Tests
Greatest Test batsman of all time: why the lists never agree
Every all-time list of Test batters should begin with Don Bradman, and from there the arguments can start. They rarely settle. Below him, Steve Smith, Joe Root and Kumar Sangakkara change places depending on which measure the list-maker picks, and none of them holds one spot for long.
The reasons lie in what the old records can tell us, and in how much cricket each generation played.
What old Test scorecards can’t tell us about Bradman
Test scorecards go back to 1877, but they are patchy on balls faced. That alone means nobody can fairly set Bradman’s scoring speed beside Smith’s.
The modern greats are far better recorded. Ball-by-ball records for men’s Tests begin in December 2001, and Smith, Root and Sangakkara built their careers inside that era. We know which bowlers they faced and what they did against each one. Every one of Bradman’s Tests came before it, so the sharpest comparisons the modern game has simply can’t reach him.
Why career runs favour modern Test batters
Bradman played 52 Tests in 20 years. Touring sides in his day spent much of a tour on warm-up matches, and England now play far more Tests a year.
Rank batters on career runs and the list mostly rewards whoever played the most. That tilts it towards modern batters, and towards England’s above all. Career totals have no place in this argument.
The fair way to set Bradman beside Root is on rates. Two of them reach back to Bradman’s day: career average, and how far a batter stood above the other top-seven batters in his matches at his peak. The modern greats can also be read on our Test ratings, which lean on the ball-by-ball records, and that is where the order starts to wobble.
Smith, Root and Sangakkara on four measures
Put the three of them through each measure and they rarely land in the same place twice.
| Measure | Steve Smith | Joe Root | Kumar Sangakkara |
|---|---|---|---|
| Career average, all time (538 batters, 20+ Tests) | 12th | 33rd | 10th |
| At his peak against the others in his matches, all time | 3rd | 17th | 16th |
| Against the others in his matches, since 2001 (120 batters, 4,000+ balls) | 1st | 6th | 3rd |
| Our Test ratings, allowing for pitch and bowling, since 2000 | 2nd | 1st | 18th |
Smith is the steadiest of the three, and even he runs from first to 12th. Any reading of the records makes him a great batter. Where he sits among the greats depends on which reading the list-maker picks.
Root moves furthest. On career average he is 33rd, a modest place beside the other greats. His Tests have been lower-scoring than Smith’s, though, and he has faced better bowling, partly because his most frequent opponent has been Australia’s attack. Our Test ratings credit him for the bowlers he had to get through, and on them he is first.
Sangakkara travels the other way. He has the best average of anyone with 10,000 Test runs, and a big share of those runs came cheaply. In 20 Tests against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe he averaged 94, and those matches account for almost a fifth of his career runs. Against everyone else he averaged 53, which is still a great batter’s record. Once his opponents are taken into account, our ratings put him 18th.
So three great batters each slide a long way between lists, and none of the placings is wrong on its own terms. Below the top, the measure decides the order.
Is Bradman the greatest Test batsman of all time?
One name stays put. Bradman is first on every all-time measure in our ratings that can include him, and the published lists agree.
| Measure, all time (20+ Tests) | Bradman | Best of the rest |
|---|---|---|
| Average | 1st, 99.94 | Graeme Pollock, 60.97 |
| At his peak | 1st, 2.38 times the others in his matches | Jack Hobbs, 1.71 |
On the figures that reach across every era, the gap is enormous. Charles Davis allowed for the strength of the opposition, uncovered pitches and career length, and Bradman still came out with an adjusted average of 84.5. That is his average after all of Davis’s adjustments, and it is more than 25 runs clear of Pollock’s adjusted average of 58.9.
The ICC’s historical ratings are the one measure where a modern batter gets near him. They put Bradman’s peak at 961 and Smith’s at 947. That is genuinely close, and Smith still finishes second.
The word GOAT gets handed to a new batter every few years, and it is used far too lightly. A modern great has a run of big series and the label follows him around. Smith, Root and Sangakkara are magnificent batters, and each of them moves up and down the order with the measure. Bradman stays where he is.
How to draw up an all-time Test batting list
Any all-time list worth taking seriously puts Bradman in a tier of his own and starts the real argument at second place. Below him, Smith, Root and Sangakkara will keep trading places according to whichever measure the list-maker prefers. Bradman is the only batter in Test history who deserves to be called the GOAT.