1) Rankings based on matches in the last 18 months.
2) Only completed matches included.
3) The scale is a number between 0 and 100 for the player, where the number denotes what percentage of the impact a player has registered vis-à-vis the highest impact player (which is taken as the maximum at 100) in that discipline.
Wisden India ranking systems are the most scientific and accurate cricket ranking systems in the world today. Besides accounting for the knowledge of its experienced panel, the rankings are exclusively powered by Impact Index – the most holistic analytics system in the game today.
The most fundamental thing that separates Impact Index from everything else in the game today is context. Every cricket performance in any match is measured as an impact of the player as a ratio against the other 21 players in the same match. This, in turn, is measured within the context of the series or the tournament.
This leads to a system that can find the rightful place of a cricketer in the context of the match, series, era or even cricket history with an ease and accuracy hitherto impossible to accomplish.
Since all player impact is limited to a number between 0 and 5 (up to 2 decimals), it is possible to match players with remarkable accuracy and that too across disciplines (like batsmen vs bowlers).
Impact Index is used in all 3 formats of the game and can rank players in any format (Tests, ODIs and Twenty20) in a series/tournament context or within any time-frame. In this context, we aim to use the same time-frame as ICC does (April to March) to further bring out the superiority of this system vis-à-vis the official system.
The system ranks players in 3 categories primarily – Batsmen, Bowlers and Players (overall impact). Individual category awards like “Highest Pressure Impact” (the batsman who absorbed the most pressure) or “Highest Partnership-Breaking Impact” can also be given.
Impact Index is the most innovative analytics system in the game today, which is why it was written about in Wisden Almanack (UK) in 2012 itself. Its ranking function is one of its most valuable applications.
It is a huge improvement from the panel-led award selections that others indulge in.
A perfect match with Hyundai’s philosophy of “New Thinking New Possibilities”. The time has come to take cricket out of the Romantic Age to the Information Age.
Not only does Impact Index identify the players who performed in the big matches, it is also able to identify the big moments in the match easily. And reward the players who win those – all within the larger context of winning the series or tournament.
Impact Index identifies these bigger moments (and the players who win them) but equally it is able to identify the more valuable performances within a match – who scored the tougher runs, who played under pressure (of falling wickets), who broke a thriving partnership and so on.
These are still the details in the system. Even the basic idea of measuring everything within the context of a match makes even simple measures like runs tally, economy and strike rate much more meaningful. Runs Tally Impact, for example, is how many runs a batsman scored within the context (a ratio) of how many runs got scored in that match – a much more valuable measure than how many runs got scored in plain terms.
To avoid the skews of conventional stats systems (like averages) where one big performance can cover for repeated failures thereafter, limiting it to a maximum of 5 in a career context keeps it more accurate. The construct of the system also makes the Impact number roughly representative of how many players’ job is done by the player (an Impact number of 2.65 means he has done roughly done the job of 2.65 people in the match), so it makes it meaningful also on that level. Doing 5 players’ job (if all contributions are deemed equal) comes up as the right measure in a team of 11 players.
To give a simple example – suppose a batsman makes 0, 0, 0, and 160 in four ODI matches in a series. His batting average would be 40 – which is pretty good, actually too good for someone who failed 3 out of 4 times. Here, his Impact would be 5/4=1.25 which is a much more fair measure. If that 160 helped his team draw the series from behind, then its value would be considerably enhanced accordingly. Imagine doing this across careers – the results are very interesting. If we did not limit his Impact to 5 in that last game, the skews from it would be very similar to what happens with averages.
Within a match context, it is able to measure all sorts of thing never done till date. For batsmen, the system can evaluate how much pressure (of falling wickets) he absorbed successfully, the impact of the partnerships he built and of course, the impact of his strike rate (which is different from the usual “strike rate” numbers quoted for players). For bowlers, it can spot partnership-breaking impact, pressure-building impact (when a bowler takes quick wickets) and of course, economy impact (again, different from the usual “economy” numbers used). It also separates the lower-order wickets from the others. It also measures captaincy, fielding and wicket-keeping impact too. For all cricketers, it can also measure their failure rate.
Everything is measured from the scorecard. There are no external inputs taken from anywhere.
Finally, this is the most transparent system in the game. Every ranking/ selection can be simply explained in conventional terms. That makes this the most credible ranking system in cricket today, at least intellectually.
|1||100||AB de Villiers|
|4||81||Quinton de Kock|
|5||80||Faf du Plessis|
|4||83||Quinton de Kock|