Eureka!! My advanced Duckworth Lewis (D/L) formula will revolutionalize cricket whenever there is a ‘sorry for the interruption’ break. Non exhaustive list of possibilities causing legitimate breaks during a match include rain, pitch invasion, intimate couples in the park throwing stones to put off floodlights, food poisoning due to lunch prepared by my engineering hostel chefs, looong nature call attendance breaks taken by umpires or whatever.
The D/L method, despite undergoing several upgrades, unfortunately does not effectively represent resource utilization based target revisions. Simply put, a complete resource set is 50 overs and 10 wickets. If there is a break after 30 overs, team has used up 60% of 50 overs and 50% of 10 wickets if they had lost 5 wickets. This knowledge is sufficient if you have not spent precious time reading up the DL rulebook in detail. The basic approach seems ok, but it is static. This method shows how much resource has been lost due to an interruption. A table shows that 60% (say) resource is used up. The other team’s target is set after factoring this resource utilization figure. Got it?
• In my opinion, this cannot be accurate as table does not reflect the current form of batsmen. The formula needs to get dynamic.
• An average of last 10 matches must be taken into consideration. In order to justify my point, assume: Dravid, who is at present, woefully out of form will come in after the next dismissal. As a resource, he cannot be given same weightage as a Michael Clarke at number 5 or even Yuvraj Singh. Coming to Yuvraj Singh, his form swings like a pendulum and we must thus look into the form index. The values in the table should be recalculated before start of every match to reflect more accurate resource utilities.
• This is just a high level picture of the complex system and I recommend ICC to look into the matter and invite me to make necessary changes. Ultimately, cricket will win. I will help Duckworth Lewis to come up with the next upgrade, and call it, Duckworth, Lewis and Ranga (also nicknamed DULERA) method
The above gyan also reminds me of an interesting story. It involves an Economics exam in the first trimester at IIM-L. I am forced to change names to protect identities and story is such that any resemblance to characters or events is purely not coincidental.
Very late at night before the economics exam, Bose, an economics graduate from a well known university in India, was doing the campus rounds with his head about 3 feet above his shoulders. His poor batch mates were desperately trying to understand elasticity of demand, socialism, capitalism, monopolies, oligopolies etc. As the night began to get older, and owls started falling to sleep, few souls gave up and approached B. B swelled with pride and agreed to ‘teach’ them so that they could pass.
B: Sweta, can you tell me what you know about economies of scale?
Sweta: I bought a scale (wooden ruler) for 8 rupees. When I bought 50 scales, the shopkeeper offered 1 rupee discount on each scale. That’s economies of scale, Boss, err. Bose!
Nair: Boss (pronounced Bose) … Lalaji uses 900 gm weight to measure 1 kg on his weighing scale. Isn’t that economy of scale?
B: Oh no, let me start from basics. By the way, it was an out of syllabus question.
B began by drawing a strange looking red curve on the board, followed it up with a stranger looking curve in green color and said, “The red curve is what Keynes says”, and pointing at the green curve, “this is what I say”.
As the night began to change its color from black to a 50% grey, B’s ‘students’ feigned sleepiness and ran to protect themselves from B’s fundae stings. In the exam, Sweta started tugging at her headband and Nair was playing with a rubber band. They probably thought it was a better way to decipher the nuances of elasticity than Bosonomics. Bose finally got a ‘Pass’ grade as the professor only possessed bookish knowledge and no practical wisdom, you see.
Who knows? Maybe, Bose felt the same way I feel now when I suggest revising the D/L method 🙂