lewis

This system, often referred to by its initials, offers a mathematical method to recalculate target scores in cricket matches interrupted by weather, such as rain delays. It considers factors like resources remaining with each team, including wickets in hand and overs available, to determine a fair and competitive revised target. For instance, if Team A scores 200 runs in 50 overs and Team B’s innings is reduced to 40 overs due to rain, the system wouldn’t simply prorate the target. Instead, it would analyze the resources available to Team B at the time of the interruption and set a potentially higher target to compensate for their loss of overs while acknowledging that they still have all their wickets.

Crucially, this method addresses the inherent unfairness that arises from simple target adjustments, recognizing that a team with more wickets in hand has a greater potential to accelerate scoring, even with fewer overs remaining. Developed by two statisticians, Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis, this methodology was first used in international cricket in 1997 and has become an integral part of the limited-overs game, ensuring fair and exciting contests even when weather intervenes. Its evolution has seen several revisions to refine accuracy and address specific scenarios.

Read more

The system for recalculating target scores in cricket matches interrupted by weather, most commonly rain, is a mathematical formulation designed to adjust targets fairly. For example, if a match is shortened after the first innings, the team batting second might be set a higher run-rate target to compensate for having fewer overs to bat. Conversely, if rain interrupts the second innings, the chasing team’s target might be reduced based on the resources they have remaining, compared to what the team batting first had available. This system accounts for factors like wickets lost and overs remaining.

This method is crucial for maintaining fairness and sporting integrity in limited-overs cricket. Before its adoption, various ad-hoc methods were employed, often resulting in controversial and unsatisfactory outcomes. Its introduction provided a standardized, statistically sound approach, minimizing disputes and ensuring more equitable results in affected matches. The method’s development arose from a recognized need for a more robust system than pre-existing alternatives, which often unfairly favored one team or the other.

Read more