Speed of pace-bowlers (Wasim/waqar/Curtley
Ravindra S Kane
There have been a number of articles posted recently talking about
the speed of wAsim and waqar's bowling. I was wondering if anybody
has some stats about the actual speed at which they ball.
(Or say the speed of their fastest ball).
I would think that at their fastest, these bowlers should ball at
> 90 mph.
(Pitchers in baseball have fast balls > 90mph) - now granted they
have a sidearm motion, but they don't have a runup. The run up could
easily add 10mph to the speed of the ball.
If anybody has any info about the speeds of these bowlers, (as well
as the speeds of medium pacers- eg. kapil etc., do send me a mail!)
Thanks
-Ravi
################################################################
As my friend Vinay Rao put it :
tamsorma jyotirgamaya:
move from darkness to light,
from baseball to cricket !!!!!!!!!!
################################################################
Robert William Halstead
:
: There have been a number of articles posted recently talking about
: the speed of wAsim and waqar's bowling. I was wondering if anybody
: has some stats about the actual speed at which they ball.
: (Or say the speed of their fastest ball).
: I would think that at their fastest, these bowlers should ball at
: > 90 mph.
: (Pitchers in baseball have fast balls > 90mph) - now granted they
: have a sidearm motion, but they don't have a runup. The run up could
: easily add 10mph to the speed of the ball.
:
:
: If anybody has any info about the speeds of these bowlers, (as well
: as the speeds of medium pacers- eg. kapil etc., do send me a mail!)
:
: Thanks
: -Ravi
I know this doesn't answer your question but just as a point of interest, Jeff
Thompson was officially clocked at 99mph according to Guiness Book of Records.
Apparently he has been verified as the worlds fastest bowler which I'm sure is
open to argument.
R.Halstead (ISU)
Mad Hamish
>I know this doesn't answer your question but just as a point of interest, Jeff
>Thompson was officially clocked at 99mph according to Guiness Book of Records.
>Apparently he has been verified as the worlds fastest bowler which I'm sure is
>open to argument.
Not quite, it's the fastest verified delivery. However enough batsmen of
the 70s have stated that Thommo was the fastest bowler they've faced in terms
of consistant pace that I'd consider it pretty cut and dried. However Holding
was apparently able to produce a few bursts to batsmen in the same pace range
but couldn't sustain it as long.
I'd suggest the fastest of the 80s would have been Marshell. The fastest of
the 90s so far would probably be either Winston Benjamin, Bishop or Younis. If
anyone want's to argue with the Winston Benjamin selection (apart from the
spelling) I'd just like to say that I haven't seen too many other people beat
MArk Waugh for pace when he was set.
****************************************************************************
The Politician's Slogan
'You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all
of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Fortunately only a simple majority is required.'
****************************************************************************
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
h_l...@postoffice.sandybay.utas.edu.au
ta...@grove.ufl.edu
>I'd suggest the fastest of the 80s would have been Marshell. The fastest of
>the 90s so far would probably be either Winston Benjamin, Bishop or Younis. If
>anyone want's to argue with the Winston Benjamin selection (apart from the
>spelling) I'd just like to say that I haven't seen too many other people beat
>MArk Waugh for pace when he was set.
>
I'd think Imran was the fastest in the early eighties, alteast for
about a year and a half, after Holding got injured, and before
Imran himself got injured. Then Marshall took over, even though
there were others such as Hogg, Patterson, Akram and Benamin
who used to bowl fast in bursts, till Bishop and Younis came along,
and Marshall started getting old.
Poor Benjamin. I've seen him bowl at 87 mph, at the Nehru Cup
final in India, and he was getting hit left, right and center.
Tanny
Ravi Krishna
:: There have been a number of articles posted recently talking about
:: the speed of wAsim and waqar's bowling. I was wondering if anybody
Clocking fast bowlers became a regular feature in the last decade. However
there are a growing number of experts who believe that it is a farce as the
technique used to clock the bowlers is not accurate. So the best judge of
fast bowlers speed is the batsmen themselves.
Following bowlers have been universally acknowledged by great and not so
great batsmen as FAST :-
Jeff Thompson from 1974 to 1979.
Holding from 1975 to 1982
Roberts from 1974 to 1978
Lille from 1971 till his back injury.
Malcom Marshall from 1983 to 1988
Rodney Hogg from 1978 to 1984
Patrick Patterson from 1987 to 1989
Imran Khan from 1976 to 1983
Their speed vary anything from 85 mph to 90+ with fastest delivery cleary 10
more miles then their avg delivery.
Following bowlers in spells were FAST and not always fast :-
Bob Willis
Len Pascoe
Courtney Walsh
and others
Among contemperary bowlers the fast one are:-
Allan Donald
Wasim Akram
Waqar Younis
However I doubt whether any of the above three can bowl at top speed for a
long duration.
Regarding Kapil Dev's speed he started off well as fast medium bowler. In
fact in the Madras test in 1980 against Pakistan when Kapil took 11 wkts he
was bowling at his fastest. This was confirmed by the two captains of the
team Gavaskar and Asif Iqbal. Kapil was reported to be bowling at 80+ mph.
Normally fast meduim bowlers bowl upto 75mph which is brisk enough to keep
the batsman on the backfoot. In fact Kapil , Hadlee proved that fast medium
bowlers last longer then fast bowlers. Hadlee in fact proved to be the best.
Contrary to the popular opnion Ambrose is not fast but fast medium. Very
similar to Joel Garner.
Paul Kendall
> I'd suggest the fastest of the 80s would have been Marshell. The fastest of
> the 90s so far would probably be either Winston Benjamin, Bishop or Younis.
Wasn't Patrick Patterson reputed to be the quickest WI bowler in recent
years when he burst onto the scene?
Paul
deb...@ci.seattle.wa.us
> > Clocking fast bowlers became a regular feature in the last decade. However
> there are a growing number of experts who believe that it is a farce as the
> technique used to clock the bowlers is not accurate.
>> Normally fast meduim bowlers bowl upto 75mph which is brisk enough to keep
> the batsman on the backfoot. In fact Kapil , Hadlee proved that fast medium
> bowlers last longer then fast bowlers. Hadlee in fact proved to be the best.
> >>>>
seconds to reach the batsman's wickets; a 105 mph delivery should take just under 0.45 seconds, and a 120 mph delivery
0.38 seconds. Anyone with patience and an electronic timer can determine fast- or fast-medium bowlers' speeds.
The fastest deliveries that I timed seemed to take just over 0.40 seconds, and sustained spells from the fastest bowlers
averaged well below 0.5 seconds when "outliers" like deliberate change-of-pace balls were excluded. This would suggest top
speeds around 110 to 115 mph, and sustained fast bowling spells of 100 mph. I wonder if anyone else has tried similar
experiments, and what results they have obtained.
By way of comparison, the fastest baseball pitches I clocked were just about 0.50 seconds, with most fastball pitchers
averaging slightly under 0.6 seconds (recall that the distance traversed is the same for baseball and cricket). This goes with
the general impression that the fastest cricket bowlers are typically 10% faster than fastball pitchers, because of the added
momentum they get from their run-up---it was nice to see it confirmed.
deb...@ci.seattle.wa.us
>>>>
The following is posted, at his request, on behalf of sanj <si...@Orbital.com>
I've read in the past that Dennis Lillee was timed at around 113 mph (fastest at the time). I've been trying to figure out
whether I remembered this correctly. In those days, they were probably not as accurate as they are now.
Could someone please verify this. In the days of the accurate radar guns (a la tennis), they MUST have a very good handle
on this by now.
Sanj
P.S: Isn't a baseball thrown 90ft, whereas a cricket pitch is 66ft (I remember counting 22 yards with my steps ;) )?
[ Comment: No, the distance from the baseball pitcher's mound to the batting plate is 66 feet. 90 feet is the distance between
two consecutive bases. Deb Das.]
Shariq Ahmed Tariq
On 9 Apr 1996, Ravi Krishna wrote:
> Robert William Halstead wrote:
> :: There have been a number of articles posted recently talking about
> :: the speed of wAsim and waqar's bowling. I was wondering if anybody
> ..
>
> Clocking fast bowlers became a regular feature in the last decade. However
> there are a growing number of experts who believe that it is a farce as the
> technique used to clock the bowlers is not accurate. So the best judge of
> fast bowlers speed is the batsmen themselves.
Ravi I don't think that measuring speeds is inaccurate.
Basically they use the same technique as used by traffic
police who are on the prowl for overspeeding vehicles.
Anyways, that device mesures the pace of the ball as soon
as it leaves the bowler's hand. So I reckon it's pretty
authentic. Am not sure if the equipment used for measuring
Thommo's pace was all that great. I am not sure of this
but someone told me that the equipment measured the
speed of the ball after it had travelled the length of
the pitch. Somebody please confirm.
>
> Following bowlers have been universally acknowledged by great and not so
> great batsmen as FAST :-
>
> Jeff Thompson from 1974 to 1979.
> Holding from 1975 to 1982
> Roberts from 1974 to 1978
> Lille from 1971 till his back injury.
> Malcom Marshall from 1983 to 1988
> Rodney Hogg from 1978 to 1984
> Patrick Patterson from 1987 to 1989
> Imran Khan from 1976 to 1983
You forget Colin Croft, Joel Garner,and Sylvester Clarke (whom Imran
described as frighteningly quick).
>
> Their speed vary anything from 85 mph to 90+ with fastest delivery cleary 10
> more miles then their avg delivery.
>
I think they consistently bowled faster than 85 miles per
hour. To be an authenic fast bowler you have to be able
to bowl more than 85 miles per hour at will. Thommo
has been "clocked" at 99.4 miles per hour. It is
widely acknowledged that Holding from time to time hit
the the triple figures but there was no equipment to
measure his pace. In Imran's opinion nobody is
capable of bowling quicker than Micheal Holding. Imran
does rue the fact that Holding did not work as much on
his fitness as he could and should have.
> Following bowlers in spells were FAST and not always fast :-
>
> Bob Willis
> Len Pascoe
> Courtney Walsh
> and others
I think Lennie Pascoe was consistently quick. Courteny
Walsh always bowls well within himself. He is capable
of some lethal and frighteningly quick stuff.
>
> Among contemperary bowlers the fast one are:-
>
> Allan Donald
> Wasim Akram
> Waqar Younis
>
> However I doubt whether any of the above three can bowl at top speed for a
> long duration.
Maybe true for Wasim Akram, but Allan Donald and Waqar Younus
are authentically quick. There is no doubt about that. Infact
Waqar is not capable of bowling anything less than fast.
Allan Donald is definitely as quick as any of the great
fast bowlers of the 70's and 80's and so is Waqar.
>
> Regarding Kapil Dev's speed he started off well as fast medium bowler. In
> fact in the Madras test in 1980 against Pakistan when Kapil took 11 wkts he
> was bowling at his fastest. This was confirmed by the two captains of the
> team Gavaskar and Asif Iqbal. Kapil was reported to be bowling at 80+ mph.
>
Was that before his knee operation? Yeah Gavaskar wrote
in his book that Kapil was never the same bowler after his
knee surgery. I think Kapil did not really work on his fitness
like he could have. He put on a lot of weight in the early
80s and always carried a paunch till the time he went on a diet
and reduced it somewhat. Early pictures of Kapil Dev will
verify what I am saying.
> Normally fast meduim bowlers bowl upto 75mph which is brisk enough to keep
> the batsman on the backfoot. In fact Kapil , Hadlee proved that fast medium
> bowlers last longer then fast bowlers. Hadlee in fact proved to be the best.
>
Hadlee was genuinely quick at the start of his career
and he could slip in the odd quick till the end of his
career. And ofcourse fast medium bowlers are supposed to
last longer because their bowling does not take as much
toll on their body. However, maintaining your finess
has alot to do with it as well. Hadlee meaintained his
fitness and his physique and Kapil did not. Hence Hadlee
was almost as good towards the end of his career as he
was in his prime. That is not true for Kapil.
> Contrary to the popular opnion Ambrose is not fast but fast medium. Very
> similar to Joel Garner.
>
>
No Ravi Joel Garner was genuinely quick. Definitely quicker
than Ambrose I assure you. Have seen Garner and he could
make the ball scream off the pitch. Nobody less than genuinely
quick could do that.
Shariq
ta...@grove.ufl.edu
> authentic. Am not sure if the equipment used for measuring
> Thommo's pace was all that great. I am not sure of this
> but someone told me that the equipment measured the
> speed of the ball after it had travelled the length of
> the pitch. Somebody please confirm.
According to Lillee's book, Thommo's fastest measured ball was
a bouncer, and so, even though when it left his hand it was 99+
mph, after pitching it had slowed down to ~86 mph, as the pitch
took a lot of the pace out. This, despite the pitch being the
Perth pitch, which was (is?) widely regarded as the fastest in
the world.
In that Test ('75), Holding, Roberts and Lillee were measured
too, and I think both Holding and Roberts recorded speeds in
the low nineties, while Lillee was in the mid-eighties. But,
Lillee, I guess, wasn't as fast as he was in the early seventies,
before his back injury.
Tanny
ana & dan
consistent bats in the Indian team.
I guess they are the only batsmen.
But I have never seen both of them piling up
runs in the same inning.
And we know atleast one of them has to make close
to a century to have a respectable score.
So why not separate them.
What is the stat on India's opening partnerships
in the ODI
thanks
James Pettifer
: > rkri...@informix.com (Ravi Krishna)writes:
: In these days of videos and replays, it is not too difficult to
clock speeds of bowlers. A 90mph fast ball should take 0.5 seconds to
reach the batsman's wickets; a 105 mph delivery should take just under
0.45 seconds, and a 120 mph delivery : 0.38 seconds. Anyone with patience
and an electronic timer can determine fast- or fast-medium bowlers'
speeds. : The fastest deliveries that I timed seemed to take just over
0.40 seconds, and sustained spells from the fastest bowlers : averaged
well below 0.5 seconds when "outliers" like deliberate change-of-pace
balls were excluded. This would suggest top : speeds around 110 to 115
mph, and sustained fast bowling spells of 100 mph. I wonder if anyone else
has tried similar : experiments, and what results they have obtained.
hmmm . . . fastest bowlers at 110 to 115 mph ????? i think that you
should check your results . . . thomo didn't even reach 100 mph and is
regarded as being one of the fastest ever. . .