What better tool to do this analysis with than the PQI (Pitch Quality Index), which is one of the most powerful and solid of my derived measures. It is an excellent measure to determine the true nature of the pitch. Because the expected performances of the players are built in, PQI allows for normalisation across players at the extreme ends of the spectrum. There will be no lumping Don Bradman and Habibul Bashar or Sydney Barnes and Nicky Boje into the same basket.
And PQI values of 25 or 65 in 1972 will have the same meaning as PQI values of 25 or 65 in 2022. This is a unique nature of the measure. Since there have been quite a few new readers of my column in the past couple of years, I have given a complete primer on how the PQI value is calculated.
Pitch Quality Index (PQI)
The PQI is dependent on six values:
- The expected runs from the batters (based on career-location average values)
- Actual runs scored by the batters
- Expected wickets from the bowlers (based on career-location balls-per-wicket figures)
- Actual wickets captured by the bowlers
- Base runs per wicket (for the concerned period) and
- Actual runs per wicket values
Actual career figures are used rather than career-to-date figures since this is an estimate value and I wanted some stability in the calculations. All these figures are used to derive the PQI. To start with, the following ratios are determined.
- Actual runs / Expected runs
- Expected wickets / Actual wickets
- Actual RpW / Base RpW (For the concerned period)
The first two ratios are capped at 3.0. The third ratio could go above 3.0 – only for three Tests has this value gone above 3.0 (all three are mentioned below). For these three Tests, the higher value is taken since these matches are overwhelmingly batting-friendly. A ratio value greater than 1.0 indicates a batting-friendly pitch and lower than 1.0 indicates a bowling-friendly pitch.
To explain, let us say that the expected runs are 250 and the actual runs scored are 350. The ratio is 1.4, indicating batting was easier. If 180 runs are scored, the ratio is 0.72 – tougher batting conditions. Let us say that the expected wickets are 8.0 and the actual wickets captured are 6. The ratio is 1.333, indicating batting was easier. If ten wickets are taken, the ratio is 0.8. RpW is self-explanatory. A ratio greater than 1.0 indicates that more runs have been scored per wicket than the base, and vice versa.
Since each of these values has a range of 0 to 3.0, the sum of the values, which is the first-level PQI, has a range of 0.0 to 9.0. However, since the mid-points of this distribution are around 3.0, we map it to work out a 100-based PQI. The raw PQI of 3.0 maps on to 50.0. Extrapolation is done either side on ranges of 0.0 to 3.0 and 3.0 to 9.0 respectively. A low PQI indicates a bowler-friendly pitch and a high PQI indicates a batting pitch. During the past 147 years, the extreme PQI values are given below.
- The highest was 93.0 in Delhi in 1955. Scores: New Zealand 450 for 2 declared and 112 for 1, Ind 531 for 7). Lots of overs were bowled for very few wickets.
- The next highest was 91.5 in Lahore in 2006. Scores: Pakistan 679 for 7 declared, India 410 for 1
- The third highest was 90.8 in Colombo in 1997. Scores: India 537 for 8 dec, Sri Lanka 952 for 6 declared.
A total of 81 Tests had PQI values of 70.0 and above.
Now, for the other end of the spectrum.
- The lowest PQI ever was 14.3 at the MCG in 1932. Scores: South Africa 36 and 45, Australia 153
- The next lowest was 17.7 in Bridgetown in 1935. Scores: West Indies 102 and 51 for 6 declared, England 81 for 7 declared and 75 for 6
- The third lowest was 18.9 at Lord’s in 1888. Scores: Australia 116 and 60, England 53 and 62
Amazingly, a total of 81 Tests had PQI values of 30.0 and below.
My first cut was limited to the Match PQI. However, after a few requests, consultations and discussions, I established that the pitch changes significantly during the course of the match and that I needed to develop individual PQI values for the first half of the match and second half of the match, where appropriate. These are called PQI-12 and PQI-34 respectively.
The PQI-12 and PQI-34 are significant when I do the BAT-100 and BOW-100 player performance analyses. If there are two identified values of PQI-12 and PQI-34, I use the appropriate values pertaining to the half of match where the performance took place. Why this is done will be clear when you look at the scores of the matches featured below. If the fourth innings does not start at all, there is only one PQI value.
To give the readers an idea of the variations that can occur in the PQI values across a match, I worked out a ratio called the PQI-Ratio, which is PQI-12/ PQI-34.
- The highest value for this ratio is 3.23, at Trent Bridge in 1951. PQI-12 = 70.1, PQI-34 = 21.7. Scores: South Africa 483 for 9 dec, England 419 for 9 dec; South Africa 121, England 114
- The next highest value is 2.80, in Bulawayo in 2003. PQI-12 = 59.0, PQI-34 = 21.1. Scores: West Indies 481, Zimbabwe 377; West Indies 128, Zimbabwe 104
Moving on to the other end.
- The lowest value is 0.283, in Adelaide in 1951. PQI-12 = 14.7, PQI-34 = 51.9. Scores: Australia 82, West Indies 105; Australia 255, West Indies 233 for 4
- The next-lowest value is 0.287, in Christchurch in 2018. PQI-12 = 20.8, PQI-34 = 72.7. Scores: New Zealand 178, Sri Lanka 104; New Zealand 585 for 4 declared, Sri Lanka 236. The 1987 Test between India and West Indies in Delhi comes close.
PQI Analysis
It is important for all readers to understand the PQI concept completely since that is one of the most used of my measures. Now, let me move on to the main article. I have decided to cover the period 1970 to 2026 as the periods of analysis. This is to inject an element of current validity to the findings. The article is current up to the 2026 Edgbaston Test between England and Pakistan.
Let us now move on to Australia, our bone of contention.
The numbers are amazing indeed. Let us look at them.
- The average PQI in Australia has always hovered around the 50-plus mark in the five decades starting 1970. In the first two decades of the 2000s, the PQI average was either side of 52. In the last six years, it has dropped to around 45, a catastrophic drop because it is not just 10%. Since the range is low, it is a lot more than that.
- In the 2020s, only 42% of the Tests had PQI values above 50. Just look at the period 2000-2019: there were 75 Tests above 50 and just 39 below it – that’s 66% above 50. What happened?
- Finally, look at the way the runs per wicket has dropped – From around 35 to 29.
- Surprisingly, England has not been as bowler-friendly as most of us would perceive. Barring the last decade and half, their PQI average has always hovered around the 50 mark with an extremely high value of 52-plus in the 1990s. In the 2010s, the average has been a fairly low 47, and around 48 recently.
- In the 1980 and 1990s, the number of sub-50 PQI matches are way below the higher-value matches. That trend has been reversed in the last two periods.
- The average RpW has dropped recently. It is picking up now after Bazball and nearing 32.
Overall, England has seen a drop but not as steep and drastic as Australia.
Since South Africa played only four Tests during the 1970s, these have been merged into the 1990s numbers.
- South Africa has always been, as expected, a bowler-friendly country. The average PQI has hovered in the mid-40s. In the last few years, it has even gone below 45.
- As expected, no fewer than around 60% of the Tests had PQI values below 50. That is a huge share indeed.
- Barring the 82.2, the highest PQI value has been quite low, in the 60-70 range.
- Barring the first decade of 2000s, the average RpW has been below 30, and well below 30 recently.
It is very clear that South Africa is the toughest country to play in for the batters.
West Indies has been a topsy-turvy country when it comes to quality of pitches. This might very well be because of the drop in their cricketing standards.
- Look at the way the PQI average has moved: 52 – 49 – 52 – 46. The final average for the six decades is fine but there is a lot of movement within.
– 122 Tests (55%) had sub-50 PQI values. - The RpW moves in a similar manner. The current average is 27 and it was 34 a couple of decades earlier.
Overall, a very turbulent area as far the pitch quality is concerned.
- It is quite surprising how the PQI average in New Zealand has been 50 or more barring a single decade – the 2000s. During this strange period, there were occasions when New Zealand looked like the cricket was being played on pitches from a hundred years ago. Remember India in Hamilton in 2002.
- It’s a big surprise when we look at the number of Tests with 50+ PQI values. An amazingly high 108 Tests (55%) have PQI values exceeding 50. Not what we would expect the numbers in New Zealand could be.
- The RpW values have been on the lower side during most of the decades. Possibly because the expected runs were lower than normal.
In summary, New Zealand is a difficult-to-define country. Not as bowler-friendly as one would have expected.
- Look at the yo-yo movement of the PQI values in the six decades: 48 – 51 – 48 – 52 – 50 (okay, we are settling down) – 42. What is happening? A top-level conclusion would be the preparation of spinner-friendly pitches, which do not improve as days pass.
- Let us take the last few years. A fair number of Tests (26) have been played – 20 Tests have PQI values below 50 and only six have been on the batting side. That is not a good spot to be in. The overall numbers for these six decades are fine. But not the recent trend.
- This is substantiated by the RpW averages. A huge drop from the mid-30s to 27.
Batting has certainly become tough in India.
- In the recent past, Indian pitches have been a nightmare for the batters while, across the border, Pakistan has seen batting paradises. Look at the last two decades: PQI averages of well over 53. In the 1990s, due to the great bowling pair of Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis, the average PQI dropped to below 50.
- But the 1970s were something else. A PQI average of nearly 57.
- Only 45% of the matches had sub-50 PQI values.
- Look at the RpW averages in the 1970s – above 40 – and in the 2000s, above 37. This is the only instance when the RpW across Tests in a decade has touched 40. The high 90+ PQI value occurred in the 2000s and has already been referred to earlier.
- Sri Lanka has always tilted towards the bowlers, and that too the spinners. In the 2000s, the Muthiah Muralidaran decade, the average PQI was below 48. And when they started their international cricket era in the 1980s, the situation was similar.
- The sub-50 Tests have outnumbered the other side by a slight margin, but not by much.
- The average RpW fell below 30 in the 1980s. Since then it has been at or above the 32 mark.
Now, for a summary table for the three remaining countries.
- Zimbabwe have produced good pitches on the whole. The PQI average of 50 and RpW average of nearly 32 testify to this.
- Bangladesh has similar figures. Maybe the truth is that both teams were almost always receiving stronger teams and would not wish to be caught on under-prepared pitches.
- UAE’s figures show that there has been a strong Pakistan’s influence in their pitches. Not surprising since all the 38 Tests played in UAE have featured Pakistan. In all three locations, the sub-50-PQI Tests are not far from those with 50-plus PQI.
One final table looking at the PQI averages across these six decades.
- Nearly three-fourth of the Tests so far have been played in these six decades. So one could say that this is fairly representative.
- The PQI Average is 49.32, which is only marginally above the PQI average across all Tests that have been played, which stands at 49.16. No great difference in that measure. However, the current decade stands out with an average of 48. A clear indication that batting has been more difficult across the globe during these years.
- There have been 989 Tests with PQI values below 50 and 977 Tests with PQI values above 50. This is indeed amazing. All said and done, the six decades’ distribution is almost perfect. However, the current decade again stands out with a lot more on the lower side.
- The average RpW is 32.43. It compares well with the average across all Tests of 33.17. And the trend has repeated with the current decade average a couple of runs below.
Potpourri
Over 300 runs in a Test is nowhere near the number of runs that any bowler should look at conceding in a Test. Arthur Mailey has done this twice. He really believed in buying his wickets, as evidenced by his spell of 4 for 362 in an innings in a Sheffield Shield match. “A spell which would have been better but for the gentlemen in the bowler hat in the pavilion who kept on dropping catches” – a lament by the irrepressible Mailey. Jason Krejza and Keshav Maharaj are contemporary cricketers who could not be called frugal by any means.
Talking Cricket Group
Any reader who wishes to join my general-purpose cricket-ideas-exchange group of this name can email me a request for inclusion, providing their name, place of residence, and what they do.
Anantha Narayanan has written for Cricinfo and CastrolCricket and worked with a number of companies on their cricket performance ratings-related systems