WEIR updates...

[al Furqaan]

For those who might not know, I have developed a ratings system to compete with the official LG ICC ratings. For more information on the Wahid Efficiency Index Ratings, see following link: http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/showthread.php?t=24500&highlight=weir

At any rate, I have basically come up with a simple set of mathematical formulas to rate batsmen and bowlers in both ODIs and Tests. The formulas are standardized so that the games greatest players have WEIR ratings in the 30s (30-40). This way we can see exactly who stands where.

Originally, the WEIR formulas for ODI batting and bowling along with Test bowling were perfectly derived. The only problem was the Test batting formulas which placed too much emphasis on strike rate - which of course is not so very important in Test cricket. However leaving the strike rate out, meant that with my current formula the ratings system would just be a form of batting average. Plus it is important to know who can score runs and do so at a decent pace.

So I have fixed my Test batting WEIR formula (Mijan bhai, you can now incorporate this formula into your NCL stats thread).

Final Test batting WEIR formula:

(runs * strike rate) (runs)
_______________ X ______________ X 3
(innings * 100) (innings * 100)

**********************************


So now our WEIR ratings look like this:

International Batsman:

Jaques Kallis (South Africa) - 31.06


Bangladesh Batsmen:

Habibul Bashar - 18.26
Shahriar Nafees - 12.54
Mohammad Ashraful - 8.18
Rajin Saleh - 7.43
Aftab Ahmed - 6.80
Nafees Iqbal - 6.47
Sakib al Hasan - 5.53
Javed Omar - 5.43
Alok Kapali - 4.30
Khaled Mashud - 2.87
Mushfiqur Rahim - 2.66
Mashrafee Mortaza - 2.06
Mehrab Hossain Jr - 0.94
Tushar Imran - 0.80

[Rifat]

it's just for batting, right? what about bowling?

[al Furqaan]

Observations:

1) Bashar was indeed the best test batsman we have ever produced despite the fact that he would probably be in the bottom half of the list based on talent or technique.

2) Leaving aftab out of the Test side makes no sense except to teach him to value himself more.

3) Mushfiqur Rahim looks pretty pathetic, but remember that he has only played a handful of matches and is still only 18 years old.

[al Furqaan]

it's just for batting, right? what about bowling?

no, its for both batting and bowling...

for ODI ratings see: http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/showthread.php?t=24518&highlight=weir

for Test ratings see above and: http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/showthread.php?t=24527&highlight=weir

[Rifat]

Observations:

1) Bashar was indeed the best test batsman we have ever produced despite the fact that he would probably be in the bottom half of the list based on talent or technique.

2) Leaving aftab out of the Test side makes no sense except to teach him to value himself more.

3) Mushfiqur Rahim looks pretty pathetic, but remember that he has only played a handful of matches and is still only 18 years old.

yeah, i agree, aftab should inducted into tests ASAP along with Tamim. both are capable of playing any form of the game given the situation.

[WarWolf]

We need to back up the rating system here in BC. What if BC takes this system officially after some carefull reviews?

[al Furqaan]

its a simple scheme, and within that has no real flaws, so i see no reason why BC cannot officially grab it?

I hereby, give www.banglacricket.com the legal rights to call it the "BC WEIR ratings" or "banglacricket WEIR ratings". my name is still attached to the name and BC can put their name on it as well, since without BC i would most likely not come up wiht the ratings.

admins, lets make it official so that i can be honored to have stamped my influence on BC in some small way. BC has become my home away from home...

[israr]

al-Furqaan bhai, can you explain to me your ratings a bit more in elaborate. You've seriously done a good job, and I vote for WEIR to become the official ratings here in BC, because I see the rankings to follow an axiomatic pattern, with which I am highly impressed. Its just that I want to be more well acquainted with your rating system, and understand what exactly do the values imply.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/<o:p></o:p>

[al Furqaan]

al-Furqaan bhai, can you explain to me your ratings a bit more in elaborate. You've seriously done a good job, and I vote for WEIR to become the official ratings here in BC, because I see the rankings to follow an axiomatic pattern, with which I am highly impressed. Its just that I want to be more well acquainted with your rating system, and understand what exactly do the values imply.
<o:p></o:p>

thanks.

great details can be found in the link found at the top of the page on my first post in this thread.

in short, i have actually tinkered with the original formulas so that there are 4 seperate formulas: one for test batting, one for ODI batting, one for test bowling, and one for ODI bowling.

Test batting:

ratings reflect basically a modified batting average in conjunction with strike rate. this is because a player who averages 50 at a strike rate of 10% is not as "good" of a batsman, IMO, as one who averages 50 with a higher strike rate.

ODI batting:

ratings are based on a single formula which incorporates strike rate and assigns it a higher weight value. thus the importance of strike is greater in the ODI ratings as opposed to the test ratings.

Test bowling:

i have dropped economy out of the equation as it really doesn't matter in tests. i may tweak the formula to make strike rate and average correspondingly more important, however. the stats included are strike rate, average, wickets taken and innings bowled.

ODI bowling:

incorporates econ, strike rate, average, wickets taken, and innings bowled