Cricket 1901

406 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. S e p t. 12, 1901. CR ICK ET RECORDS. The following extract from a long article by Mr. Hamish Stuart in “ Black­ wood’s Magazine” for September, will, we think, show that the whole article is indispensable to those who make a study of the game :— “ From the point of view of the bats­ man, consider what a record or even a great performance means. The former is only possible under certain conditions. The first obviously is a perfect wicket, natural or prepared, as smooth as a billiard-table, almost as durable. The second is, that he must find two or more —in most cases more—of his side in such form that ‘ somebody will stay with him ’ while he makes rurs. Such conditions as fine weather and ‘ time ’ are under­ stood, but as a rule an essential condition is that his side must bat first, and he must go in early, if the record is to be an individual record and not one shared with a partner. Any modern batsman likely to break record who remained in for two whole days would ea?ily accomplish the desired end. On 1he opening day of a first-class match the time devoted to acluil play i» usually o j hours; on the second day play should extend over at least 6 hours. This would give him 11$ hours at the wicket, and if he scored at the slow rate of 38 runs an hour, he would break the existing record. If he scored at the Jessopian rate of 100 an hour, he would become immortal. In all probability, however, a record innings would not be a fast innings all through its course. Many of our most reliable batsmen rarely exceed 20 to 25 runs for the first hour of a big innings, but treble that rate of scoring when they have worn down the bowling and the ball comes along looking as large and conspicuous as if its diameter had been increased six­ fold. “ A record score, given the necessary conditions, is thus always possible; it is therefore, also, theoretically probable. The degree of its probability is, however, a delicate and difficult practical problem. If we take the five most successful modem batsmen, Abel, W. G. Grace, Gunn, W. W. Bead, and Shrewsbury, players whose active participation in the game has extended over a period (suffi­ ciently long to have afforded them several of those opportunities fulfilling all the conditions necessary to the making of a record, what do we find ? Simply that the facts are all against a record score being made, even under conditions most favourable to its making. These great batsmen have played between them no fewer than 4,280 innings. Deducting one-fourth for innings played on 1bowlers’ ’ wickets and one-fourth for innings played under other circumstances rendering a big score unnecessary or impossible, we have 2,140 innings played under conditions favourable to exceptional performances. What are the facts ? Between them these five great batsmen have scored 275 centuries, and only forty scores of over 200 and four above 300. lt is at this point that you enter the fascin­ ating region of cricket probability. How simple the whole matter would become if you could apply the ordinary rules of arithmetic. A batsman plays 50 innings aud scores 10 centuries; therefore in every 100 innings he will score 20 centuries. Hence a hundred from his bat when he goes to the wicket is what is called ‘ a five-to-one ’ chance. By similar reasoning you reach the arithmetical pro­ ability of a score of 200 or 300 or more. Lst us take the figures of one of the five as typical. Up to 3rd August Abel’s figures were: — Innings. Over 300. Over 200. Over 300. t38 65 7 1 Here, then, you have in all the rigidity of cold figures the probabilities of the situation so far as Abel is concerned— deducting one-half from the number of innings for the leason already stated. Against TOO. Against 200. Against 300. Nearly 8 to 1. Nearly 60 to 1. Nearly 419 to 1. “ If we subject to a similar analysis the innings played by the five most brilliant batsmen of the younger school, men who have only played on the ‘ plumb ’ prepared wickets of to-day, we find the veterans have no cause to feel ashamed. The five batsmen selected are A. O. MacLaren, K. S. Ranjitsinbji, O. B. Fry, Hayward, and Tyldesley, and the following table enables a comparison between the performances of the old and the young brigade to be made;— No. 200 or 30) or Inna. Centuries, over. over. Veterans ................. 4380 275 40 4 Juniors (to 10th Aug.) 1648 138 21 2 It will therefore be seen from the above that the ‘ odds against ’ the various scores from 100 or over to 300 and over on all sorts of wickets are as follows:— Against 100. Against 200. Against 300. Veterans... Nearly 16 to 1 lC 9tol 3095 to 1 Juniors ... „ 12 to 1 78 to 1 824 to 1 “ It would be possible to draw some interesting conclusions from these figures. Relatively to the wickets of their earlier days, the veterans are shown to be better. When further allowance is made for the fact that the veterans are slower between the wickets, the superiority of the old brigade is clear. W. G. Grace, it may be noted, loses 33 per cent, of the run value of his hits for this reason. So the writer calculates, after assigning the hits of several innings their proper value and making some deduction for the lethargy of the field when W. G. is batting—a lethargy due to the fact that the fielders know he will not attempt a second or third run in cases in which a younger and more active batsman would do so. “ This aspect of the figures is not, however, the most important. By them­ selves they may seem to solve the problem in probability by a very simple applica­ tion of arithmetic. Yet a very little consideration will at once show that your reasoning begs the whole question. Cricket is a game of constant antagonism, in which the skill of eleven is set against the skill of one, in which the unexpected is always happening, in which the bats­ man can never afford to relax hisvigilance, in which a momentary loss of self- restraint on his part may lead to his downfall, in which one such error is fatal, and in which opportunism is a quality essential to success. A good modern wicket, it must be remembered, is literally as true as a billiard-table though of course its durability is not such a per­ manent possession. It is a ‘ made ’ wicket, prepared in such a way that the layer of ingredients on the real ground corresponds to the slate of the billiard - table. Here and there it may be chipped or worn, and ‘ spots ’ may be created, but, as a rule, it remains from the first ball to the last a wicket on which the pace and flight of the ball, once mastered, may be subsequently calculated and anticipated with such precision that bat­ ting becomes mechanical, and run-getting is not so much a matter of ‘ timing ’ as of ‘ placing.’ How, then, do modern batsmen of the best class lose their wickets on such pitches ? ‘ I felt as if I could stay in for ever, and as if only carelessness on my part would get me out.’ These are the very words used by one of the five veterans to the writer. The batsman had just been stumped after making over 200 and being at the wickets for five hours without giving a chance. Then a good-length ball very wide to the off came along. He should have left it alone; but with a momentary reckless­ ness he indulged in a little fancy forward play, lost his balance, and was stumped. In the language of the cricket-field, he ‘ got himself out.’ “ And here you have the key to the truth. Human nature in flannels is j ust the same as human nature in ordinary clothes. Sooner or later it errs and ‘ gats itself out.’ The writer is one of those who chronicle the game and have to spend thirty-six hours a week watching c osely, either with field-glass or naked eye, every ball bowled in two first-class matches: he has, therefore, enjoyed exceptional opportunities of noting and estimating the character of those fatal errors, without which, in dry weather and on true wickets, finished matches would be impossible, and cricket would cease to be really interesting. Every ‘ situation ’ would depend on the weather for its development, and such of its dramatic character as can now be traced to the fallibility of human nature would have to be attributed to a prosaic shower and a hot sun.” 8TRE ATHAM v. THE VILLAGE, tham on September 7. T h e V il l a g e . -Played at Strea- G. Wilbourne, b Field G.Curtis.c Barkworth, b H ooper.................20 R. Sandham, c Bark­ worth, b Hooper ... 7 A.G.Freeman,st Kerr, b Hooper................. 4 B. Sandiford, c Feeny, b Hooper................. 0 R. Caffarey, b Hooper 2 H. Hazell, c Leaf, b Feeny ................. 44 S treath am . E. Stillwell, c Pull- brook, b Hooper ... 5 J. Mitchell, b Hooper 9 G. Dickinson, b Feeny 43 E. Watts, b Sco^t W . Horn, not out Total 27 17 D. O’Kerr, b Caffarey 4 E. Field, b Caffarey ... 22 H. H. Scott, not out 106 H. 8. Barkworth, lbw, b Freeman ..........21 H.M. Leaf, b Freeman 7 J. F. W. Hooper, c Dickinson.bSandham 73 G.B Cordero/, runout 24 M. C. Dahl, not out... 61 B 28, lb 1, w 2 ... 31 Total (6 wkts) 349 E. P. Pulbrook, S. Lloyd-Jones, V. F. Feeny, and A. E. Fortescue did not bat.