Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Sachin's match winning centuries

Sorry, the analyst in me couldn't resist doing this. I recently came across this photo.

"Sachin has more match winning centuries than Ricky Ponting has in total" - that's the stupidest argument, mathematically. So I just went ahead and did a little bit of analysis.

Ricky Ponting: 30 centuries, 25 of them victories - win % when Ponting Scores a 100 - 83.33%

Okay, now the argument becomes - "hey, Australia was a much better team than India during that time and they won a lot of their games invariably". Well, I say - "very good call".

So I went ahead and studied another Indian who had significant success in ODI Cricket and was a peer to Sachin - Saurav Ganguly.

Saurav Ganguly: 22 centuries, 18 of them victories - win % when Saurav scores a 100 - 81.81%.

Sachin Tendulkar: 49 centuries, 33 of then victories (according to the image) - win % when Sachin scored a 100 - 67.34%

That is *significantly* lower than the two considered above.

I'm not under-mining Sachin's achievement at all. But when someone says Sachin has more match winning centuries than any other player, he also has more centuries in lost causes than any other player, even as a percentage.


Simpson Selwyn said...

Well analysed!!!

പിപഠിഷു said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
പിപഠിഷു said...


siddharth agarwal said...

hello mr. blogger, cricket is team game , so even after sachin performing well, other need to contribute as well. SO in the case of Mr. tendulkar when there is a difficult situations he performs , But team fail to do so, that`s only why india lose ... So shut your analyst mind and go to slip ..

Vineeth said...

Wow. The amount of butthurt on a one year old post is astounding.

First of all, I wasn't undermining Sachin's achievement. I love Sachin and respect his contributions.

I was merely pointing out to a flaw in an argument like "Sachin has more match winning centuries than xyz has centuries". That statement is purely based on the fact that he has way more centuries than anyone else (which could or could not have been based on the fact that he played much longer than anyone in comparison). With such large numbers he is more than likely to have had a higher number of centuries in match winning games.

Second of all, Venkatesh Prasad scored 1 century and it was match winning doesn't hold because of sample sizes and statistical significant. 18/22 vs. 33/49 is a valid comparison because of the denominator. 33/49 vs. 1/1 is not a valid comparison - again denominator.

18/22 vs. 33/49 IS actually statistically significant. I was merely pointing out the mis-representation in the statement "Sachin has more match winning centuries than xyz has centuries".

vaibhav saigal said...

How is there any mis-interpretation in the statement "Sachin has more match winning centuries than xyz has centuries" ???? it is true....
that statement was just for those who say "when sachin scores a century, India loses the match"..... y did u have to put in so much mathematical shit into it?????

ankur agarwal said...

chutiya hai kya tu??