Last month, my article on Test hat-tricks, evaluating these special events on the quality of batters dismissed and the other relevant factors, elicited a number of positive responses. The underlying theme was that virtually all that was needed to be known on hat-tricks was available in the article, which became a single-point reference to that fascinating topic. Incidentally, since that article was published, another hat-trick has been taken, by Gus Atkinson of England.
Encouraged by those reactions, I have embarked on a similar semi-anecdotal article on an equally fascinating topic - Test triple-hundreds, hereafter shortened to triples. There is a wealth of information available on this topic and in this article I have compiled all the data - some of these more analytical in nature - and presented the same.
As usually happens with me, I went deep and wide into that fascinating topic. The result is a really fun article with a lot of very interesting insights.
The article has two parts. In the first, I present tables created using analytical values key to evaluating the triples. Most of these values are derived by me as part of my data analysis work. For many new readers, and some of the older readers as well, there is a need on my part to offer clear explanations of these metrics. Hence I have created a support document explaining them.
In the second part, I cover the analytical snippets that are smaller groupings, not requiring full tables. In addition, I cover a few interesting nuggets related to triples. I have perused each scorecard to unearth such nuggets. The result is a multifarious article which will appeal to all followers of the game. It is possible minor errors might have crept in because of this unusual process. Kindly excuse those.
Till date, 32 triples have been scored by 28 batters in 32 Tests. As such, a triple is less frequent than a hat-trick, which occurred 46 times. These innings have come in all hues, shapes, and sizes, ranging from one scored from the depth of 94 for 5, to one which was part of a near-1000 runs team score. In one case, the opposition bowlers barely crossed 30 wickets in their careers. In another, there was a world-class bowling attack waiting. Thus, lots of fascinating insights are there waiting to be discovered by perusing the scorecards and that is the object of this exercise.
Now it is time to go on a data-mining expedition.
Let us first move on to the analytical tables.
Key metrics related to triples
1. Pitch Quality Index
Inzamam-ul-Haq's 329 in Lahore in 2002 was scored on a pitch unique in this analysis. That is the only pitch with a PQI below 50.0 - notionally a slightly bowler-centric pitch. A perusal of the scorecards will reveal why. The combined effects of the two New Zealand innings of 73 and 246 was enough to pull the effect of Pakistan's 643 down. It was clear it was not a batting beauty. So, Inzamam's knock gains some gloss. John Edrich's 310 at Headingley in 1965 is almost similar. Even though England reached 546 for 4, New Zealand's scores of 193 and 166 indicated a reasonably neutral pitch. Hence a PQI of 56.4. Close behind comes the more recent Dubai Test. In 2016, Azhar Ali masterminded the Pakistani score of 579 for 3. Then 30 wickets fell, for scores of 357, 123, and 289, indicating a pitch with nothing more than slight tilt towards batting.
At the other end, we have horror pitches. When 952 for 7 meets 573 for 8, in Colombo in 1997, we know what would happen. The bowlers would want to take industrial action, and they would have the support of many. The PQI of 91.4 could even have reached 100 but for the wickets taken by Sourav Ganguly, which took the score from 921 for 4 to 952 for 6. Two Antigua pitches were at PQI levels higher than 85. In the first one, in 1994, the Brian Lara-driven 593 for 5 was matched exactly by England. That tells the story. In the other Test, in 2005, 588 for 6 met 747 (Gayle 317). There were eight hundreds in all. All 11 South Africans bowled.
2. Opposition Bowling Strength
The opposition bowling strength in these 32 Tests varies from a set of top class bowlers, in good recent form, to a bunch of net bowlers. The attack Virender Sehwag dismantled in Multan in 2004 was Saqlain Mushtaq, Abdul Razzaq, Mohammad Sami, and Shoaib Akhtar - all kings in their own backyard. They had a bowling index of around 45. Similarly, when Hashim Amla took the field at The Oval in 2012, he faced James Anderson, Stuart Broad, Graeme Swann and Tim Bresnan - all with sub-29 averages and in good recent form. The Bowling Index was a high 42.6. So, it is clear that Amla's was a very valuable innings. The attack Lara faced in Antigua in 2004 in his second foray into the 300 was also a good one in good recent form - James Harmison, Simon Jones, Matthew Hoggard, and Andrew Flintoff. The index was nearly 42.
Coming to the other end, Wally Hammond faced a few part-timers when he made 336 not out in Auckland in 1933. The four bowlers had taken 26 wickets at well over 60 runs per wicket. The bowling index barely crossed 10. Kumar Sangakkara faced an equally insipid attack in Chittagong in 2014 - an index of 23. As was the bowling quartet that bowled to Azhar Ali in Dubai, which barely crossed 25.
3. BAT_100 Performance Rating points
Hanif Mohammad's match-saving classic of 16 hours in Bridgetown in 1958 just about pips Brendon McCullum's 302 in Wellington against India in 2014. Both are once-in-a-lifetime efforts. Both came in the third innings and were almost totally instrumental in saving the Test for their teams. These get around 770 points each. Both innings are in the top 30 of the BAT-100 table - a very high placement indeed. Don Bradman's first triple-century, at Headingley in 1930, comes in next with 742 points - in a well-deserved top 50 place. Lara's 375 and Inzamam's 329 follow next - all in top 100 positions.
At the other end, we have Sanath Jayasuriya's 340 in Colombo in 1997 and Andy Sandham's 325 in Kingston in 1930 - all eminently forgettable efforts, although it must be said that Sandham's was the first triple-hundred in Test cricket.
4. High Scoring Index (HSI) - Support received
The HSI is used to understand the support received by a batter. Take two scores of 200 each. In the first case, the batter receives good support with a hundred by the next batter. His HSI is 2.0. In the next case, the next highest score is 40. His HSI is 5.0, indicating a lack of support. In both cases, the HSI value is rationalised by the percentage share of the team score. It is important to note that the HSI is confined to a single innings.
The best way to get a clear understanding is to peruse the concerned scorecards. The next best score to Hammond's 336 was 60, indicating only sporadic support. This leads to a HSI of 3.6. When Lara scored his 375, the next highest score was only 75, leading to a HSI of 3.3. Gayle's 333 had a supporting innings of 64, leading to a HSI of over 3.0.
Going to the other end of the spectrum, the recent 317 from Harry Brook in Multan this year had a huge supporting innings of Root's 262, leading to the very low HSI of 0.48. Similarly Jayasuriya had the support of Roshan Mahanama's 225 and Karun Nair, during his 303 not out against England in Chennai in 2016 had KL Rahul's 199 for company. Hence the HSI values are quite low.
5. Innings Peer Value (IPV) - to all other scores The IPV is determined across the match. The IPV is the ratio of the batter's innings to the average of all the other innings in the match (maximum 43). It is an indicator of the difficulty or otherwise in scoring runs and the value of the specific innings.
Hammond's 336 had an IPV of 20.0. Just think of this. The average of the other innings was a mere 16.8. The lack of quality extended to the New Zealand batters, as it did to their bowlers. Inzamam's 329 had an IPV of 17.6, confirming that batting was not that easy. Then comes Edrich's 310 not out, which has an IPV of 14.6. Bradman's two triples carry identical IPVs of 12.9.
At the other end, Jayasuriya's 340 has an IPV of only around five: the average score of the other 14 batters was a high 68. Younis Khan and Chris Gayle had IPVs of either side of 6.0.
6. Boundaries hit in innings
Edrich, in his tour de force against New Zealand, hit 52 fours and five sixes. This aggregate of 52 fours and 57 total boundaries has never been exceeded in Test cricket. And amazingly, this boundary aggregate formed over 77% of his innings total. Edrich was one of my favourite batters and I had the privilege of listening to this innings in the BBC's Test Match Special broadcast. Against Zimbabwe in Perth in 2003, Matthew Hayden just about missed the 50 mark with 49 boundaries, 11 of which were sixes - 57% of his runs were through boundaries. Inzamam, Lara, and Sehwag reached 47 boundary hits.
At the other end of the spectrum, Bob Cowper hit only 20 fours in his 307 against England in Melbourne in 1966, which is just above a quarter of his innings score. He must have been a tired guy running the rest of his triple. Hanif Mohammad's blockathon contained only 24 fours, as did Bob Simpson's.
Analytical snippets
1. Innings splits
The first classification is to group the Triples in the innings they were performed.
Innings 1: 16
Innings 2: 14
Innings 3: 2
Innings 4: 0
Only a couple of third-innings triples have been played - both were match-saving efforts. The fourth-innings triple is yet to be played. Let us speculate a little on the way this could happen. A target nearing 600 runs, around five to six sessions of play available, a benign pitch, a top-order batter in form, and steady support. Maybe an end-of-match score around the target, with the match won, drawn, or lost. Chances of this happening are maybe 1%.
2. Results summary
Onwards to the classification based on results. No surprises here. When a triple is scored, it negates the chance of a loss.
Won: 14
Drawn: 18
Lost: 0
Understandable, since a triple points to almost always a good batting wicket. The bowling teams could very well say, "Well, if you can score a triple, we can score a double".
3. Location summary
Home: 19
Away: 12
Neutral: 1
Not a surprise. Batters are more comfortable playing long innings in familiar surroundings.
4. Year summary
Six years -1930, 1958, 2004, 2012, 2014, and 2016 - saw two triples being scored.
5. Decade summary
The first decade of the millennium saw no fewer than eight triples being scored. The second decade of the millennium also hosted as many. When you combine these two data points, 16 triples (exactly half the total) were scored in the 20 years between 2000 and 2019. The decade 1930-39 (Bradman's peak) had five triples.
6. Batter type summary
Slightly unexpectedly right-handers scored only 20 of the 32 triples, while the left handers scored 12. This is well in excess of the proportion of left-handers who have scored 1000-plus runs in Tests - only 146 out of 588.
7. For country summary
These are the top three countries for whom the triples have been scored.
Australia: 8
England: 6
West Indies: 6
8. Against country summary
These are the top three countries against whom the most triples have been scored.
England: 9
Pakistan: 5
India: 4
9. City summary
A grouping of the cities in which triples were scored shows a few surprises. The small island of Antigua saw no fewer than three triples scored (Lara, Lara, and Gayle). In joint first place is Headingley. Two of these were scored by Bradman and the third, by Edrich.
10. Two triples in career
Four batters have scored two triples in their career - Bradman, Lara, Sehwag, and Gayle. Then Bradman missed a third one - by a single run. Sehwag missed a third one - by two hits to the fence.
11. Strike rates
This is an incomplete metric, in that at least a quarter of the 32 triples do not have balls faced information available. However, looking at those for which this information is available, there is only one triple that was scored at a better than run-a-ball: Sehwag's 319 at Chepauk against Dale Steyn and Co in 2008, was scored in 304 balls. The closest to run-a-ball comes Brook's recent effort of 317 in 322 balls, striking at over 98. The next one in line is Hayden's 380 in 437 balls, scoring at 87.
12. Entry point
Scorers of triples do not always enter at neutral or comfortable innings situations. Often they get in when the bowling teams are on the ascendancy. And they transform the situations magically. Given below are a few such situations.
- In the New Year Test of 2012 in Sydney, Zaheer Khan had scythed through the Australia top order with a devastating spell, reducing them to 37 for 3. Then Michael Clarke, in partnership with Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey, took them to 659 for 4, and an innings win. He scored 329 not out.
- At Headingley in 1934, Australia had lost Bill Brown at 37, Bert Oldfield at 39, and Bill Woodfull at 39. So, when Bradman entered at 39 for 3, things looked grim. Bradman's innings of 304 took Australia to a huge score.
- In 2014, New Zealand, after conceding a lead of nearly 250 to India, were tottering at 52 for 3 when Brendon McCullum walked in. He saw the score slump to 87 for 4 and 94 for 5. Then happened one of the greatest fightbacks of all time. McCullum scored 302 and took New Zealand to 680 for 8.
- At the other end of the spectrum, in 2016, Karun Nair entered at 211 for 3 and scored 303 - his lone day in the sun, as it turned to be. And recently in Multan, Brook entered at the comfortable position of 249 for 3 and scored his near run-a-ball 317. Unlike Nair, Brook has already had many sunny days.
13. Share of Team scores
Taking the team score as the base, Lara's 375 was the highest - 63.2% out of 593. Hammond's 336 was the only other triple exceeding 60% of the team score. At the other end, Sandham's 325 formed only 38.3% of England's 849. And Jayasuriya's 340 which was around 35.7% of the team's huge score of 952.
Taking the runs added at crease as the basis, Hammond's 336 comprised 68.3% of the 492 runs added at crease. Sehwag scored 66.3% of 481 runs added while at the crease. Sandham's contribution was only 45% of the runs scored while at the crease.
14. The intriguing score of 299
Seven batters reached 290, but six were dismissed before reaching 300. The score of 299 was reached twice.
In Adelaide, in 1932, Bradman held the Australian innings together and was on 285 when the ninth wicket fell at 499. He hit 14 runs and then came the last ball of the over. He did not want Pud Thurlow to face any ball and went for a single. Thurlow was run out, stranding Bradman on 299. A unique third triple was not to be.
It was a totally different situation in Wellington nearly 60 years later. New Zealand conceded a shocking 323-run lead to Sri Lanka. The openers both scored usefully and left Martin Crowe and Andrew Jones in charge at 148 for 2. They did not let go until ten hours later. The two added 470 runs when Jones fell. Then, nearing the end of the match, Crowe was caught behind, to the disappointment of everyone, including the Sri Lankan players. It would have been the third triple in the third innings and would have formed a triumvirate of match-saving innings. New Zealand had to wait for another 20-plus years to get their first ever triple.
The best and worst triples ever
Let me say that these are my personal selections and could very well vary from person to person.
Of the 32 triples, only two innings were really match-saving ones. McCullum's 302 was scored in the most difficult of circumstances and gets the nod from me as the best triple ever. Trailing by 246 runs, New Zealand lost early wickets and McCullum came in at 52 for 3, saw the score slump to 87 for 4 and 94 for 5 and an innings defeat looked almost a certainty. He added 352 runs with BJ Watling and 179 runs with Jimmy Neesham and was dismissed only when New Zealand were completely safe. It is difficult to imagine a better innings than this one for the ages.
Bradman had already made his mark in the first two Tests of the 1930 Ashes series with a hundred and double in the first two Tests. However, his claim to be the greatest of all time was planted firmly at Headingley. Coming in at the fall of the great Archie Jackson, Bradman scored 309 runs by close of play and finished with 334 unforgettable runs. If there is a time machine that could take me back, that is one innings I would like to have watched (along with the McCabe classic of 232 and Bradman's other 300 - that is greed for you). This innings took just over six hours and was studded with 46 boundary hits. And the bowling - Harold Larwood, Maurice Tate, and George Geary.
Cricket followers often put Sachin Tendulkar, Sunil Gavaskar, Rahul Dravid and now Virat Kohli up on a pedestal. It is just the height of the pedestal that varies. But the one forgotten player is Sehwag. He was the unique lone ranger. His hand-eye coordination, ability to destroy a perfect delivery, inventiveness, and extraordinary skill to move the scoreboard rapidly are nonpareil. Well, I am putting him on a pedestal. His 319 in Chennai against Steyn, Morkel, Ntini, and Kallis was, in many ways, the jewel in the triples crown. He needed only 304 balls to score these runs - the only run-a-ball score of 300. All these while facing a score of 540.
My fourth selection is Hanif's 337, somewhat similar to McCullum's. The deficit was a monstrous 473. However, the fall of wickets were not that daunting - 152 for 1, 264 for 2, 418 for 3, and so on. But the 16-hour epic was a monument to patience, courage, concentration, and fortitude. It earns this place for its quality, value to the team, and sheer bloody-mindedness to the cause.
My next selection is Lara's 400. Some readers might be surprised at this. Many felt that the 375 was a better innings. But I can say with conviction that the bowlers Lara faced in the latter innings were of much better quality - and all of them were in seriously good form. These bowlers were devastating and England had already won the series 3-0. West Indies had scores of 94 and 47 earlier in the series. However, what clinched this place for Lara was the fact that he reached the magic number of 400, extremely unlikely to be overtaken ever.
My last selection is that of Inzamam's 329. On the one hand, with the help of some decent support he took Pakistan to 643 on a seemingly good pitch. But the pitch was not that good. When a strong New Zealand team took the field, they lost 20 wickets for 319 runs through a combination of different bowlers. This proved that the pitch was not a batting paradise and it elevates Inzamam's innings. Coming in at 57 for 2 he held the Pakistan innings together. Hence he gets featured.
Now to come to the other end of the table. A couple of eminently forgettable, help-yourselves innings that did nothing for the game.
Jayasuriya's 340 was scored on a pitch with a PQI rating of 91.4 - the third-highest in the history of Test cricket, in one of three Tests with a RpW exceeding 100. In a Test in which a triple, a double, and four hundreds were scored. In which three Indian bowlers bowled 220 overs for three wickets. One could go on and on.
The other triple featured is somewhat different. Hammond hammered an unbeaten 336. That is a fact. But what is damning about this innings is that the six bowlers who bowled ended their Test careers with a combined wicket tally of 36 wickets at an average of 54.6. This is the lowest aggregate of wickets ever for any of the triple-hundreds. It is no wonder that Hammond feasted in Auckland. The question is: why didn't the others?
The key Excel file, containing all the relevant data, has been uploaded and can be downloaded for viewing by clicking here.
I would like to inform all the readers that there will be no article from me in January in view of a major feature planned for the Cricket Monthly that month.
The quirky stats section
In each article, I present a numerical/anecdotal outlier relating to Test and/or ODI cricket. This time the theme is batters who scored the lion's share of their team totals in an ODI.
Given below is the list of batters who scored 65% or more of the team score. Since these are ODI matches with over limits, there is no point in requiring that all wickets should be lost. The qualifying criterion is that the batter should have scored a hundred.
Shane Watson vs Bangladesh, 2011, Mirpur: 185* out of 232 for 1 (79.7%)
Ramiz Raja vs New Zealand, 1992 World Cup, Christchurch: 119* out of 167 for 3 (71.3%)
Graeme Smith vs India, 2005, Kolkata: 134* out of 189 for 0 (70.9%)
Viv Richards vs England, 1984, Old Trafford: 189* out of 272 for 9 (69.5%)
Gordon Greenidge vs New Zealand, 1987, Christchurch: 133* out of 192 for 0 (69.3%)
Glenn Maxwell vs Afghanistan, 2023 World Cup, Mumbai: 201* out of 293 for 7 (68.6%)
Sanath Jayasuriya vs India, 1997, Mumbai: 151* out of 229 for 5 (65.9%)
Kapil Dev vs Zimbabwe, 1983 World Cup, Tunbridge Wells: 175* out of 266 for 8 (65.8%)
George Munsey vs Namibia, 2023, Kirtipur: 103* out of 157 for 0 (65.6%)
Rohit Sharma vs Sri Lanka, 2014, Kolkata: 264 out of 404 for 5 (65.3%)
I am glad that the three greatest ODI innings ever played - those of Richards, Kapil Dev and Maxwell - find places in this wonderful list.
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 to the author or any player will be permanently blocked from sending in any feedback in future.