How do batsmen compare in their ability to make big hundreds?

teddy

New Member
How do batsmen compare in their ability to make big hundreds?

How do batsmen compare in their ability to make big hundreds? One way of measuring this is to take the ratio of a batsman’s 150s to the number of dismissals between 100 and 150 (dividing the former by the latter). Among batsmen with 15 or more Test centuries, the players with the lowest (or poorest) ratios are




100s
Out 100-150
150+
Ratio

ME Waugh
20
16
1
0.063

GP Thorpe
16
10
1
0.100

DL Haynes
18
13
2
0.154

ML Hayden
26
20
4
0.200

DC Boon
21
15
3
0.200

G Boycott
22
13
3
0.231

MA Atherton
16
13
3
0.231

Inzamam-ul-Haq
25
15
4
0.267




Curiously, the list features mostly modern players, perhaps because batsmen achieving the qualification standard of 15 tons are more common today. If the standard was relaxed to 10 centuries, the list would be led by Allan Lamb and Mohinder Amarnath, both of whom never reached 150 in Tests. Ian Botham, Peter May, John Wright and Saurav Ganguly would also rank above Hayden.



At the other end of the scale, well, no prizes for guessing the leader. Don Bradman reached 150 more than twice as often as he fell short. The leaders are




100s
Out 100-150
150+
Ratio

DG Bradman
29
7
18
2.571

WR Hammond
22
7
10
1.429

SR Waugh
32
10
14
1.400

BC Lara
31
13
18
1.385

L Hutton
19
8
10
1.250

MS Atapattu
16
7
8
1.143

GStA Sobers
26
10
11
1.100

SR Tendulkar
35
15
15
1.000

Javed Miandad
23
10
10
1.000

R Dravid
22
9
9
1.000




There is one batsman in the 10-14 century range with a better ratio than Bradman. Dennis Amiss was out only twice between 100 and 150 in Tests, but scored 150 eight times, giving him a ratio of 4.00.


*stats from z-scores
 
Back
Top