKoX_azei8jVw-w1iePYONRYO_nI7cS0SSYjAoOd8ExMGjRwsrfOs205Z64oq8vvIo3DUA/s1600/bprallylost.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="128" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFAN9MKRm2xCH_nVmbp0wtNBR-2PUYmgeVlDLIHAtpEn3-7YC2slasso-woZSDrw8mjaTihuKoX_azei8jVw-w1iePYONRYO_nI7cS0SSYjAoOd8ExMGjRwsrfOs205Z64oq8vvIo3DUA/s640/bprallylost.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
It is interesting to see that John Isner topping the list here. Isner actually increases his points won by aces and unreturned serves by 5.8%, but we also see here that he is able to reduce the percentage of points that he loses via unforced errors as well. It seems as though he goes big on the first serve to try and win the point early, but if that does not succeed, then he is happy to go more risk averse and make sure that he does not throw the point away himself with an unforced error.<br />
<br />
The presence of David Goffin toward the bottom backs up our earlier theory that he plays conservative on the serve to ensure that he gets into a rally, then plays far more aggressive during the rally itself, increasing both his percentage of winners and unforced errors, which could easily increase as a result of looking to hit bigger shots.<br />
<br />
One name that it is worth noting is Bernard Tomic. He appears near the top of all three tables - he hits more first serves, wins more of those first serve points, hits far more winners and hits fewer unforced errors on break points. That is a remarkable combination of statistics for a player that is not exactly renowned for his mental strength. Perhaps the pressure of break points concentrates his mind more?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmvAJZInu3Jk4cPd7QX8TpIhGgvKZhRPyLpOrH6gBFsNoE9YmDtKW20PwQQRLPuKZ8sdB1ldPO_6VSXdxAyy_Osl7VLKeUJ3CHMacbqwL_DJfxtMkgBF2u0M-pslnTPeOkcQqabEqpadY/s1600/rba.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmvAJZInu3Jk4cPd7QX8TpIhGgvKZhRPyLpOrH6gBFsNoE9YmDtKW20PwQQRLPuKZ8sdB1ldPO_6VSXdxAyy_Osl7VLKeUJ3CHMacbqwL_DJfxtMkgBF2u0M-pslnTPeOkcQqabEqpadY/s640/rba.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
On the flip side, Roberto Bautista-Agut does not come out of this looking great. He hits slightly more first serves, but a 10.2% decrease in first serve points won suggest that he takes a lot off the first serve. He hits fewer winners himself, but allies that with a big increase in unforced errors and also loses more points to opponent winners. It seems as though he simply plays far too passively and allows his opponent too many chances to hit winners and force the error.<br />
<br />
Going forward, there are two areas that I intend to look at. Firstly, it would be interesting to look at serve placement in association with the first serve stats that we have seen already. One would imagine that those players that hit more first serves would hit more into the middle of the box as safer serves, but it would be interesting to see. The other thing is to look at how a player's risk profile translates to when they create break points on their opponent's serve. Do the risk averse players on their own serve also play conservatively on their own break point chances or are there difference?<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>Note: you can see the summary data for all players with 100+ break points faced <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gH8Cs7P1e5rcfS21r9qN5bTnAmL-T85TWJIE5Aly5ks/edit?usp=sharing">here</a>...</i></span></div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-15232976500969445562016-09-09T09:48:00.000+02:002021-02-17T14:51:54.290+01:00Looking at T20 Batsman-Bowler Combinations<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Having looked previously at some of the top ranked T20 batsmen and bowlers in cricket based on my new ranking system, I thought it would be interesting to delve slightly deeper into a few of the players and take a more detailed look at how certain batsmen perform against certain bowlers, and vice versa.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigmC8kVfkRA3r8SC1JHiMURTHeo54i_qruV364piCyixUyx7Ebxgzj8o71ddPMBQ7S1tu1WKZvinIhhU8JdmYd4cpNxB8i6kSd6qqNh_hqpO4FCZh5IL8s5bIJEA6ff6-i2kMVB5akeJs/s1600/narineab.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="223" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigmC8kVfkRA3r8SC1JHiMURTHeo54i_qruV364piCyixUyx7Ebxgzj8o71ddPMBQ7S1tu1WKZvinIhhU8JdmYd4cpNxB8i6kSd6qqNh_hqpO4FCZh5IL8s5bIJEA6ff6-i2kMVB5akeJs/s400/narineab.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Obviously, when we are looking at specific pairings of batsmen and bowlers, we are looking at relatively limited sample sizes, but it should still give us an idea of whether certain batsmen enjoy facing certain bowlers or whether they have particular bowlers that they struggle against.<br />
<br />
Let us start off with the #1 rated batsman in T20 cricket - Chris Gayle. Being a player that has played a huge amount of T20 cricket over the past five years, there are actually no fewer than 38 bowlers in this period that have bowled 30+ legal deliveries at Gayle (as an aside, there are a grand total of 329 different bowlers that have bowled at least one delivery to the legendary West Indian in my database). The table below shows the highest strike rates for Gayle against particular bowlers:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjztsdf1JUoAHbeQs0BxcFDyDhKtTXD_UoEfb9yVxqC3PEeZcRp5Rpj7RRvvFdKLIoE3gWNH8azf_WGvZ08YhAB6eEUfBG4-hS6qz1WCsmdH8fr411I38N1cD7iIUSy2PEmohmdan5ADTA/s1600/top10.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="178" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjztsdf1JUoAHbeQs0BxcFDyDhKtTXD_UoEfb9yVxqC3PEeZcRp5Rpj7RRvvFdKLIoE3gWNH8azf_WGvZ08YhAB6eEUfBG4-hS6qz1WCsmdH8fr411I38N1cD7iIUSy2PEmohmdan5ADTA/s640/top10.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Chris Gayle is a fearsome hitter of spin bowling, so it is no surprise to see a host of spin bowlers with some awful figures against him. Glenn Maxwell has conceded no fewer than 70 runs in 30 deliveries against Gayle, while Samuel Badree, the #1 rated bowler in the ICC ratings and #13 in my ratings, has also struggled, conceding a boundary every 2.33 deliveries. Dwayne Bravo has bowled a huge 79 balls to Chris Gayle, conceding 21 boundaries, but dismissing him on six occasions.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsChvHYlVkJ0ZU9DX-vxYQUDfQu9QSsh1AFMUIgxHqnQ69-tIsCnUCEjc9ji8p3wz-h2rgpTAMR-_hq1BxuRXmv6kaWhWn8Dtj9R-Yp2J5WjiaYHRwZrrn7ovZCZ-jZWA7nJFKWkFJqb8/s1600/bottom10gayle.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="178" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsChvHYlVkJ0ZU9DX-vxYQUDfQu9QSsh1AFMUIgxHqnQ69-tIsCnUCEjc9ji8p3wz-h2rgpTAMR-_hq1BxuRXmv6kaWhWn8Dtj9R-Yp2J5WjiaYHRwZrrn7ovZCZ-jZWA7nJFKWkFJqb8/s640/bottom10gayle.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
At the other end of the scale, Lasith Malinga has conceded just 29 runs in 53 balls at Gayle, which is really very impressive. Admittedly, he does benefit from bowling to Gayle early in his innings before he really gets going, but it is still hugely admirable.<br />
<br />
Three spinners in particular here really stand out - Mohammad Hafeez, Sunil Narine and Ravichandran Ashwin. Given the way that Gayle can destroy spin bowling, the fact that the three of them combined have conceded just 102 runs in 144 balls at Gayle with just 9 fours and one six in those deliveries is very impressive. Whether Gayle has a real problem against those bowlers or whether he has the confidence in himself to just see off the star bowlers of the opposition, the data cannot tell us, but it is interesting.<br />
<br />
So, if Chris Gayle struggles to score off Lasith Malinga, let us look at the batsmen that can. The table below shows the top 10 SRs of players to have faced at least 24 balls from Malinga:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZvpg1S8Zd5zXr7_CBsNsPMePPrD0xPlOT90N7do4BNY8-MGL0Ko4tE4TefFCRPuWEg-5I3PK74izkQmRJrXW7rERXkl17hdVsF5Svtp-wa8Xjre-LeLf6fLV_Yn0h_XZFeGdK0okxYxU/s1600/malingatop.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="178" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZvpg1S8Zd5zXr7_CBsNsPMePPrD0xPlOT90N7do4BNY8-MGL0Ko4tE4TefFCRPuWEg-5I3PK74izkQmRJrXW7rERXkl17hdVsF5Svtp-wa8Xjre-LeLf6fLV_Yn0h_XZFeGdK0okxYxU/s640/malingatop.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
In AB de Villiers, MS Dhoni and Shahid Afridi, we have a trio of three very destructive hitters at the end of the innings that have been able to score runs off Malinga, often mentioned in the debate about the greatest death bowlers in the history of T20 cricket. However, interestingly it is Marlon Samuels that tops the list, having hit a huge five sixes off Malinga in just 28 deliveries (all the other batsmen to have faced 24+ balls have 16 sixes combined off 956 balls). It was his memorable innings of 78(56) in the World Cup T20 Final in 2012 that did the damage here, when he took 39 runs off 11 balls from Lasith Malinga in what would be a match-winning innings.<br />
<br />
So, we saw earlier that another bowler that Gayle struggled against is Sunil Narine, the #2 bowler in my ratings. However, he is far from the only batsman to struggle against Narine. Indeed, of the 29 batsmen to have faced at least 30+ deliveries from Narine, just 9 of them have a strike-rate of greater than 100.0. There are only four batsmen to have a strike rate of greater than 130.0 against Narine - JP Duminy and David Warner (both 133.3), AB de Villiers (140.0) and Suresh Raina (147.4).<br />
<br />
There are actually no fewer than 7 of the 29 batsmen that Narine has over 50% dot balls against as well - Martin Guptill (51.5%), Dwayne Bravo (51.6%), Chris Gayle (51.9%), Marlon Samuels (53.1%), Naman Ojha (55.9%), Darren Sammy (57.6%) and Yuvraj Singh (64.4%). Interestingly, we find four of Narine's West Indian teammates in here, which suggests that facing him regularly in the nets does not seem to help in terms of being able to score runs off of him.<br />
<br />
In Malinga and Narine, we have looked at two of the top T20 bowlers in world cricket. One name that has appeared in being able to score quickly off both of them is AB de Villiers, the #5 rated batsman in my rankings. Let us look at bowlers that he has scored particularly well against:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4Wdwtr_hcQl-GYqWfRnZ9wjJxuB-sLDrLhTbwYfeQqLrFgcimTzx3oHlqk0tjNSk9FnhBZfmf4U5yBTOG1dw8S4KVlzzgaePdPV_D4NlSSALmJuKKJWJrMkVTUIZ8Qz1Zc_QMz3XtcvY/s1600/ABtop10.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="178" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4Wdwtr_hcQl-GYqWfRnZ9wjJxuB-sLDrLhTbwYfeQqLrFgcimTzx3oHlqk0tjNSk9FnhBZfmf4U5yBTOG1dw8S4KVlzzgaePdPV_D4NlSSALmJuKKJWJrMkVTUIZ8Qz1Zc_QMz3XtcvY/s640/ABtop10.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
It is safe to say that there are more than a few bowlers that AB de Villiers has obliterated over the past five years. His South African teammate, Dale Steyn, is an interesting one - for a bowler than scored reasonably well in the economy part of the bowling ratings, he has been destroyed by AB de Villiers, conceding an extraordinary five sixes from just 19 balls.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-UN4ZxjNAEO7VVLxWvzIHSItz_EndxFa2mGilBGrvnGY61CeKqY1jWH_vVZRNurY8ZAfHyeW8oILyhxXTNQEeyLhMy-rn7U7kc4DOLidw_spiTlDVBcmY5AzC1gtiblY8CtNVS37BJkE/s1600/ABbottom10.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="178" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-UN4ZxjNAEO7VVLxWvzIHSItz_EndxFa2mGilBGrvnGY61CeKqY1jWH_vVZRNurY8ZAfHyeW8oILyhxXTNQEeyLhMy-rn7U7kc4DOLidw_spiTlDVBcmY5AzC1gtiblY8CtNVS37BJkE/s640/ABbottom10.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
It turns out that there are just six bowlers with 18+ balls at AB de Villiers to restrict him to a SR of less than 100.0. Indeed, Piyush Chawla has conceded just 27 runs from 30 balls against de Villiers, while dismissing him three times (joint-highest with Ashwin, Mathews and Balaji).<br />
<br />
However, when it comes to destructive batsmen, there are few more devastating than Andre Russell. The table below shows the 11 bowlers that have bowled 20+ balls to Russell in the past five years:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAteEQ5RNxs8X0mplrBaHQ4egQVqNgJFfXEQUYG-_lrImh8CBxtTYuhSNc44kdMQrvbO4pM6qMDQvlM10TUqzE3oWjRt1Cg61SWe258SK69QVEPwW6WFV20wMhOD5wy5UkW57UfZBWTts/s1600/russell.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="194" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAteEQ5RNxs8X0mplrBaHQ4egQVqNgJFfXEQUYG-_lrImh8CBxtTYuhSNc44kdMQrvbO4pM6qMDQvlM10TUqzE3oWjRt1Cg61SWe258SK69QVEPwW6WFV20wMhOD5wy5UkW57UfZBWTts/s640/russell.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
With the exception of Sunil Narine, Andre Russell has a SR of upward of 150.0 against every bowler to have bowled regularly to him. Indeed, against five of the eleven, he has a SR of above 200.0, which is quite simply incredible. That Sunil Narine has only conceded a single boundary in 30 balls to Andre Russell just goes to show why he is undoubtedly one of the all-time great T20 bowlers.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-15680179714915657772016-09-08T09:13:00.000+02:002021-02-17T14:51:09.854+01:00Which T20 Batsmen Are Fast Starters?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
In T20 cricket, getting off to a good start can be very important when it comes to setting a formidable total, but at the same time, different players need different amounts of time to really settle in before they can really start to play their shots.<br />
<br />
In this article, I want to look at a selection of 20 different opening batsmen from seven different countries, all of whom have played plenty of T20 cricket across multiple different competitions over the past five years. In particular, I want to focus on the first 30 deliveries that they face. Obviously, the majority of T20 innings from opening batsmen are likely to last less than 30 deliveries and once a batsmen has reached his 31st ball, you would hope that he is in a position to really go on the attack, but we will look at that in more detail in a future article.<br />
<br />
To begin with, let us get an overview of all 20 batsmen and their overall strike rate after each delivery in this 30-ball spell:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBjxzr_96MObjw1NIZt2zmQzWwfdzO9zCYRxkOKJsbofNzUbB0WK4hGgYF0WtETpGh0odwb7-PTvnKg2tC8unQWxl9II-3pmNmhO3MiFE_bqQVLQOa8LQbnnUyyJdBtDpLR7lf2Elpy3U/s1600/overallsrgraph.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="284" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBjxzr_96MObjw1NIZt2zmQzWwfdzO9zCYRxkOKJsbofNzUbB0WK4hGgYF0WtETpGh0odwb7-PTvnKg2tC8unQWxl9II-3pmNmhO3MiFE_bqQVLQOa8LQbnnUyyJdBtDpLR7lf2Elpy3U/s640/overallsrgraph.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
As we can see, virtually all the batsmen rapidly increase their overall strike rate over the first 10 balls that they face, at which point it begin to flatten out for the majority of batsmen. What this chart effectively shows is the score that we would expect a batsman to be on having faced a set number of deliveries. For example, with a strike-rate of 104.2 after 10 balls, we would expect Ahmed Shehzad to be on 10.42 runs, whereas with a strike-rate of 123.1, Aaron Finch would expect to be on 12.31 runs.<br />
<br />
Obviously, the most aggressive batsmen also tend to have a higher risk of being dismissed, so in terms of an opening partnership, you might be looking to pair an aggressive batsmen that will get the scoreboard moving immediately with a slightly more gradual batsman, who may need a few balls to really settle before steadily increasing his strike rate.<br />
<br />
If you have two slow starters, you potentially run the risk of finding yourself in a concerning position if they both fall after around 10-15 balls each at a run-a-ball and it increases the pressure on the players coming in afterwards.<br />
<br />
So that initial chart is quite difficult to pick out individual players, so let us take a look at a few groups of players at a time. Firstly, we shall look at the four English players in the group - the current England opening pair of Alex Hales and Jason Roy, plus two former England internationals in Luke Wright and Michael Lumb:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVHNUudM9_4lvv7f3ClAkzahznwWmaCGy0B3sm95Au5HXRdTmgIk6u0VK_Dz_3_fA8n2ovYrpVqu9N0Hk4jiJ-FGX-QtOzVSydmudGX6-skjugj4i9em9C2Swd53uFxCaRecPTVK2TcV4/s1600/englishsrchart.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="284" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVHNUudM9_4lvv7f3ClAkzahznwWmaCGy0B3sm95Au5HXRdTmgIk6u0VK_Dz_3_fA8n2ovYrpVqu9N0Hk4jiJ-FGX-QtOzVSydmudGX6-skjugj4i9em9C2Swd53uFxCaRecPTVK2TcV4/s640/englishsrchart.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
We can see that the four players split into two pairings in this chart. The pair of Jason Roy and Alex Hales are both very fast starters, not only compared to the other English players, but compared to all of the opening batsmen in the sample. After five balls, Roy and Hales are 3rd and 4th respectively, but we can see that Luke Wright and Michael Lumb take a couple more deliveries to get moving.<br />
<br />
Having said that, we can see that both Michael Lumb and, particularly, Luke Wright, increase their strike rate rapidly after the first couple of deliveries and it is also interesting to note that all three of Roy, Lumb and Wright are among some of the faster scorers through 20 deliveries. One concern for Alex Hales might be that his eventual strike rate is only around the middle of the pack, but at least he does reach that strike rate rapidly rather than eating up deliveries.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhX5ZTwSf1EvAgtwJmrKgWbegvW__s24vRfThqKXyrbIyBWTk9YGQo9nluaCDPFKS4FXIy4tXG6qJhwYDaqtmYCEj8YeaE7ur7fLg6qBBNlywwIIW2rZ3rvtpaDgpD3_A_N2GoD22GXR28/s1600/indiasrchart.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="284" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhX5ZTwSf1EvAgtwJmrKgWbegvW__s24vRfThqKXyrbIyBWTk9YGQo9nluaCDPFKS4FXIy4tXG6qJhwYDaqtmYCEj8YeaE7ur7fLg6qBBNlywwIIW2rZ3rvtpaDgpD3_A_N2GoD22GXR28/s640/indiasrchart.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Next, let us look at the Indian batsmen. The immediate concern for India is that all their openers in this sample - Virat Kohli, Shikhar Dhawan, Rohit Sharma and Ajinkya Rahane - are all close to the bottom of the group in terms of strike rate. None of them are particularly rapid starters and none have a particularly high top gear in terms of making big scores in general. Admittedly, Rohit Sharma has hit a couple of incredible innings over the years, but those are not all that common.<br />
<br />
The fact that none of the openers are able to constantly get India off to a flying start and with Rohit Sharma having the highest strike rate of the quartet after 30 balls at just 124.7, there is a lack of real dramatic acceleration, it puts a lot of pressure on the middle-order batsmen to score quickly from the start.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVXk5pU3TK-2yflEGSBVQmaSi6XogMUJva8WuGI6FtAGRe4dy0ZV2-nfYUdilXtXlcGSiLHLEz_-D9mcwc_Pd1kCGVE6_CiM7RUCMNEcTKEJUMT2Y2w0ZBijxrKpzdvUIjkRPM9KURdyc/s1600/windiessrchart.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="284" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVXk5pU3TK-2yflEGSBVQmaSi6XogMUJva8WuGI6FtAGRe4dy0ZV2-nfYUdilXtXlcGSiLHLEz_-D9mcwc_Pd1kCGVE6_CiM7RUCMNEcTKEJUMT2Y2w0ZBijxrKpzdvUIjkRPM9KURdyc/s640/windiessrchart.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Chris Gayle have long been known as a relatively slow starter, but once he gets going, he accelerates well and importantly, continues to accelerate throughout the innings. Beyond the 30 deliveries in the chart, he continues to speed up reaching a final strike rate of an incredible 153.0. The concern here for the West Indies is finding an opening partner that can get the innings moving to give Gayle the time that he seemingly wants to get his eye in.<br />
<br />
Neither Dwayne Smith or Lendl Simmons would appear to be the ideal foil for Gayle. In particular, Lendl Simmons is a very slow T20 opening batsmen and does not even break the 100.0 strike-rate mark until his 15th delivery. When partnered with Chris Gayle, this can lead to a very slow start to the innings, which then puts pressure on Gayle to convert his innings. With the big hitting further down the order, they can often get away with this, but finding a fast starting opening batsmen could improve them further. Time will tell whether Evin Lewis or Johnson Charles can be that player.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiDjKJxR6uf_LXsBrUKxB0hCqz68zJR467DAB69QdRawBthf56cjfSSYQtc9mU_t8UMZHEED0xeMQvVhYB8qwsbeCgsnkJdbrLEl38QKv_0D5R-Yb5UtSuufAiNZiCblK-nI7fUXMualvg/s1600/ausnzsrchart.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="284" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiDjKJxR6uf_LXsBrUKxB0hCqz68zJR467DAB69QdRawBthf56cjfSSYQtc9mU_t8UMZHEED0xeMQvVhYB8qwsbeCgsnkJdbrLEl38QKv_0D5R-Yb5UtSuufAiNZiCblK-nI7fUXMualvg/s640/ausnzsrchart.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
When it comes to fast-starters, there are very few in T20 cricket that are better than Aaron Finch. He is regularly able to get the innings off to a flying start, which gives his partner the opportunity, if needed, to build into his innings. The fact that he seemingly plateaus very quickly might raise the odd question about his stamina, but he is still a valuable opening batsman. He also makes a good foil for David Warner, who we can see starts slightly slower, but builds to a very good strike rate.<br />
<br />
Another fast-starting opener, which will come as a surprise to very few, is New Zealand's Brendon McCullum. Now retired from international cricket, he is a very effective and fast-scoring opening batsman, who will undoubtedly be in great demand from franchises around the world, particularly given his ability either behind the stumps or in the field.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJF3vBV-22cv88G9G-FN-EVHv1-Skqlx1C28awjg2zgyulRLRFUuISwUdeepCLyhtOdlIkNVJFI-4tlOnPWfvlwDIcfzT40NMdJWSU_AUvNWCIRRrKY7piowPKZLV17VsTLtJmjXwsLQA/s1600/sasrchart.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="284" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJF3vBV-22cv88G9G-FN-EVHv1-Skqlx1C28awjg2zgyulRLRFUuISwUdeepCLyhtOdlIkNVJFI-4tlOnPWfvlwDIcfzT40NMdJWSU_AUvNWCIRRrKY7piowPKZLV17VsTLtJmjXwsLQA/s640/sasrchart.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
While he is pipped slightly over the first five deliveries, there is no opening batsman that can live with AB de Villiers. The South African is one of the greatest T20 batsman in history and the strike rate that he peaks at after 30 deliveries is streets ahead of his closest contender, Jason Roy. His rapid start is a perfect foil for his South African partner, Quinton de Kock, who is one of the slower starters in this sample, but he steadily builds to a very solid strike rate as his innings progresses.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-66227955662279312632016-09-07T09:45:00.000+02:002021-02-17T14:51:23.637+01:00The Effect of Different Grounds in T20 Cricket<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Given all of the many T20 competitions that take place around the globe in the modern day, there are a huge number of matches taking places each year at many different grounds. While it sounds obvious, there are very few grounds that play similarly with pitches varying in preparation, boundaries being of different lengths and even different weather conditions affecting the score that teams should be aiming for.<br />
<br />
In recent articles on both batting and bowling ratings, I have mentioned that I adjust expected runs by the ground at which the match is being played and in this article, I intend on looking in a little more depth at how different grounds vary in a number of ways. Even grounds at which the par score are the same can look quite different once you look in detail at how that par score might be expected to come about.<br />
<br />
Firstly, a quick mention of the data used in this article. In my database of ball-by-ball information, there are just over 150 different cricket grounds that have hosted matches in the past five years - of these 150+ grounds, there are 96 that have seen at least 600 first innings deliveries (i.e. five full innings of deliveries), so we shall narrow the data down to these grounds for the analysis here.<br />
<br />
So, let us first look at the average first innings scores at these grounds. The table below shows both the top 10 and the bottom 10 highest-scoring T20 grounds and the average first innings scores:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhqIWdzv_1KK_9BfIn0O4OdghD9KHiYCRKOj1CfiMutyyExp9Fs5wBPyv2PYB3aBAUWCTFvltetMpAmM4wMfFt34YDxjwxUCb06lHtTz5r1NxoVF3NFPIhA6Qo3CpXXOpZ4GJxGQv1GB30/s1600/groundsscore.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="204" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhqIWdzv_1KK_9BfIn0O4OdghD9KHiYCRKOj1CfiMutyyExp9Fs5wBPyv2PYB3aBAUWCTFvltetMpAmM4wMfFt34YDxjwxUCb06lHtTz5r1NxoVF3NFPIhA6Qo3CpXXOpZ4GJxGQv1GB30/s640/groundsscore.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Now, most of the grounds at the top of this list are not likely to be too much of a surprise. The M Chinnaswarmy Stadium, home to the Royal Challengers Bangalore in the IPL, is renowned as a batting paradise, while Seddon Park was the venue for Richard Levi's record-setting T20 century back in 2012. Similarly, the likes of St Lawrence Ground, Eden Park and Trent Bridge are ground that are well-known to suit batsmen.<br />
<br />
At the other end of the scale, we see an interesting number of grounds located in the West Indies. Providence Stadium in Guyana has an incredibly low average first innings score, while the Beausejour Stadium in St Lucia and Sabina Park in Jamaica also feature in the bottom 10.<br />
<br />
Now, let us look at which grounds see the most sixes. Logically, we might imagine that there is a pretty strong relationship between high-scoring grounds and six-hitting. To an extent, this is true. The top five grounds in terms of balls/6 are Seddon Park (12.9 balls/6), Central Broward Regional Park Stadium (14.6), Eden Park (14.6), M Chinnaswarmy (15.0) and Wanderers Cricket Ground (15.0), all of which appear in the top 10 highest-scoring grounds.<br />
<br />
However, there are a couple of interesting ones to look at. St Lawrence Ground in Canterbury actually only ranks 41st out of the 96 grounds in terms of balls per six, only seeing a six in the first innings every 24.0 deliveries, implying that there will be an average of five 6s in each first innings.<br />
<br />
In contrast, we find the Beausejour Stadium, ranked 92nd out of 96 in terms of average score appearing at number 22 in terms of balls per six, seeing a six every 21.5 deliveries, while Sabina Park follows at 23rd in balls per six.<br />
<br />
The table below shows the top 10 and bottom 10 grounds in terms of deliveries per six:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnd34EyOhYmAowerVlGqrB2oUH5IdTFfBZsjSYX4n6l4A7o6YFrogsv5omr63leBudmpVd_rZKpgboPIdOAT_TpeyoWC6e5pUGDx7OTuVonXyylnE1KA7r3fw14ryDipdUBizY4j68WLU/s1600/groundssixes.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="184" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnd34EyOhYmAowerVlGqrB2oUH5IdTFfBZsjSYX4n6l4A7o6YFrogsv5omr63leBudmpVd_rZKpgboPIdOAT_TpeyoWC6e5pUGDx7OTuVonXyylnE1KA7r3fw14ryDipdUBizY4j68WLU/s640/groundssixes.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
So, if there are a relatively low number of sixes being hit at St Lawrence Stadium in Canterbury, one might surmise that there are plenty of singles, twos and boundaries being hit and this does seem to be the case. We find that Canterbury shows up ranked 3rd in terms of balls/4, which could either be a reflection of the type of batsmen that Kent tend to select in their T20 team or the fact that there are long boundaries that it is hard to clear. It also appears ranked 1st in terms of the fewer dot balls at just 33.2%.<br />
<br />
The next question is whether facing spin or non-spin bowling tends to make a difference at certain grounds. The table below shows a selection of seven grounds and the balls/6 against spin and non-spin bowling:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsJTj63DKQwchTcDPvheVObT87Fed4WonK4EPMt8U0_x4oUoHoE3ML0wVUL2RUYWbYY8n35vzbkHVwH2QLQlo3C36WFkIrANTnS0qgk_jUcrTeIwnkBi2hjIEJqlyZ_BdJdg4mqiZ24HE/s1600/groundsspin.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="184" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsJTj63DKQwchTcDPvheVObT87Fed4WonK4EPMt8U0_x4oUoHoE3ML0wVUL2RUYWbYY8n35vzbkHVwH2QLQlo3C36WFkIrANTnS0qgk_jUcrTeIwnkBi2hjIEJqlyZ_BdJdg4mqiZ24HE/s640/groundsspin.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Being one of the biggest six-hitting grounds, it is no surprise to see that the M Chinnaswarmy Stadium is a ground where it is relatively easy to hit sixes off almost any type of bowling, particularly when you have the likes of Chris Gayle and AB de Villiers playing there regularly. Similarly Warner Park is a ground where sixes can be easily hit off all types of bowling.<br />
<br />
The Dr Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy ACAVDCA Cricket Stadium, a venue used by a number of IPL franchises over the past five years, is a ground where we can see a large discrepancy between the ease of six hitting off spin bowling compared to non-spin bowling. The Maharashtra Cricket Association Stadium in Pune is another ground where we see this discrepancy between spin and non-spin bowling.<br />
<br />
The Brisbane Cricket Ground interestingly appears to be easier to hit big shots off the quicker bowlers - a trend that we also see at the Sinhalese Sports Club Ground in Colombo, which may reflect the fact that Sri Lanka are generally known for producing quality spin bowlers as opposed to quicker bowlers.<br />
<br />
Finally, we see a ground like Grace Road, where it seems that it can be tricky to hit boundaries off any type of bowling with figures upward of 30.0 balls per six against both spin and non-spin bowling.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com20tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-78543351946507177392016-09-06T09:25:00.002+02:002021-02-17T14:52:01.579+01:00Who are the best T20 Bowlers in World Cricket?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Recently, I looked at how we could rank the best batsmen in T20 cricket, comparing two existing rating systems and developing my own system to compare and contrast with the ICC ratings and the Cricket Ratings systems (<a href="http://www.sportdw.com/2016/08/best-t20-cricket-batsmen.html">here</a>). Obviously though, there are two crucial elements to cricket though - batting and bowling.<br />
<br />
In this article, I want to take a look at the best bowlers in T20 cricket. As before, let us first look at the ICC, who have developed their <a href="http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/ranking/t20/bowling/">own rating system</a> to grade bowlers. Their current rankings are shown below:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCP-IWzqVykV9ITRpTAu5x4OZHt6KtspDBUTp-zwqD7tjcBcbPwlaysZmGUn3GbRRN2kpw6rkJttNPsYeaCA661XFCPGP1-eykzQm-eM7NZescfjSKkHJuh0EQ5wpdwRIAfoXXQoW4Ih8/s1600/iccbowlers.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="206" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCP-IWzqVykV9ITRpTAu5x4OZHt6KtspDBUTp-zwqD7tjcBcbPwlaysZmGUn3GbRRN2kpw6rkJttNPsYeaCA661XFCPGP1-eykzQm-eM7NZescfjSKkHJuh0EQ5wpdwRIAfoXXQoW4Ih8/s400/iccbowlers.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
As with the batting rankings, this only takes international matches into account and arguably this top 10 might cause more arguments than the batsmen. One of the hardest aspects of grading bowlers in T20 is deciding on the balance between the weights given to economy and wicket-taking. As the ICC mention about their rankings, "while taking wickets is still important in T20 cricket, the T20 rankings give more credit to a bowler for economy. A bowler that takes 0-15 off 4 overs gets more credit than one who takes 2-35.<br />
<br />
This weighting toward economy is perfectly valid, but if you are only taking the pure figures, one would therefore expect bowlers that bowl during the powerplay at the start and during the death overs to be overly penalised by this system. Indeed, we see that the majority of the bowlers in the top 10 of the ICC rankings are spinners that will bowl most, if not all, of their overs during the middle overs.<br />
<br />
So, let us move on and take a look at the <a href="http://www.cricketratings.co.uk/grading-t20-bowlers">Cricket Ratings system</a>. As described previously, this takes domestic competitions into account and adjusts for the quality of competition in each different event to allow performance to be compared across different countries. It breaks down performance into two aspects, adjusted average and adjusted economy. The rankings are shown below:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHZUimh_ljDNDOxhD42U0tIGgNw-792T4KbU0UO3s8A-DF_xKYrhVkHvvAvBlbqdTZqVy2-krChE3kvFy3VQV8ToGBQsN1UrBgpGgn69YjA14EG-JYwTQBIbkCEovsJCxQoVWyIdcYm6w/s1600/crbowler.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="298" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHZUimh_ljDNDOxhD42U0tIGgNw-792T4KbU0UO3s8A-DF_xKYrhVkHvvAvBlbqdTZqVy2-krChE3kvFy3VQV8ToGBQsN1UrBgpGgn69YjA14EG-JYwTQBIbkCEovsJCxQoVWyIdcYm6w/s640/crbowler.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Now, we see that there are only two bowlers that appear in the Cricket Ratings top 10 that also appeared in the ICC top 10 - Sunil Narine and Ravichandran Ashwin. Here, we see an increase in fast bowlers appearing toward the top of the list with Lasith Malinga, Mustafizur Rahman and Bhuvneshwar Kumar in particular rating highly. There are also a couple of unexpected names in this list. Benny Howell, Kevin O'Brien and Rikki Clarke are names that have performed well in the T20 Blast in recent seasons that might have gone somewhat under the radar.<br />
<br />
It is interesting here that there appears to be equal weighting given to wicket-taking and economy, which is in contrast to the ICC system.<br />
<br />
Now, my system is based on my T20 database that contains almost every T20 match played around the globe in the past 5 years for which there is ball-by-ball data. As with both the ICC and Cricket Ratings systems, my system takes two aspects into consideration - wicket-taking and economy.<br />
<br />
The economy aspect is based around the number of runs that a bowler concedes compared with the expected runs that an average bowler would concede on that delivery. For example, off the opening ball of the match, the average T20 bowler would be expected to concede 0.78 runs, while if he were bowling the final ball of the final over, he would be expected to concede 1.72 runs. By comparing what a bowler should concede with what he actually concedes, we can compare economy rates regardless of when during the innings the bowler was actually bowling.<br />
<br />
In addition, I adjust the expected runs based on the ground at which the match is being played and for the batsman that is facing the ball. For example, if you were bowling the first ball of the 19th over to Khaya Zondo at Queen's Park Oval, you would expect to concede fewer runs than bowling the same ball to Chris Gayle at the M Chinnaswarmy Stadium.<br />
<br />
For the wicket-taking aspect, I again compare the actual wickets taken to the expected wickets, taking into account once again, the batsman and the stage of the innings. For example, you would expect to take 0.024 wickets with the first ball of the first over of the innings, but bowling the last ball of the innings, you would expect to take 0.134 wickets. Similarly, you would expect that to vary depending on whether you were bowling to Virat Kohli or to a #11.<br />
<br />
As with the ICC system, I have decided to weight my ratings slightly more toward economy, rather than wicket-taking, simply due to the fact that the confidence interval for economy is narrower than wickets due to the relatively low frequency of wickets compared to runs. The top 10 from my ratings are shown below:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAJd2jRvalSmBsZiLoOk0RGdwG_nwIXAquyObSnAwZcrF0oMaSRPERxrwzKCUuj4C2D3HVw9_WsTLpl3FgU63F3yzrP3pD9wI10YkiCTtQKXqgTotWMmeW74Drvb3EvRTJaO9GtOjqGUU/s1600/ratings.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAJd2jRvalSmBsZiLoOk0RGdwG_nwIXAquyObSnAwZcrF0oMaSRPERxrwzKCUuj4C2D3HVw9_WsTLpl3FgU63F3yzrP3pD9wI10YkiCTtQKXqgTotWMmeW74Drvb3EvRTJaO9GtOjqGUU/s400/ratings.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Based on my ratings, Australia's Mitchell Starc is the best T20 bowler in world cricket. Interestingly, Starc did not show up in either of the previous top 10 rankings, but I imagine that plenty of people would not be surprised to see him near the top of the list. He performs well in economy and he is one of the most dangerous wicket-taking bowlers in T20 cricket.<br />
<br />
Another Australian, although less-heralded, Jason Behrendorff, appears second in my ratings, as he did in the Cricket Rating system. It would be interesting to see Behrendorff tested outside of the Big Bash and, at only 26-years old, there is still time for a franchise in another competition to take a chance on what would likely be a relatively cheap player.<br />
<br />
There is likely to be little surprise to see Sunil Narine rounding out the top 3. His economy rating is simply outstanding and his low wicket-taking performance is likely partially affected by batsmen simply looking to play out his overs without taking any risks.<br />
<br />
The trio of Benny Howell, Azeem Rafiq and Liam Dawson represent the T20 Blast strongly here and Dawson's performances have been rewarded recently with a T20 England debut. Benny Howell is a name that has appeared on both my system and the Cricket Ratings system and he is one that England should maybe keep an eye on. Strong performances in both the economy and wicket-taking aspects suggest that he is a very talented T20 bowler.<br />
<br />
As with the batsmen ratings, let us take a quick look at the bottom 10 in the ratings. These are shown below:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKe6CWK03PQksXrUlChaurKQ_kGoiv4Jir00RVvBTaMbsTig_lHM2dBEOSg9B0sRDj_qVhjaLqi3c_rq5_1jyVDO4SqR9zXqAmmlTuBQJaFmS4HMhWW1YHjVfRE9BSe887YXId6_X3ruU/s1600/bottom10.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKe6CWK03PQksXrUlChaurKQ_kGoiv4Jir00RVvBTaMbsTig_lHM2dBEOSg9B0sRDj_qVhjaLqi3c_rq5_1jyVDO4SqR9zXqAmmlTuBQJaFmS4HMhWW1YHjVfRE9BSe887YXId6_X3ruU/s400/bottom10.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
This does not make excellent reading for India with both Ishant Sharma and Umesh Yadav, both of whom have played internationally for India and who are both regulars in the IPL, showing up in the bottom 10. Indeed, Ishant Sharma scores very poorly on both aspects, suggesting that he is expensive and rarely takes wickets.<br />
<br />
Regarding a couple of the other names that showed up highly in the ICC ratings, we find Samuel Badree at #13 in my rankings, Jasprit Bumrah way down at #123, Imran Tahir at #59 and Kyle Abbott actually shows up a long way down at #232, well below the average T20 bowler.<br />
<br />
Comparing a couple of names from the Cricket Ratings system, Lasith Malinga is at #23, Kevin O'Brien is at #51, Bhuvneshwar Kumar is at #57 and Ravi Ashwin is at #24. Generally, there appears to be slightly more consistency between my ratings and the Cricket Ratings rankings than with the ICC rankings.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com138tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-66637567603878346862016-08-20T10:48:00.000+02:002021-02-17T14:52:09.613+01:00Finding the Best T20 Batsmen in World Cricket<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
In any team sport, one of the more difficult aspects is determining the influence of individual players within that team. In football, drawing out which players are really driving the team and which players appear good purely as part of being part of a successful system can be very difficult due to the fluid and interconnected nature of the sport. However, in T20 cricket, it is easier, particularly if we view a match as a series of individual contests between batsman and bowler.<br />
<br />
The ICC has developed its own rating system to rank which the best international T20 batsmen are (available <a href="http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/ranking/t20/batting/">here</a>). The current ranking from their system is shown below:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_0ufIYiPxZMwVtJjHKfJ0LjBeSpjXWCRcM78bD4tFBfvd96ghQv-5pfPx6WZk9tPbpVVu-6kcSEKQ4rp3tEHMNApWBjJlXBv86KQretwF-dxfOUGxMNEFAtJkgU-35vhfmgeUhxN5h3c/s1600/iccratings.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="207" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_0ufIYiPxZMwVtJjHKfJ0LjBeSpjXWCRcM78bD4tFBfvd96ghQv-5pfPx6WZk9tPbpVVu-6kcSEKQ4rp3tEHMNApWBjJlXBv86KQretwF-dxfOUGxMNEFAtJkgU-35vhfmgeUhxN5h3c/s400/iccratings.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Now, while this system only takes into account international matches, it does not seem too bad. Given his form recently, there are not too many people that would argue with Virat Kohli topping the rankings, while we see Joe Root, Alex Hales and Chris Gayle in the top 10, all of whom appeared in the T20 World Cup Final earlier this year. However, it also feels as though there are a number of big T20 players that are missing from the top 10.<br />
<br />
Recently, a new website, <a href="http://www.cricketratings.co.uk/">Cricket Ratings</a>, set-up by Dan Weston, released their version of a top 10 T20 batsmen that uses data from domestic T20 competitions around the world as well as international matches. It also adjusts for the different level of quality in competitions around the world to enable, for example, performances in the IPL to be directly compared with performances in the T20 Blast. It also breaks down the performance into two aspects - adjusted average and adjusted strike-rate. The top 10 players from the <a href="http://www.cricketratings.co.uk/grading-t20-batsmen">Cricket Ratings system</a> are shown below:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7uvro8zStXwh9cl8t_FEyTLJvDkxuHupD7uSiRissnaX51I1LGiXQ_ECtZwCrUcz9aiXguLkSUkGHR5uwdLmrAjhvGP76l2Qky0n-g2VPN3zRt8jXGt_9hyjO8QrSPI3NUKv_FKomw0c/s1600/trratings.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="341" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7uvro8zStXwh9cl8t_FEyTLJvDkxuHupD7uSiRissnaX51I1LGiXQ_ECtZwCrUcz9aiXguLkSUkGHR5uwdLmrAjhvGP76l2Qky0n-g2VPN3zRt8jXGt_9hyjO8QrSPI3NUKv_FKomw0c/s400/trratings.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Again, we see Virat Kohli topping the ratings here, but there are a number of new names that appear here. Ab de Villiers and David Warner are the two standouts here that were missing from the ICC version and if you asked cricket fans, I would suspect that they would include those two names in their top 10. There are also a couple of more unexpected names appearing here, particularly Yusuf Pathan and Reeza Hendricks.<br />
<br />
Now, over the past six months, I have been building up a database of ball-by-ball T20 data, which has enabled me to come up with my own rating system.<br />
<br />
Similarly to the Cricket Ratings system, my rating system is built around two aspects - average and strike rate. Clearly, any top T20 batsman should be strong in both of these areas - it is no good having a high average if you only score at a strike rate of 100.0, but similarly, there is no point in having a strike rate of 150.0 if you generally only last a couple of balls.<br />
<br />
In my model, the strike-rate aspect is based around the concept of comparing the runs that a batsman actually scored against the runs that a batsman would be expected to score. This run expectation is derived based on a number of factors, including the ground, the time of the innings and the quality of the bowler. For example, if a batsman is playing at the M. Chinnaswamy Stadium in Bengaluru, facing a ball in the final over of the innings bowled by Ishant Sharma, they would be expected to score more runs off that delivery than if the same batsman was facing the first ball of the seventh over at Sabina Park against Sunil Narine. By comparing the runs that a batsman scored off each delivery compared to the expected runs, we can see which batsmen score at a higher than expected rate.<br />
<br />
The average aspect is based around looking at the runs scored per innings and the runs scored per dismissal, again adjusted by the ground and the quality of bowling. For example, if a batsman had averaged 30.0 runs per dismissal, but most of the bowling that he had faced was against low-quality county bowling, he would be marked down compared to a player with the same average, but who had faced the likes of Sunil Narine and Mitchell Starc on a regular basis.<br />
<br />
Having explained the basics of how the rating system works, here are the top 10 T20 batsmen from my model:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEig0SsUlDXIpdJRGaFHZULGlXpVEcF_0cn_uVN-FJFgjJVCoEOdrNtU3Hmp5SpdmrUFhAABLFsxmpdWa5_sc4bCXRBdghH2J4J6mZdUbJ09NZZlfIS80QmKMLkNPrejfhwX7AxVSK7bfp4/s1600/ratigns.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="217" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEig0SsUlDXIpdJRGaFHZULGlXpVEcF_0cn_uVN-FJFgjJVCoEOdrNtU3Hmp5SpdmrUFhAABLFsxmpdWa5_sc4bCXRBdghH2J4J6mZdUbJ09NZZlfIS80QmKMLkNPrejfhwX7AxVSK7bfp4/s400/ratigns.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Chris Gayle actually tops my rankings, although Virat Kohli maintain a top 2 place. It is the incredible strike-rate of Chris Gayle that draws him above the Indian in this ranking. Michael Klinger is a name that appears in third place in my ratings that was conspicuously absent in both the prior rating systems. I would surmise that his absence in the previous systems were due to Australia's bizarre reluctance to pick him at international level (ICC Rating) and the fact that the majority of his appearances have come in the T20 Blast and Big Bash, where the quality is deemed lower than the IPL (Cricket Ratings). David Warner and AB de Villiers round out the top 5 in my ratings.<br />
<br />
As my data is based around a weighted average of performances over the past five years, the name of Phillip Hughes appears at number six. As all cricket fans will remember, Hughes tragically passed away in November 2014 having been struck by a bouncer, so unfortunately we shall never find out whether he would have gone on to become one of the T20 great batsmen.<br />
<br />
We find the South African pairing of Quinton de Kock and Hashim Amla, England's Jason Roy and Australia's Usman Khawaja also appear in the top 10. Jason Roy is an interesting one as we can see that while his longevity in terms of his innings are nothing all that special, but he does have a remarkable strike-rate part of the rating, showing his ability to score at an impressive rate.<br />
<br />
While the top 10 is interesting, we can also look at the bottom 10 to spot some of the worst T20 batsmen in world cricket. These are as follows:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixtlx8P8xlJd-DqfO8bEBioBENByFwOCGLpdkvwY8LFTvSj_dFSh5s34snednCwuU7qEBGDuDRXB7I7J4nGCgWGHy-iaLvHi2mK3gBiLf4jOiAn6jtYAtMFTr6htZ-J_cDBbJ_mMK8nkk/s1600/ratignsbottom.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="217" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixtlx8P8xlJd-DqfO8bEBioBENByFwOCGLpdkvwY8LFTvSj_dFSh5s34snednCwuU7qEBGDuDRXB7I7J4nGCgWGHy-iaLvHi2mK3gBiLf4jOiAn6jtYAtMFTr6htZ-J_cDBbJ_mMK8nkk/s400/ratignsbottom.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
We find the likes of Dinesh Chandimal, the former Sri Lanka T20 captain, who actually dropped himself during their successful 2014 World Cup T20 triumph, and Manoj Tiwary, who has been a regular in the IPL and has represented India at international T20 level. However, no player is ranked as badly as South African, Khaya Zondo, whose combination of dreadfully slow scoring and poor average means that he is officially the worst T20 batsman in the world based on my rating system.<br />
<br />
From an England perspective, while Jason Roy was the only batsman in the top 10, there are a number of other Englishmen in the top 25 with Sam Northeast (#12), Luke Wright (#14), Joe Root (#21) and Michael Carberry (#23) also suggesting that England does have plenty of T20 batting talent at their disposal, although interestingly, Roy and Root are the only two that actual form part of England's T20 team. While the time has probably passed for Luke Wright and Michael Carberry, it will be interesting to see whether Sam Northeast gets an opportunity in the coming years to cement a place in England's middle-order.<br />
<br />
Finally, let us see how some of the names that appeared in the other ratings perform in my system. In the ICC ratings, we saw the likes of Aaron Finch, Martin Guptill and Faf du Plessis in the top 5, although they drop to rankings of 11th, 42nd and 66th in my ratings. In the Cricket Rating system, it is interesting that while there is agreement on a number of names, there are strong differences on some of the others. In particular, we saw the Indian pairing of Yusuf Pathan and MS Dhoni inside the top 10, but they drop to 223rd and 155th in my ratings, which raises the question of how the IPL is weighted in the two different systems.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-64100961944885982562016-05-21T13:41:00.002+02:002016-05-21T13:41:58.282+02:00Tennis Stats Mailbag - Edition 1<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
It has been a while since I wrote much about stats in tennis. There are a number of reasons for this, but one being that I was struggling to think of topics to write about. As a result, it seemed like an interesting idea to ask around my Twitter followers for some ideas of what they might like to know. I got a number of responses and have picked a selection of them to answer in this article.<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/sportdw">@sportdw</a> do u know if there is a higher instance of set 2 bagels in tournaments the week before a slam? Lots of tanking going on seemingly</div>
— Rory O' Keeffe (@rokky90) <a href="https://twitter.com/rokky90/status/732984571097153536">May 18, 2016</a></blockquote>
The idea that there is plenty of tanking going on the week before a Grand Slam event has been around for a long time. The theory is that higher ranked players will generally want to prioritise the slam events due to the better chance of picking up prize money and ranking points.<br />
<br />
Firstly, if we address the actual question of whether there are more second set bagels, we find that in ATP events not in the week before a slam, 3.3% of matches that finish in straight sets see a second set bagel. In the week before a slam, 3.0% of matches that finish in straight sets see a second set bagel. There is very little different here, and indeed, we also see virtually no difference in 6-1 second sets either or even the percentage of matches that finish in straight sets.<br />
<br />
However, one difference that we do see is the number of favourites that lose in straight sets. In an average ATP tournament not in the week before a slam event, we see 45.8% of wins by outsiders being completed in straight sets. However, in the week before a slam, this jumps to 59.1%, suggesting that there may be an element of favourites not putting everything into trying to fight back if they go down by a set and a break.<br />
<br />
From a betting perspective, can we see any profit in backing against the higher ranked players in this week before a slam? Well, if you had £10 on every match since the start of 2010 where a non top-20 player was against a top-20 player in the week before a slam, you would have won £189.70 at an impressive return of 10.4%. Indeed, if we break this down further, if you had backed non-top 20 players against top 10 opponents, you would actually have lost £46.20. It seems that either the top 10 players only enter these events if they intend to try and win them or that even if the top 10 players are not giving it everything, they are still good enough to win. Instead, it is the players ranked between 11 and 20 that are the ones to oppose in this week - a strategy that would have returned £235.90 from £10 stakes at a 19.5% return since 2010.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/sportdw">@sportdw</a> Murray vs Djokovic rally duration. Murray win more of the longer rallies?</div>
— Mark Wilkins (@biscuitchaser) <a href="https://twitter.com/biscuitchaser/status/733351433089777664">May 19, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray are arguably the two best returners in the game and their fitness and ability gives them an advantage in long rallies. However, the question of which player tends to come out on top in long rallies between them is an interesting one.<br />
<br />
Using the data from the Match Charting Project, we find 13 matches between the pair with information on rally lengths. The data can be summarised as below:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSQZv-vwIbbNYWyfpo_k6HIG1skTVWtH8LLw2_sv3KDVGhmTtdHZ1avA7XmtPfCMC6kSGygtvkrPv4pWX5O8ByKcMBomOiy4vkTP-y2u8sPepa8Ch9dZf7MdV-c-uZm2_ugpN2GrOjpwg/s1600/murrayrallies.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="294" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSQZv-vwIbbNYWyfpo_k6HIG1skTVWtH8LLw2_sv3KDVGhmTtdHZ1avA7XmtPfCMC6kSGygtvkrPv4pWX5O8ByKcMBomOiy4vkTP-y2u8sPepa8Ch9dZf7MdV-c-uZm2_ugpN2GrOjpwg/s400/murrayrallies.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
We can see that the longer rallies of 10-20 shots, there is virtually nothing between the two players. Of the 452 rallies of between 10 and 20 shots in the 13 matches, we find that both players have won precisely 226 points each. Djokovic appears to have a slight edge on the seriously long rallies, but a sample of only 109 points means that it could be slightly less reliable.<br />
<br />
Instead, it is when Djokovic is able to keep the points shorter that he has the advantage over Murray. Of points between 4 and 9 shots in length, Djokovic wins 54.7%, which is a significant difference and is where his success over Murray has come from - Djokovic is able to attack early in the point and end them early.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-cards="hidden" data-conversation="none" data-partner="tweetdeck">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/sportdw">@sportdw</a> tie breaks; when serving on the first change of ends, do players have a higher likely hood of losing set? E.g. loss of rhythm</div>
— TomDUK (@TomDUK1) <a href="https://twitter.com/TomDUK1/status/733584825655820288">May 20, 2016</a></blockquote>
If we look at the ATP, we find that the percentage of players that are serving at the first change of ends in a tiebreak goes on to win the tiebreak on 47.5% of occasions. This could possibly suggest that there is a very slight impact from this.<br />
<br />
However, if we look at the percentage of points that are won by the player serving at this stage in the point before the change of ends and the point after the change of ends, we see very little difference. The server wins 64.2% of the points immediately before the first change of ends compared to 64.6% of the points immediately after the change of ends.<br />
<br />
Indeed, we actually see that the percentage of aces increases from 8.0% to 9.6% following the first change of ends and the percentage of double faults drops from 3.3% to 2.7%, suggesting that the slightly longer break may actually benefit the server, giving him the opportunity to focus his mind on his upcoming serve.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-cards="hidden" data-conversation="none" data-partner="tweetdeck">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/sportdw">@sportdw</a> which players have had the largest increase in return points won and if it is sustainable?</div>
— snag97 (@orichimaaru) <a href="https://twitter.com/orichimaaru/status/733574421844131841">May 20, 2016</a></blockquote>
The top 5 players with the biggest increases in return points won in the top 50 in the world rankings are Guido Pella, Ricardas Berankis, Milos Raonic, Richard Gasquet and Nick Kyrigos.<br />
<br />
This is an interesting list. Guido Pella has won 6.9% more return points at ATP level in 2016 as he did in 2015, although he only played a handful of matches last year and mostly on his less favoured surface. On clay, he dominated at Challenger level in 2015, racking up a 45-14 record with four titles and he has really carried this form into 2016 reaching the final in Rio de Janeiro, the quarters in Nice and Bucharest and a third round run at Indian Wells.<br />
<br />
As to whether he can keep up these improved number, it is debatable. He has been very efficient at beating players ranked below him this year with a 9-3 record and 40.8% of points won on return. However, against players ranked above him, he is just 3-8 and 34.8% won on return. So, it seems as though he has a level and while he may be able to keep up his improved return stats, there is not much to suggest that he can improve them significantly more.<br />
<br />
It is tough to feel that the numbers for Ricardas Berankis have not benefited from the level of opposition that he has faced thus far in 2016. The average ranking of his opponents last year was 66.4 compared to 90.7 this year and in matches where he has won a significant number of return points, he has been aided by very poor first serve percentages from his opponents, such as Seppi's 49.5% 1st serves in Doha and 55.6% by Fritz in Memphis.<br />
<br />
The improvements on return for Milos Raonic and Nick Kyrgios are impressive though. Two big servers that are still developing their return game, they have both posted significant improvements in their return numbers despite facing a higher average level of opposition in 2016. They are already two of the most effective servers in the game and if they can add an improved return game, they could be very dangerous.<br />
<br />
However, they are still starting from a low level. Even with a 4.4% improvement, Milos Raonic still only has the 41st highest return points won percentage in the top 50, while Nick Kyrgios' 3.2% improvement moves him to 34th in the top 50. They both still have plenty of time to improve this aspect of their game and I see no reason why this improvement cannot be sustained.<br />
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5319624793909672042.post-49619249441005298872016-05-14T11:20:00.002+02:002021-02-17T14:52:19.107+01:00How do run-rates change across a T20 innings?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
In the 13 years since its inception, T20 cricket has arguably become the most popular format of cricket across the world. Love it or hate it though, it has undoubtedly had a huge impact on how batsmen play across all formats.<br />
<br />
Over the past five months, I have been building a database of ball-by-ball data for T20 events around the world. It currently consists of information for just under 290,000 deliveries covering all T20 matches since the start of 2014 as well as a number of matches from international level and the IPL and CPL from before 2014.<br />
<br />
Across all of the matches, the average score is 144.9 runs in the 20 overs, suggesting an average run-rate of 7.25 through the innings. However, as anyone that has watched T20 cricket will know, the run-rate is not constant throughout the innings, so I thought it would be interesting to look at how it changes as the innings progresses.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIM9huCYvp4y2h6HRh5bE9S4CsVR4TDU42jCr3bkaE3nMDIEhyphenhyphenrqLyFcCZ8YtaxdPvzyfm25FBYUUSUX2iW8bBzQhxhrPfNfydbJMHPYDyg3PpeCe9887qxHNyu9Nb2mfrLYihWg9vvxs/s1600/runratebyover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="366" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIM9huCYvp4y2h6HRh5bE9S4CsVR4TDU42jCr3bkaE3nMDIEhyphenhyphenrqLyFcCZ8YtaxdPvzyfm25FBYUUSUX2iW8bBzQhxhrPfNfydbJMHPYDyg3PpeCe9887qxHNyu9Nb2mfrLYihWg9vvxs/s640/runratebyover.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
We can see that the first over of a T20 is generally the lowest scoring of all the overs as the opening batsmen get used to the surface and do not want to risk giving away an early wicket. Indeed, it is the only over in a T20 match that averages a run-rate of less than six runs per over. This reticence from batsmen to attack early on may explain why many teams look to get an over from one of their weaker bowlers out the way here.<br />
<br />
Once the first two overs are out of the way, the run-rate for Overs 3-6 in the powerplay are pretty constant, ranging from 7.55 in Over 3 to 7.75 in Over 6. During this powerplay period, only two fielders are allowed outside the circle, which explains why batsmen are more aggressive and able to score more runs in this period.<br />
<br />
There is a significant drop-off once the powerplay ends with the runs-per-over dropping from 7.75 in Over 6 to 6.40 in Over 7. Indeed, the run-rate does not return to the powerplay levels until it reaches 8.05 in the 15th over of the innings. We can also see the acceleration as teams attack at the end of the innings as the graph continues upwards.<br />
<br />
The drop-off in the last two overs in the second innings can probably be explained by teams either being in a comfortable position to win and not needing to go mad or being well behind and no real incentive to really attack.<br />
<br />
The next question is whether the pattern is similar across different tournaments or whether teams structure their innings different in different competitions. The graph below shows the same, but broken down by tournament instead of innings.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUTut9rYWqTw3XJy7Le7NInGOOxGAMZ9rdxwdo_I13YWOerv_Twc2Kf3mIJFsznnvzWE2fuvgTB47q5ZnGfG6iFxiv0lv9cJgUeT7LaXOAB-ksEUS1CUdVDvCnU-HLQ1Io7mbN12C8Kow/s1600/runratebycomp.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUTut9rYWqTw3XJy7Le7NInGOOxGAMZ9rdxwdo_I13YWOerv_Twc2Kf3mIJFsznnvzWE2fuvgTB47q5ZnGfG6iFxiv0lv9cJgUeT7LaXOAB-ksEUS1CUdVDvCnU-HLQ1Io7mbN12C8Kow/s640/runratebycomp.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
There are some interesting features to note here. Firstly, we can see that there is a significantly higher run-rate in the powerplay overs in the T20 Blast in England than in either the IPL or the CPL. The T20 Blast averages 47.0 runs at 7.84 runs-per-over during the six powerplay overs, compared to 42.0 in the IPL and 39.3 in the CPL. Whether this is a feature of weaker bowling in the T20 Blast or whether it is a strategy to attack early is unclear, but it is something worth considering.<br />
<br />
We can also see that batsmen accelerate more toward the end in the IPL, particularly in the final five overs of the innings. Throughout most of the innings, we see the T20 Blast ahead of the IPL, but once we hit Overs 16-20, the IPL starts to move clear. Could the higher run-rate earlier in the innings in the T20 Blast result in fewer wickets and established batsmen left later on? That is something to look at in the future potentially.<br />
<br />
The CPL is an interesting tournament. It lags way behind the IPL and T20 Blast in terms of run-rate throughout most of the innings before they start properly hitting in the final over or two. Indeed, the 10.87 in the final over in the CPL is far ahead of any other over in either of the other competitions, but it is still only just enough to lift the overall innings average just over the 7.0 runs-per-over mark. Does this mean that the grounds are tougher to score on in the Caribbean? Maybe, although they are apparently easy enough to score off at the end of the innings. Does it mean that West Indian teams need to work on rotating the strike more often in the middle overs? Possibly.<br />
<br />
This is only a brief first look at how innings are structured in T20 matches. There are obviously plenty of other factors to build into this - how many wickets do teams have remaining at different stages or are the grounds tougher to score on in certain areas are two, but there are many more. However, it gives an overview of how the run-rate changes across an innings and it may give some ideas of periods in which teams can look to improve their strategies.</div>
Ian Dorwardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12915714073751444741noreply@blogger.com1