Highest ever test batting rankings

Bounced for PP.

Waiting

Still looking?

Either put up or STFU

Basil wrote:The Chappell brothers are notable omissions from that list

Greg would certainly have made it if not for WSC stats which aren't included in these figures and he also would have been given deductions for all the official tests he missed.

Ditto DKL in the bowling stats.

Jaysus - Smith goes to No 1 with 913 - higher than Lara, SRT, Chappell, Waugh, Dravid, Javed, Hammond and a number of other legends ever achieved.

JGK wrote:Jaysus - Smith goes to No 1 with 913 - higher than Lara, SRT, Chappell, Waugh, Dravid, Javed, Hammond and a number of other legends ever achieved.

Not bad for a specialist fielder.

Mascot.

taipan wrote:

JGK wrote:Jaysus - Smith goes to No 1 with 913 - higher than Lara, SRT, Chappell, Waugh, Dravid, Javed, Hammond and a number of other legends ever achieved.

Not bad for a specialist fielder.

Smith now goes to outright 10th all time (sharing the Top 10 with some pretty handy names). A decent test in Sydney could take him to outright 6th all time.


ID Rat. Name Nat. Career Best Rating
1 961 D.G. Bradman AUS 961 v India, 10/02/1948
2 945 L. Hutton ENG 945 v West Indies, 03/04/1954
3 942 J.B. Hobbs ENG 942 v Australia, 23/08/1912
3 942 R.T. Ponting AUS 942 v England, 05/12/2006
5 941 P.B.H. May ENG 941 v Australia, 27/08/1956
6 938 C.L. Walcott WI 938 v Australia, 15/06/1955
6 938 I.V.A. Richards WI 938 v England, 31/03/1981
6 938 G.S. Sobers WI 938 v India, 17/01/1967
6 938 K.C. Sangakkara SL 938 v England, 05/12/2007
10 937 S.P.D. Smith AUS 937 v Pakistan, 30/12/2016

Hmm, missed this. That's some wobbly ranking system!!!

Rankings before this test. Given that Smith went from 936 to 941 with 178* and 21 in Pune, today's ton could well put him into outright 3rd all time and depending on how the rest of the match pans out, maybe even equal with Sir Len.

1 961 D.G. Bradman AUS 961 v India, 10/02/1948
2 945 L. Hutton ENG 945 v West Indies, 03/04/1954
3 942 J.B. Hobbs ENG 942 v Australia, 23/08/1912
3 942 R.T. Ponting AUS 942 v England, 05/12/2006
5 941 S.P.D. Smith AUS 941 v India, 20/03/2017

yes, it has been a phenomenal runfest

JGK wrote:Rankings before this test.   Given that Smith went from 936 to 941 with 178* and 21 in Pune, today's ton could well put him into outright 3rd all time and depending on how the rest of the match pans out, maybe even equal with Sir Len.

1 961 D.G. Bradman AUS 961 v India, 10/02/1948
2 945 L. Hutton ENG 945 v West Indies, 03/04/1954
3 942 J.B. Hobbs ENG 942 v Australia, 23/08/1912
3 942 R.T. Ponting AUS 942 v England, 05/12/2006
5 941 S.P.D. Smith AUS 941 v India, 20/03/2017

Remarkable.

Alas, only another big score in the 2nd dig will do, if Aus is to retain the ABavaskar.

Just revisiting this- Smith's 239 in a winning side could get him from 938 to 942 and equal 3rd all time.

Heard him called BSB this morning ... big call.

lardbucket wrote:Heard him called BSB this morning ... big call.

Aye. 5 years doesn't make a career.

And there it is.   Smith joins Sir Len as the second highest peak rating ever.  Astonishing.

ID Rat. Name Nat. Career Best Rating
1 961 D.G. Bradman AUS 961 v India, 10/02/1948
2 945 L. Hutton ENG 945 v West Indies, 03/04/1954
2 945 S.P.D. Smith AUS 945 v England, 18/12/2017
4 942 J.B. Hobbs ENG 942 v Australia, 23/08/1912
4 942 R.T. Ponting AUS 942 v England, 05/12/2006
6 941 P.B.H. May ENG 941 v Australia, 27/08/1956
7 938 C.L. Walcott WI 938 v Australia, 15/06/1955
7 938 I.V.A. Richards WI 938 v England, 31/03/1981
7 938 K.C. Sangakkara SL 938 v England, 05/12/2007
7 938 G.S. Sobers WI 938 v India, 17/01/1967

http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/alltime/test/

Fark a duck!! Well done Tweek!!!

Are the rankings like a log scale? I assume the 16 points to the top is like double the rank??? Meaning that no pleb will ever approach it?

Just to make trouble, where does Mishmash rate before and after his Saturday effort?

Shit, and less shit?

The Hollow Man's ratings would be at Bruce Francis levels, where any rating at all is an over rating.

It's OK , h

We know you were wrong and I've accepted you apology

When did you become the bnlg?

Most of the people on that list played when they're weren't ropes and bowlers could do as they damn well pleased. That said Smith deserves to be there. Crap captain but we've been there before.

skully wrote:Fark a duck!! Well done Tweek!!!

Are the rankings like a log scale? I assume the 16 points to the top is like double the rank??? Meaning that no pleb will ever approach it?

Yep. Tweak would need to score a double ton for about 7 consecutive tests to get to 961.

And that score itself is a bit unders for Bradman who total is after discounting for missing the 1936 tour of South Africa.

Similarly, the likes of Lillee and GSC never had a really high rating because of missed tests due to injury, unavailability and WSC.

So with 178 runs for once out in the match, Smith is likely to go to outright all time second when the next rankings are released.

JGK wrote:

skully wrote:Fark a duck!! Well done Tweek!!!

Are the rankings like a log scale? I assume the 16 points to the top is like double the rank??? Meaning that no pleb will ever approach it?

Yep.    Tweak would need to score a double ton for about 7 consecutive tests to get to 961.

And that score itself is a bit unders for Bradman who total is after discounting for missing the 1936 tour of South Africa.

Similarly, the likes of Lillee and GSC never had a really high rating because of missed tests due to injury, unavailability and WSC.

Is that actually the case with Sir Donald, DKL and GSC though, Mr K ?

P'raps I'm wrong - but if they had scored those runs/taken the wickets credited after the missed games *during them (had they played)* surely their ranking would be the same as it is. Or does your rating drop if you miss a match for any reason?

I'm not sure my question is clear though. Does the same run of runs scored, or wickets taken over say, 30 consecutive matches get a higher rating than those same runs/wickets taken over 20 matches, then missing 7 or 8 matches through injury - and then playing another 10 ?