There’s been a lot of talk about the importance of winning the toss in this series.
One of the scribes here on The Roar suggested that the captains alternate on deciding who bats and bowls during a series.
For example the home side has the choice to bat or bowl in the first Test, then the away side choosing for the second Test and so on.
This was obviously brought up because of the results from the Ashes contest in England and from the first two Tests of this one.
So far in the seven Tests that have been played, the side that has lost the toss hasn’t won a match. Winning the toss has lead to five wins from seven matches.
So is winning the coin flip that important?
From the small sample size of seven matches it sure appears that way, but lets dig a little deeper.
For a larger sample size I looked at the results for the past five years. I split the records for home and away Test matches.
Australia’s record at home when winning the toss is: Won: 13 Lost: 5 Draw: 1
Losing the toss: Won: 6 Lost: 2 Draw: 3
Not much of a difference here, maybe a little better when they win the toss, but that is to be expected.
Australia’s record away when winning the toss: Won: 6 Lost: 7 Draw: 4
Losing the toss: Won: 3 Lost: 8 Draw: 4
This clearly shows Australia is no where near as good away from home, but they are even worse when they lose the toss in away matches.
England’s record at home when winning the toss: Won: 13 Loss: 3 Draw: 4
Losing the toss: Won: 7 Loss: 1 Draw: 4
Very similar to Australia’s record at home, losing the toss doesn’t really affect their performance.
England’s record away when winning the toss: Won:1 Loss:4 Draw:7
Losing the toss: Won:6 Loss:4 Draw:5
Now this is interesting, it seems England play better away from home when they lose the toss. This is hard to explain but it shows they are a good side playing away Test matches.
The only conclusion that I can make out of both nations’ records is that the Aussies are clearly better when they win the toss in away Test matches.
So its not that surprising that the Poms won the three Tests where they won the coin flip.
But in Australia it shouldn’t make that much of a difference.
For instance the last ashes series played in Australia the team that won the toss could only manage one win for the series, with three wins for the team that lost the toss.
So I wouldn’t be in favour of getting rid of the toss, or making any radical changes in the way we decide who bats and bowls, I dare say things will even themselves out for the series.
Liam
Guest
I would like to see these stats in the subcontinent then compare this to Australia. Now get back to me.
Nagesh Bharadwaj
Guest
Tony You have brought up a very interesting issue. One has to study the stats to find out whether the toss has mattered or not. I have studied the stats of all cricketing nations since test cricket has been played. When analyzing the wins and losses it is important to isolate the wins or losses that would be a result of coin toss win. In order to do that one important thing to do is to select a sample size which is big enough. Then we have to start comparing apples to apples ...as they say. So in order to do that, I have taken all the tests from beginning of tests i.e 1877. Then I have taken the Wins/Loss ratio. Out of 100 tests if you win 50, and lose 50 then Win/Loss ratio would be 1. So for all the tests played, almost all teams have a higher Win/loss ratio when they have won the toss. For example, most major nations has a Wins/loss ratio advantage of 0.3 when they have won the toss. This translates to around 15-20 percent advantage in a test match or if you want to put in other words team winning the toss plays with One Extra Player. In addition, if you study the choices made by captains major test playing nations chose to Bat (avoid 4th innings batting) about 80 percent of the time. If there is no advantage in winning the toss then why are test captains making this choice time and time again? There is an advantage that is quantifiable and the players know it tooo..... I have offered an alternative to coin toss. It is a simple method. Captains instead of coin toss will walk out a NB method (Nagesh Bharadwaj). Captains will make a *closed* commitment (bid) of runs for the choice they want. For example Australia want to bat first, they can commit(bid) 40 runs. If England wants to bat first they can commit 50 runs. Then England wins the bid to bat first as their bid is higher and they get their choice but Australia gets the runs at the start of their batting innings, i,e they will start out at 50 for no loss. This evens out the advantage. Also teams are free to make any commitment they want, which could even be 0 runs. There are more details on www.nbmethod.info, please have a look and provide your feedback. Best Regards Nagesh
Beechmere
Guest
The perceived advantage in winning the toss is not as important as who is the home team. I suggest that the AWAY team gets to choose first in the first match of a series, and then it alternates. In an odd-numbered set of test matches, this gives the AWAY team the choice advantage, 3-2 or 2-1, which acts in their favour, much like a lightly weighted horse in a handicap race. This will make the series more closely contested and put pressure on the HOME team to prevail. By removing the TOSS, you make the series more interesting.
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
Yeah I remember the Aussies bowling quite well in some of those first innings in England only for the batting to totally collapse.
AlanKC
Guest
Tony, I suspect the reason winning the toss has been such a statistical anomaly in the last 7 tests between these sides comes down to the fragile nature of each teams batting. Having a total in front of them seems to provoke paralysis if not outright panic.
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
Yeah I was a little surprised how little the advantage was. Like I keep saying playing at home though is a massive difference.
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
Seriously I checked EVERY nations record back to 2000 its only a very slim advantage. But playing at HOME is a huge advantage and I think thats what we are seeing. It really is just coincidence that the 7 tosses have lead to such big wins. If I had to make a change I would give the decision to bat/bowl to the away side
Punch
Guest
Actually, histiorically, winning the toss provides a marginal 3.6% increase in the chance of winning the Test Match Toss result Win Lose Draw Tie Win toss 34.6% (728) 31.0% (653) 34.3% (723) 0.1% (2) Lose toss 31.0% (653) 34.6% (728) 34.3% (723) 0.1% (2)
davidjohn
Guest
Interesting article. Thanks. Do different grounds have different ratios I wonder? It could be that winning the toss at the WACA matters a lot, but winning it at Lords doesn't.
balanced
Guest
My comment is the same as Dave's. By definition the toss is important in cases where the teams are fairly evenly matched. If one side is dominant it doesn't matter much. With respect, checking records back around 2000 when Australia had just about killed test cricket by its dominance won't tell you much other than Australia won all the time anyway. The current streak, where the loser of the toss has not won in seven matches, is almost impossible to justify randomly. I'm one of those who has thought for a long time that they should alternate the "toss winner" in each test. It just seems logical to me that all sports contests should eliminate for "luck" to the maximum extent possible. Even if winning the toss only gave a 0.0001% advantage, why not remove it?
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
sorry that last comment should have read - Every record from 2000 - so the last 13 years
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
Dave, I checked our record against South Africa and England for the last ten years and it was very similar to the one's in the article.
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
yeah I checked every nations record since 2010, And it was very similar winning or losing the toss. But the biggest advantage I found in these records was playing at home. Most teams are almost twice as likely to win at home than they are away. That is a HUGE advantage I knew teams were better at home but not by that much. I'll put these figure into an article if your interested.
Dave
Guest
I'd like to see these stats over a longer period and only matching teams of roughly equal standing, as surely the coin toss would have the most impact on games which are tight, not those where one side has a clear advantage. Does anyone know of a study like this?
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
Agreed Sheek, the stats seem to back that up. At the end of the day the better side generally wins
sheek
Roar Guru
Someone has to bat first & soemone has to bat last. It's more important to get your tactics & strategy right. It's a five day game, the conditions can change from session to session & day to day. The toss is only important in making the best use of the wicket if batting, or on the rarer occasions you decide to bowl first. Otherwise, it's not soemthing to lose sleep worrying about.
Ajax
Guest
Id be intrigued to know if the great West Indies of the 1980's side were affected by the toss.. seemed to me they won where-ever they played, home or away, batting first or second didnt matter .
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
I just checked the record of Australia, England and South Africa going back to 2000 and the records for all 3 countries are very similar winning the toss or losing the toss. I think I'll expand on this article and check every nations record going back to 2000
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
Yeah I didn't want to go past 2008 because the Aussies were so dominant and I don't think it mattered if we won the toss or not.
Tony Loedi
Roar Guru
Johnno I can only go by the stats and in the last 5 years in Australia it hasn't mattered as the records are very similar winning the toss or losing it. But as you can see, away from home for Australia it is a big deal winning the toss. And for England it hasn't mattered at all, in fact they have a better record away from home when they lose the toss