Originally posted by thecoolestleo
How come Irfan Pathan got 600+ points against BD whereas Enamul Jr is getting only 440 or something points against ZIM. But both of them got al most similar numbers of wickets and were match winners for 2 match test series.
My question is what is the criteria for this evaluation and looks like Irfan is getting the favor .
Irfan Pathan didn't get 600+ points against BD. The info that you see on the third column (607 vs Bangladesh, Chittagong 2004) is the 'career best' column and it just mentions the highest point a player has ever reached (followed by the name of the country and the time of play after which he had reached that point).
Incidentally Irfan has reached his highest rating after playing with Bangladesh, which is also his last test so far. Once he plays another test, his rating will go up or down (or stay the same). If it goes up, then that will be his career best for then. If it goes down, then you will still see 607 vs Bangladesh as the career best rating. And same thing happened for Enam too. That is, he reached his highest rating after playing against Pakistan.
As for rating calculation, strength of a country is taken into consideration against which a player is playing. On that account, Irfan is supposed to make less from playing against Bangladesh in comparison with Enam, since Enam played against a stronger team. The reason Irfan has now a rating of 607 is that he already had more rating before that series started and Enam had less. Since pricerwatercooper is no longer hosting the ratings, there is no way (at least, I don't know) to get history of rating for an individual player, from which we could have deduced how much point each of these two players accrued after the series.