Greatest Opening Batsman of all time?

[sid_19840]

Well,all time makes things interesting.From India I would say that Sunil Gavaskar is the greatest opener mainly due to his calmness at the top of the order and the solid start that he provides.From another country judging from what Ive seen Gilchrist would make it in ODI's for the kind of start he provides and from Tests it would be the pair of Greenidge and Haynes perhaps.

 

[Sureshot]

Didn't Sobers open both the bowling and batting?

 

[MUFC1987]

How you can say that either one of them is the best of all time is beyond me. Tendulkar doesn't open in Tests, ergo not an opener. Meanwhile, Hayden has only faced a decent bowling attack in the last few years, I guess being in the dominant team helps.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Most of your points are so irrelevant, your argument is weak, now let me show you why Tendulkar and Hayden should not be mentioned in the same sentence.

Hayden's stats for ODI's:

Runs: 4131 Highest Score: 146 Average: 40.10 Strike Rate: 75.90 100's: 5 50's: 26 4's: 419 6's: 50

Tendulkar's stats for OD's:

Runs: 14148 Highest Score: 186 Average: 44.21 Strike Rate: 85.97 100's: 39 50's: 72 4's: 1508 6's: 149.

Now, lets see if Hayden had played as many games as Tendulkar...First of all, this should give you a clue...If Hayden doesn't even get selected, then how the hell can he be so damn good.

IF Hayden would have mainted that 40.10 average and had played as many games as Tendulkar...And I very very highly doubt he would have mainted that average....He would still be around 1500 runs short of Tendulkar's total....And this is...If he had mainted that average, and realisticly speaking he most certainly would not have. If Hayden had played as many games, he would probably have a lower average, and hense would then be around 4-5 thousand runs short of Tendulkar...Maybe more.

Now lets look at the centuries each have scored...Tendulkar has scored 34 more centuries than Hayden...No other batsman has even scored 34 ODI centuries...You might argue that Hayden has not played as many games as Tendulkar, so it's unfair to look at the centuries aspect...But let's pretend that he did play as many games as Sachin.

Hayden scores a century 4.3% of the time, whereas Tendulkar scores a century 11.02% of the time. A difference of a whopping 6.72%.
This means that if Hayden had played as many games as Tendulkar he would have 17 centures...Tendulkar would still have more than double off Hayden's centuries. Right Hayden is so much better... :

BTW, besides for cutting the ball better than Hayden, Tendulkar has also much superior footwork, he basicly plays every shot in the book, and does it at a level where Hayden cannot. I have watched both of them, and Tendulkar is soooo far ahead, its not funny...

Listen, I'm not saying that Hayden is a bad batsman, he's not, he is a great bat, but Tendulkar is lightyears ahead, the raw facts prove just that.
Tendulkar has also got out in the 90's more than any other batsman.

I wait for your rebuttle...

...That is if you have one...



I still want you to name me an opening batsman who was better, Ill prove to you by raw statistics that Tendulkar was better...then we'll see how many runs they scored agaisnt minows, etc etc.. Because runs agaisnt minows applies to all batsmen.
Your argument is really weak bro, read my other post, with the stats..You'll see.

I think you've been sadly mistaken mate. My post was more so angled at Test match cricket then ODI.

Let me try and respond to you're post which was, I admit. Very well put out.

You don't think Hayden would've maintained his average? I think he would've with flying colours because if you look at his cumulative batting average (Tendulker's that is) then you'll see that his average is practically the same as Hayden's after the same ammount of matches played by the to. And let's not forget Hayden's average went tremediously down after having piss-poor form during the course of mid 2004 to 2005 and don't start on that topic, I remember you posting in the "5 Best Batsman topic"

Sachin has been a consistent preformer throughout his entire career...Yes he went through rough patches...But who doesn't?

For the purpose of my previous paragraph. Here is the stats for Hayden & Tendulker after 115 ODI Batting Innings.

Sachin Tendulker
Match:118 Inns:115 NO:12 Runs:4094 HS:137 Average:39.74 100s: 8 50s:26

Matthew Hayden
Match: 119 Inns: 115 NO:12 Runs:4131 HS:146 Average:40.10 100s:5 50s:26

Pretty similar aren't they? I guess the only difference is that Hayden prior to being dropped from the ODI, used to average as high as 46 in the ODI were as Tendulker has never had an average that high in ODI cricket.

What you see is the same ammount of innings with the matter of a 1 game difference in Hayden's favour (How does that suggest that Hayden's playing in a better team?), same ammount of NO's, Hayden with approximedly a 40 run buffer to his favour, a better higher score, pretty much same average & same ammount of half centuries made and to Tendulkers favour, 3 more centuries then Hayden. I also noticed you mentioned that Tendulker had posted more 90's in ODI cricket then anybody else. Up until the cumulative stats which I have supplied on my post, Tendulker had only made one 90 in his career where as Hayden had made three. I guess that little theory may aswell be put to rest. Don't believe me? Just check these out...

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?...edhigh=;csearch=;submit=1;.cgifields=viewtype

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?...edhigh=;csearch=;submit=1;.cgifields=viewtype

The point of this post is to ask the question, if Tendulker can do what his done in ODI's, what's saying Hayden couldn't? Afterall after the same ammount of games played (cumulated into how much Hayden has played in his entire career) says that Hayden matches Tendulker. I guess you could defend the fact that Tendulkers produced more centuries up until that point then what Hayden has, though, Hayden had made more runs and they had the exact same ammount of NO's to 'even it up'. So that's basically saying that Hayden plays better after reaching a milestone of either 50 or 100 or does it mean that Hayden was a tad more consistant?

I dunno what I'm doing though, I agree with you that Tendulker is probably a better ODI BATSMAN then Hayden because initially I was saying that Hayden was a BETTER Test Match batsman but there's no reason why Hayden couldn't of been as great, if not greater then Tendulker in the ODI arena. The difference between me & you is that you're using stats that could possibly predict the future while I'm using stats that have actually happened in the past.

I could go on about Test statistics now and go on why I think Hayden's better then Tendulker in that department, but I think I'll just wait it out for a reply... 'if there is one'.

 

[kodos]

Hayden in Tests, easily... in this current era....

Whilst looking at the stats for Tendulkar i couldn't help but notice in Tests he has only batted once at opener, and ZERO times at no.3..... Seems to me like he doesn't want to face the new ball and would rather get his eye in with an older ball that isn't doing what it was at the start of the innings.

*Awaits the Moronic Indians*

You can't say that a batsman who bats 4 or lower is "scared of the new ball". So by your theory, Steve Waugh must have been scared of the new ball then as well. I'm not trying to flame at you but your last comment is totally incorrect.

 

[langerrox]

#4 is oldball bashing #5 is the second newball..

 

[aussie_ben91]

Hayden in Tests, easily... in this current era....

Whilst looking at the stats for Tendulkar i couldn't help but notice in Tests he has only batted once at opener, and ZERO times at no.3..... Seems to me like he doesn't want to face the new ball and would rather get his eye in with an older ball that isn't doing what it was at the start of the innings.

*Awaits the Moronic Indians*

LMAO! Legend...

 

[MUFC1987]

I think it's a bit harsh comparing Hayden's 100 odd innings to Tendulkar's first 100 odd innings. For the simple fact that Tendulkar started out as a teenager, whereas Hayden was already an experienced batsman.

This is shown by looking at Tendulkar's stats since 1993, when Hayden made his debut and Tendulkar would of course have still been younger than Hayden.

 

[nightprowler10]

Sachin Tendulker
Match:118 Inns:115 NO:12 Runs:4094 HS:137 Average:39.74 100s: 8 50s:26

Matthew Hayden
Match: 119 Inns: 115 NO:12 Runs:4131 HS:146 Average:40.10 100s:5 50s:26

I don't think its fair to compare Sachin's first 115 innings with Hayden's to see which one is a greater batsman. Sachin hit his peak after the 1996 World Cup, and has averaged over 40 and scored 25+ centuries since the 97/98 season. You can't ignore something like that.

I think it's a bit harsh comparing Hayden's 100 odd innings to Tendulkar's first 100 odd innings. For the simple fact that Tendulkar started out as a teenager, whereas Hayden was already an experienced batsman.

This is shown by looking at Tendulkar's stats since 1993, when Hayden made his debut and Tendulkar would of course have still been younger than Hayden.

I took too long to type.

 

[aussie_ben91]

I don't think its fair to compare Sachin's first 115 innings with Hayden's to see which one is a greater batsman. Sachin hit his peak after the 1996 World Cup, and has averaged over 40 and scored 25+ centuries since the 97/98 season. You can't ignore something like that.

You mean like Hayden didn't hit his peak until 2002-2003?

 

[YOTC]

You can't say that a batsman who bats 4 or lower is "scared of the new ball". So by your theory, Steve Waugh must have been scared of the new ball then as well. I'm not trying to flame at you but your last comment is totally incorrect.

Yeah could be true. Steve Waugh was never one for opening.....

The indians on here aren't moronic? Hah, they sure seem like it....

 

[langerrox]

You mean like Hayden didn't hit his peak until 2002-2003?

lol exactly:P cmon good arguements please.....
okay next on the list, haydos nor tendulkar are the best. any more suggestions? perhaps define greatest?

 

[nightprowler10]

You mean like Hayden didn't hit his peak until 2002-2003?

Not quite the same. His peak apparently lasted a couple of years, in which time he made three centuries. Sachin's peak is still going after 9 years.

Hayden just played like he was in the best form of his life and then went back to his usual self.

lol exactly:P cmon good arguements please.....
okay next on the list, haydos nor tendulkar are the best. any more suggestions? perhaps define greatest?

Doesn't matter if my arguments are good or not, if you aren't willing to consider them.

BTW, I am by no means an Indian supporter.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Not quite the same. His peak apparently lasted a couple of years, in which time he made three centuries. Sachin's peak is still going after 9 years.

Hayden just played like he was in the best form of his life and then went back to his usual self.

Well you could say that. He just had a really bad slump for about a year & after maturing out of that he scored 4 centuries in 4 test matches?

 

[nightprowler10]

Well you could say that. He just had a really bad slump for about a year & after maturing out of that he scored 4 centuries in 4 test matches?

I thought we were talking about ODIs.