This article, and the next one, are inarguably the most important ones I have written. In this one, I will comprehensively analyse various measures in the complex area of Test batting and arrive at a list of the best Test batters of all time. Such an exercise needs to be fair across 150 years, six generations, and the shifting paradigms of Test cricket. I have spent over six months working on these complex analyses and am confident I have got it correct – maybe not 100% but upwards of 90%. I will do the same for Test bowlers in my next article.
Let me first set down what aspects of Test batting need to be covered in this exercise. This is what I am likely to get if I ask cricket followers around the world:
-
It is important to recognise the number of runs scored; but a player’s longevity should not be allowed to dominate in the process
-
Batting averages are the most important measure of a batter’s career. Different hues of this metric should be introduced
-
If a batter scores important runs against tough bowlers and on difficult pitches, that has to be recognised
-
Because strike rate has become a key metric over the years, that factor should be considered – extrapolated, if required
-
The value of away performances needs to be recognised
-
The context in which the runs were scored must be an integral part of the analysis
-
How was the batter compared to his peers – both within and outside his team?
-
The performance of the batter versus those of his team-mates in the matches he played must be considered
-
How easy or tough was batting during a batter’s career? That should be indicated by the global average of all contemporaneous batters, from the first to last Test of the player in question
-
The support the batter received must be weighed
-
The batter’s consistency must be looked at
-
How much the batter contributed to his team’s aggregate of runs needs to be incorporated
-
The specialist roles that the batter took on – opening, wicketkeeping, and captaincy, must have an influence on the assessment
-
The batter’s contributions in terms of MoM awards, towards wins achieved by the team, and the like must find a place
-
The batter’s capacity to score hundreds frequently, convert fifties to hundreds, and score big hundreds, should be considered
Weighted Batting Average: I use the WBA as my main metric to measure batting performance. For those unaware, the methodology assigns fraction values, between 0.0 and 1.0, to all not-out innings and determines a batter’s WBA. It equalises the values for all batters, irrespective of their not-out innings percentage, which could vary from 1% to 25%.
Strike Rate: Balls-faced data is available for 76% of the 93,000-plus innings that have been played. For scores of 50 and above, this goes up to 78%; for hundreds, it is 80%. So we only need to extrapolate for around 25% of all innings. This makes strike rate a sound measure.
Percent of Team Runs: Looking at the batter’s share of the runs scored while he was at the crease only measures how much he outscored his team-mates. The batter’s overall contribution to the team is better reflected in his share of the runs scored by the team in the innings.
MoM Awards: Since only two-thirds of all Tests have had MoM awards declared, this measure covers both declared and derived awards (matches where the award wasn’t announced but has been derived through numbers). This means every Test is covered. Both aspects, frequency of receiving the award, and the number of awards received, are covered.
The schematic below summarises the entire set of computations and weights. Here is an explainer for the terms and indices used in this article.
The schematic is largely self-explanatory. In general, the data points for the maximum allocation are placed at between 101 and 110% of the highest values achieved by any batter. An example or two will demonstrate this. The highest WBA is 92.74, for Don Bradman; the maximum value, 12.50, is associated with a WBA of 100.0 (107.8%). The highest career run aggregate is 15,921, by Sachin Tendulkar; the maximum value, 12.50, is associated with a career run aggregate of 17,000 (106.7%). And so on, for 32 parameters.
The WBA Group (32.5 points)
-
The most important performance measure, WBA, is assigned 12.5 points, the equal highest of all
-
The ratio comparing the batter’s own batting average to those of other batters in his team, batting at Nos. 1-7 is assigned 6.0 points. Only Tests played by the team during the batter’s career span are considered
-
The ratio comparing the batter’s own batting average to those of other batters from all teams, batting at Nos. 1-7, is assigned 4.0 points. All Tests during the batter’s career span are considered
-
The Runs per Test measure is assigned 2.5 points. The importance of RpT is that batters from stronger teams sometimes tend not to bat twice in a Test and the RpT measure is a fair deliverable requiring due recognition
-
In the Away segment, the Away Batting Average is an important measure and gets 3.5 points. This is the absolute value. The relative measure, the ratio between Away and Home Batting Averages, is allotted 1.5 points. This measure will benefit batters from the lesser countries
-
The Global Batting Average is allotted 2.5 points. This is the average of all 44 batters, or batting instances, in every Test during the batter’s career span. The lower it is, indicating that the period was a tough one for batters, the more points are allocated. And vice versa
An important clarification: The first five measures explained (WBA, Ratio_to_OwnTeam, Ratio_to_All, RpT, and Away Ave) are pure performance measures, and Bradman is ahead of the second-placed batter on these counts by many miles. As such, fixing the maximum by considering Bradman’s values leads to a crowding of the first 20 or so batters, who are bunched together. So the maximum is fixed considering the second-best value and Bradman’s values are way above the maximum. This works out very well.
Career Runs (12.5 points)
12.5 points are allocated for this important measure. That shares the highest weight with WBA. This is the primary longevity-based measure.
Ratings/Contributions (10.0 points)
Performance Rating measures are allotted a total of 6.0 points. 4.0 points are for the average Performance Ratings value and 2.0 points for the highest Performance Rating value. These are context-centric values.
Match Contributions measures are allotted a total of 4.0 points. 2.5 points are for the average Match Contributions value and 1.5 points are for the highest Match Contributions value. These are non-contextual, numbers-based values.
IPV/HSI values (10.0 points) Innings Peer Value (IPV) measures are allotted a total of 6.0 points. 4.0 points are for the average IPV value and 2.0 for the highest IPV value. This indicates how far ahead of the others the batter was in a Test.
High Score Index (HSI) measures are allotted a total of 4.0 points – 2.5 for the average HSI value and 1.5 for the highest HSI value. This zeroes in on the support the batter received in the Test.
Consistency/Runs-weighted PQI/Runs-weighted BowQ (15.0 points)
Consistency Index is allotted a maximum of 5.0 points.
Pitch Quality Index (PQI) Average, weighted by Runs scored, is allotted a maximum of 5.0 points. This is to recognise tough runs scored on difficult pitches.
Bowling Quality Index (BowQ), weighted by Runs scored, is allotted a maximum of 5.0 points. This is to recognise tough runs scored against top-quality bowlers.
X-Factors (20.0 points)
-
Hundreds (3.5 points): The three sub-measures are Hundreds Frequency (Tests/Hundred), Hundreds Conversion Ratio (Hundreds/Total Fifties), Hundreds Average (Total Hundreds value/Hundreds)
-
MoM/BP Awards (3.5): The two sub-measures are Number of MoM/BP awards, Frequency of MoM/BP (number of Tests divided by awards)
-
Contribution to Wins (3.5): The two sub-measures are RpT in Team wins and percentage of Team Runs in wins
-
Percentage of Team Score (2.5): The ratio of Batter Runs to Team Total Runs
-
Strike Rate (2.0): Based on balls faced and extrapolated if that information is not available
-
Opening Runs (2.0): Runs scored in the opening position
-
Wicketkeeping Tests (1.0): Number of Tests played as the primary wicketkeeper
-
Captaincy Tests (1.0): Number of Tests captained
-
Vox Populi (1.0): This is based on the top-ten selections made by the members of my Talking Cricket Group (more on it at the end of the article) and a few others in a contest run by me.
The “Contribution to Wins” requires a minor explanation. Readers must understand that wins per se are not rewarded. That would lead to batters from strong teams like Australia benefiting unfairly. What is recognised is the batters’ contribution in the wins achieved by their teams. This will allow batters from weaker teams to get credit.
The criteria for selection is 3000 Test runs and an average of 25 or more. A total of 216 batters get in. I am sorry to lose George Headley and Graeme Pollock, but lowering the bar to 2000 runs, dilutes the overall tables; a career of around 25 Tests is too short.
For the first time ever, I am sharing below a screen image of my program, to provide relevant information. Normally I would extract the relevant information into a graph or table but in this case I felt it might be appropriate to provide a window into how I work. Even non-programmers will find the image below illuminating. All the maximum values are presented as comments in the program segment.
Let us now move on to the most important table – the top ten Test batters of all time.
Inarguably this is the worst-kept secret. Can any of us imagine anyone other than Bradman heading this list? He leads by the proverbial mile, topping the tables on eight of the 18 main measures and on seven of the 13 X-Factor measures. He defined Test batting for generations, and will do so for as long as Test cricket is played. Arguably, across all sports, Bradman has left behind the toughest mountain to climb for sportspersons to get anywhere close to him.
That Brian Lara would finish high on the table should not surprise many, but that he is second might be a surprise. He was the leading batter of his generation, and was way ahead of others in his relatively weak team. He played many memorable, context-rich innings, and shone like a beacon in a team on the way down. Lara was among the top few batters on most measures.
Kumar Sangakkara’s presence in third place should, again, not surprise many. He averaged above 70 against Pakistan and Bangladesh, and above 60 against Australia. His away average was a creditable 53-plus. He held Sri Lanka’s batting together throughout his career.
Joe Root often seems to be grossly underrated and he has mostly flown under the radar, accumulating his runs quietly and efficiently. He has been outstanding against Sri Lanka, and averages 50-plus against Pakistan and South Africa. He has scored a lot of runs on tough pitches and against top-quality attacks.
Then comes Sachin Tendulkar, the darling of billions. In addition to his huge number of runs, his performance values are excellent. The strength of the Indian batting line-up for long periods during his career will certainly have played a part in him coming in relatively low.
Steven Smith might have been higher up if he had not dropped off a little in his last 20 or so Tests, but even so, he averages over 55. And in terms of valuable innings, he stands quite high.
Then come two all-time great openers: the great England opener Len Hutton and Sunil Gavaskar, the equally great Indian opener. In ninth and tenth places, we have two magnificent allrounders, Jacques Kallis and Garry Sobers. They were world-class batters, and their wickets were bonus contributions.
The four batters who come immediately after the top ten are Rahul Dravid, Kane Williamson, Jack Hobbs, and Ricky Ponting.
Australia, England, India, and West Indies each have two entries each in the top ten. Sri Lanka and South Africa have one batter each. For the other teams, Williamson, Younis Khan, Andy Flower, and Tamim Iqbal are the top batters.
This chart plots the group-wise totals for the top ten batters. Bradman leads in four categories. As you can see, he is far above the maximum in the WBA group, his column dwarfing those of the others.
Tendulkar, not unexpectedly, leads the Career Runs group, reasonably comfortably ahead of Root.
The most open group is the Consistency group since it comprises three disparate measures. Root leads with 11.99 points. However, 40 other batters have 12.0 or more points. The highest is Colin McDonald, with 13.13 points. Quinton de Kock and Temba Bavuma follow with 12.89 points. Then comes Aiden Markram, with 12.78 points. Those scores for these current and recent South Africa batters indicates theirs was the toughest country to bat in.
The three sub-tables above split the overall stats into three periods – 1877-1939, 1945-1984, and 1985-2026. The first segment lists the top ten batters in the first period – the one that ended with the onset of World War 2. Bradman is at the top, understandably by even more of a margin than he had in the main table. Then we have a couple of wonderful English openers, Hutton and Jack Hobbs, followed by Walter Hammond, who, I must admit, feasted on sub-standard bowling attacks. Herbert Sutcliffe follows. None of these selections is a surprise.
Gavaskar’s position at the top of the table in the second period cannot really be questioned. He was a breath of fresh air on the Indian cricket scene. His achievements in the West Indies, particularly, are legendary. He is followed by the great Sobers. In third position is the unassuming Allan Border. Greg Chappell, elegance personified as a batter, is fourth, and the master of away matches, Ken Barrington, is fifth.
The top five of the modern era – Lara, Sangakkara, Root, Tendulkar and Smith – are all in the top ten of the all-time table. All of them exceeded 10,000 runs in their career. However, what has kept them in this elite group is their top-drawer performance numbers. It is not a surprise that Virat Kohli is not in the top ten of this era; he dropped off drastically in the last third of his career.
Some interesting facts relating to the analysis
Top openers: The top opening batters are Hutton (No. 7), Gavaskar (8), Hobbs (13), Alastair Cook (15), and Graeme Smith (21). No surprises there, except perhaps for the absence of Sutcliffe. One reason for this could very well be that he was always in the shadow of the other great opener, Hobbs. A common feature for these five openers is that they were way ahead of their regular opening partners.
Top allrounders: Kallis (No. 9) and Sobers (10), deservedly lead this list. These two are genuine 200-wickets allrounders. Then comes a drop; I had to lower the wickets tally cutoff to 75 to get some allrounders in. Hammond (19) comes in next, followed by Steve Waugh (36) and Sanath Jayasuriya (100). This indicates that there is a shortage of top-quality batting allrounders.
Top wicketkeepers: Flower is on top, by a distance. During his years with Zimbabwe, he was their leading batter, way ahead of his compatriots and nearly twice as good as them. He is in 40th place on this list. Then come two match-winners – Rishabh Pant (No. 82) and Adam Gilchrist (90).
Top late-order batters: To qualify as a late-order batter, the average batting position of the player has to be No. 7 or more. Chris Cairns (No. 191) is the leader on this count, closely followed by Ravindra Jadeja (192) and Matt Prior (194). All very good selections. The only batter in this exalted list with an average batting position exceeding 8 is Daniel Vettori, who averaged 8.09, indicating that he batted at 8 during most of his career. He is in 210th position.
Breakdown of the top 50 positions
The top 50 places on the Top Batter table lead to the country-wise distribution I’ve placed below this paragraph. England are ahead by a significant number. West Indies are surprisingly strong team in this selection, with substantial representation. When it comes to the top 100, Australia take top place, with 25 placings. England follow next with 23. West Indies have 13.
-
13: England
-
10: Australia
-
8: West Indies
-
5: South Africa
-
5: India
-
5: Pakistan
-
2: Sri Lanka
-
1: New Zealand
-
1: Zimbabwe
Readers will probably have some queries about this. I’ve tried to answer some of the most likely questions here.
Data files
Since I have featured only the top ten batters in this article, I have made available the following data files, in easily accessible text form. I would suggest that you create Excel sheets out of them if you want to further analyse these.
-
TopBat1.txt: Rtg Summary
-
TopBat2/3/4.txt: Rtg Summary for three periods
-
TopBat5.txt: Rtg values for all key parameters
-
TopBat6.txt: Data values for all key parameters
-
TopBat7.txt: Rtg values for parameter groups
-
TopBat8.txt: Rtg values for X-Factor elements
-
TopBat9.txt: Data values for X-Factor elements
The above files can be downloaded here.
Possible movements in the next few years
As the current top batters score more runs and maintain or improve their performance figures:
It is almost certain that Root will move above Sangakkara into third place during the summer of 2026. There is a slight chance that he might move above Lara also.
It is quite certain that Steven Smith will move above Tendulkar into fifth position very soon. There is a slight chance he might move above Root, although it is true that both are still playing. Smith catching up with Sangakkara is a reasonable ask, but Lara might be a couple of bridges too far.
Williamson will certainly move into the top ten, vaulting over Dravid, Sobers and Kallis. There is some chance that he might move above Gavaskar and Hutton also. Anything beyond that could be be quite a tough task.
And finally, despite his meagre tally of 3178 runs, Harry Brook is very highly placed, at No. 26. It is tough to guess at how far up the tree he might move, but you would think he will almost certainly get to the top ten. In fact, in the quirky measure of RtgPts/100 Runs, Brook leads with 2.04 pts/100 runs. He is followed by Lindsay Hassett (1.80) and Markram (1.78). Tendulkar props up that table with a value of 0.45 pts/100 runs. He has most of the 10,000-plus runs batters for company there. Bradman (1.31) is just outside the top quarter.
One final request: I am sure most readers will have their favourites. If, by any chance, they are not placed where you expect them to be placed, do not rush to decry the analysis or send in accusatory messages. Take the trouble to find out the parameter values of the player(s) and understand why he might have slipped a place or two. The data related to this exercise has been made available to everyone. And let us not forget that the Top Ten Test Batters list consists of one giant plus nine first-among-equals.
Talking Cricket Group
Any reader who wishes to join my general-purpose cricket-ideas-exchange group of this name can email me a request for inclusion, providing their name, place of residence, and what they do.
Email me your comments and I will respond. This email id is to be used only for sending in comments. Please note that readers whose emails are derogatory will be permanently blocked from sending in any feedback in future.
