|
|
#61
10-27-2006, 05:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Most amazing achievement 99.9% of Americans won\'t care about
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Does anyone else who's a cricket fan find it amazing that Jason Gillespie, a world-class fast bowler but a serviceable night-watchman type at best as a batsman, now has a higher top score than Steve Waugh? [/ QUOTE ] I am pretty sure that Waugh has a test double century under his belt. Are you sure about the above quote? Or maybe, his high score was 200 on the nose making both me and you correct... [/ QUOTE ] looks like you're both correct. Lori 
|
|
#62
10-27-2006, 06:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Most amazing achievement 99.9% of Americans won\'t care about
While we're on the topic of cricket, who's going to try to explain what happens in one day test matches when rain forces play to stop before the second team can finish battting?
|
|
#63
10-27-2006, 06:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Most amazing achievement 99.9% of Americans won\'t care about
[ QUOTE ]
While we're on the topic of cricket, who's going to try to explain what happens in one day test matches when rain forces play to stop before the second team can finish battting? [/ QUOTE ] A new total is calculated depending on how much resources each side used. Overs and Wickets are counted as resources, so both sides would start with 50 overs and 10 wickets worth of resources and convert them into runs. Two statfreaks Mr.Duckworth and Mr. Lewis created tables using previous data to give a value to resources, which gives a new total for the team batting second to chase. This link will allow you to calculate such stuff for yourself.... very handy when betting in play. Lori
|
|
#64
10-27-2006, 06:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Most amazing achievement 99.9% of Americans won\'t care about
I know the answer, but from what I understand even ardent cricket fans have trouble with the Duckworth/Lewis system (although i guess 2+2ers aren't typical).
|
|
#65
10-27-2006, 07:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Most amazing achievement 99.9% of Americans won\'t care about
[ QUOTE ]
I know the answer, but from what I understand even ardent cricket fans have trouble with the Duckworth/Lewis system (although i guess 2+2ers aren't typical). [/ QUOTE ] It's a horrible mess of a system. The only reason I'm even vaguely familiar with it's workings and have pages stored with how to calculate it is because cricket is a good sport to bet in running, and knowing what score the second side is likely to be chasing is rather a good edge to have [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] Lori
|
|
#66
10-27-2006, 11:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Most amazing achievement 99.9% of Americans won\'t care about
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I know the answer, but from what I understand even ardent cricket fans have trouble with the Duckworth/Lewis system (although i guess 2+2ers aren't typical). [/ QUOTE ] It's a horrible mess of a system. The only reason I'm even vaguely familiar with it's workings and have pages stored with how to calculate it is because cricket is a good sport to bet in running, and knowing what score the second side is likely to be chasing is rather a good edge to have [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] Lori [/ QUOTE ] Does this system take into account the different fielding rules that are in place in different overs? How about the fact that later batsman are likely to be poorer?
|
|
#67
10-27-2006, 11:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Most amazing achievement 99.9% of Americans won\'t care about
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I know the answer, but from what I understand even ardent cricket fans have trouble with the Duckworth/Lewis system (although i guess 2+2ers aren't typical). [/ QUOTE ] It's a horrible mess of a system. The only reason I'm even vaguely familiar with it's workings and have pages stored with how to calculate it is because cricket is a good sport to bet in running, and knowing what score the second side is likely to be chasing is rather a good edge to have [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] Lori [/ QUOTE ] Does this system take into account the different fielding rules that are in place in different overs? How about the fact that later batsman are likely to be poorer? [/ QUOTE ] It factors in both. I have a hunch that it doesn't factor in fielding restrictions as well as it should but I'm sure it gets the batsmen right. Lori
|
|
#69
10-28-2006, 09:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Most amazing achievement 99.9% of Americans won\'t care about
[ QUOTE ]
It's cricket. Who cares? [/ QUOTE ] Very essential contribution to the discussion. Well thought out. My congratulations. And to answer your question, just counting the Test-playing nations: India - population 1.103 billion Pakistan - 165 million Bangladesh - 147 million England / United Kingdom - 60 million South Africa - 47 million Australia - 21 million West Indies - 20 million between all nations Sri Lanka - 20 million Zimbabwe - 13 million New Zealand - 4 million Let's see, that's about 1.6 billion people out of a world population of about 5 billion, or approximately 32% of the world's population (read: "5 times as many people as American 'football'", which is only played by people in 2 nations, if you count Canada's hybrid version. Maybe I'll be real nice and throw in the couple remaining nations that play in NFL Europe, which draws on average about as many people as a Third Division soccer game). And that's not even counting people in the nations that only play the one-day version of the game. Must be nice to wallow and take pride in your ignorance. But thank you for playing anyway. Good night.
|
|
#70
10-28-2006, 11:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Most amazing achievement 99.9% of Americans won\'t care about
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] It's cricket. Who cares? [/ QUOTE ] Very essential contribution to the discussion. Well thought out. My congratulations. And to answer your question, just counting the Test-playing nations: India - population 1.103 billion Pakistan - 165 million Bangladesh - 147 million England / United Kingdom - 60 million South Africa - 47 million Australia - 21 million West Indies - 20 million between all nations Sri Lanka - 20 million Zimbabwe - 13 million New Zealand - 4 million Let's see, that's about 1.6 billion people out of a world population of about 5 billion, or approximately 32% of the world's population (read: "5 times as many people as American 'football'", which is only played by people in 2 nations, if you count Canada's hybrid version. Maybe I'll be real nice and throw in the couple remaining nations that play in NFL Europe, which draws on average about as many people as a Third Division soccer game). And that's not even counting people in the nations that only play the one-day version of the game. Must be nice to wallow and take pride in your ignorance. But thank you for playing anyway. Good night. [/ QUOTE ] First, good job responding to the troll post, that was way better than ignoring him. Second, are you saying that everyone who lives in a country that plays a sport care about that sport, because that's clearly wrong?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
