From 1877 until World War One
Between the World Wars
Post War to the WSC Revolution
The Professional Era to the New Millennium
The New Millennium and Beyond
Other Pages
Home Page
Article Archive
How the System Works
Frequently Asked Questions
Statistical Points of Interest
Current and Future Series Predictions
Links
Site Map
Information for Visiting Webmasters
Contact Us
Get Free e-mail ratings updates
When do ratings change?
Ratings are only updated at the end of each test series.
Why not change the ratings after each test?
The rating system is most accurate when applied to a number of matches - hence at the end of a series. While it maintains its overall coherence for the few "one-off" tests that occur, it is best suited to a series by series approach.
Why bother giving half-points for draws and ties?
The system works by allocating expected results between the competing teams. The two team's expected results must add up to equal the maximum number of actual points from the games played for the system to "balance".
Why don't all teams start on 1000 points like England and Australia?
If new teams all started at 1000 points then the relativities within the system would be pulled out of proportion. This is because the first of the "existing" teams to play the "new" team are likely to be in for a ratings bonanza because the new team will generally (but not always) be over rated.
For example, consider Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe's records. Clearly they have never been strong enough to threaten the 1000 point mark. So the first few teams they played in test cricket would have a lower expected result because the new team is over rated. When the existing team's actual result dramatically outpointed their expected (undervalued) result then their rating would skyrocket and the new teams rating would plummet.
If you observe the historical graphs where new teams entered test competition you will see that, by and large, their ratings have levelled out fairly quickly.
Does a team's rating always go up if they win a series?
No. Imagine Australia (1134) playing a 5 test series against Sri Lanka (940) and winning 3-2. Would you say Australia had done enough to improve their rating? More likely there would be calls for selection changes starting with the captaincy! In this imaginary example, Australia should be expected to win closer to 3.75 to 1.25!
Therefore, to improve their rating, a team must perform better than its regular performance level rather than "just win a series".
When do ratings go down?
Ratings go down when a team does not perform up to their expected performance level during a test series. However, a team can lose a series yet their rating may rise slightly. For example, if South Africa (1136) defeated Zimbabwe (961) 3 - 2 over a 5 test series then Zimbabwe's rating would rise, as they would only have been expected to have scored around 1.35.
Why does the system predict scores the teams cannot achieve like .35 or .75 when they can only score 1 or 0.5 for each test?
The predicted result is a guide to how a team is likely to perform. If the team is predicted to get 1.35 then the system is really saying they are more likely to get 1.5 than only 1.
A rating varies by less than 4 points for each 0.25 difference between expected and actual results. Most of the test series to date have had an average rating change of over 5 points for each team. In the overall scheme of things, 3 or 4 points don't make much difference and the system applies to all teams the same way.
Does the losing team always lose the same number of ratings points as the winner gains?
For test series of up to 4 tests the gain by one team is the same amount as the loss of the other.
However, if a series is played over five or more tests then the winning team has a chance to gain "bonus points". Bonus points are awarded when the winning team's actual result is at least a full point greater then their expected result - in other words, they out-performed their usual level beyond reasonable expectation. The South African win over West Indies 5 - 0 in 1998/1999 is a good example of this. There are no "bonus points" for losing teams.
Do teams get more points if they win by an innings or by more than 300 runs?
In the overall scheme of things, a win is a win is a win. From time to time team a will win by an innings only to lose the next test by 300 odd runs so such things often even themselves out.
The system works on the basis of hard results rather than subjective minutia.
Does it matter if a team plays "home" or "away"?
No. There is no "special loading" in the expected outcome based on any perceived "home ground advantage". To be the best team in the world you have to be able to win on all surfaces - Australia 1934 - 1966, West Indies 1983 - 1995 ...
Are rain interruptions taken into account?
No. Rain delays are not taken into account. Consider it a case of swings and roundabouts, especially in the modern era with the ability to play late under lights or catch up time with an early start over the remaining days. Also, in recent years the number of five day tests has declined dramatically.
Are abandoned tests counted?
No. Only competed tests within a series.
Do the ratings take one day cricket into account?
No. One day cricket and test cricket are like swimming freestyle and backstroke. You swim both in water from end to end in a 50 metre pool between lane ropes, but that's it.
Will you be producing a one day cricket rating service?
Not unless you can offer us a substantial sponsorship deal. We don't mind one day cricket, but organising the calculations spreadsheet becomes significantly more onerous.
Do you make graphs or provide statistics on request?
Write to us with the start date, end date, teams to be included and reason for request - if we know why you want it we may be able to give you more than you expected.
test_cricket_ratings_service@yahoo.com
