[Cricket] Sussex V Glamorgan T20

[JJ McClure]

Can someone explain what the WASP and batting Index are?
The commentators keep mentioning them like the WASP is 86% or the incoming batsman has a batting index of 138 without explaining what the chuff it actually means.

 

[Titanic]

Can someone explain what the WASP and batting Index are?
The commentators keep mentioning them like the WASP is 86% or the incoming batsman has a batting index of 138 without explaining what the chuff it actually means.

Batting index is a combination of strike rate and average. Something in the 150+ range is good I would guess.

WASP is a manufactured calculation of the likelihood of a team winning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WASP_(Winning_and_Score_Predictor)

 

[Gazwag]

Can someone explain what the WASP and batting Index are?
The commentators keep mentioning them like the WASP is 86% or the incoming batsman has a batting index of 138 without explaining what the chuff it actually means.

Can't remember what it stands for but for the side batting first the statistical historical data report for the ground gives the estimated score based on conditions wickets down etc. For the side batting second it uses the same formulas and shows the percentage chance of winning. So 95% means 95% of teams win in that situation but 10% means only 10% do, such as needing 30 off the last over would be something like 2%.

 

[keaton]

Batting index is a combination of strike rate and average. Something in the 150+ range is good I would guess.

WASP is a manufactured estimate, including commentator guesses, of the likelihood of a team winning.

I don't think WASP is linked to commentator guesses, it's a statistical model like Duckworth-Lewis but with more stats and variables fed into it

 

[Titanic]

I don't think WASP is linked to commentator guesses, it's a statistical model like Duckworth-Lewis but with more stats and variables fed into it

Indeed... corrected my post just as you quoted! My comment was based on something Paul Allott said... which unsurprisingly turned out to be bollocks.

 

[keaton]

Indeed... corrected my post just as you quoted! My comment was based on something Paul Allott said... which unsurprisingly turned out to be bollocks.

They don't seem to understand it much, and i'm not sure it adds much. I'm sure I watched a game earlier this year where the WASP was 0 and went up to 3 which should be impossible