The art of scoring 180 runs in a 20-20 match

This friend of mine, an ardent cricket fan, has suggested his version of how an above-par score of 180 or so can be reached at any 20-20 match, without much of a hassle. I put up his thoughts as under, with a bit of typo-correction of course 🙂

While I agree to quite a bit of this in principle, my views on the same will come up soon…. Waiting for your views on the same as well…. And yes, I mean YOU.

To add, if you have any snippets of sporting information, or want to engage in some proper sporting debate, (the ones who read this blog, albeit few, are genuine sports enthusiasts), please do email me at and I will be happy to put up your thoughts here. And my commentary, of course if I have anything to say int he first place.


Everybody agrees that a total between 160-180 is a decent, fighting total in 20-20 giving you a decent enough chance to win the game. Let me show you how easy it is to get to this total if 20-20 were played like any other game of cricket.

The art of singles is being quickly forgotten in 20-20 and people are trying to slog everything out of the ground.

If one were to focus on getting the singles which I believe are far easier in 20-20 with largely defensive fields set in this format of the game….

That avergaes to 6 runs an over which is 120 runs

Add to that 10 boundaries which is one boundary every two overs – again in my book realistic

Some crazy hits to the fence only 3 sixes – one every six or so overs – 18 Runs

Simple Math – 120 + 40 + 18 = 178. (Edit: 120-10-3+40+18=165+{15 extras}=180)

Again you might think i am trying to make it sound simple while it actually is not that simple to get 6 singles in the over.. no its not simple but that is the avergae considering there are always the 2’s and 3’s.

The subtle things like left right combination are ignored and forgotten. They key to most sports is to keep things simple. Yes there are the Tendulkars and Messis of the world who make genius look simple but that is a freak, you dont plan for it, they just happen

Also the lessons learnt from the 20-20 world cup are also forgotten, its very important to keep wickets. Atleast one of the two openers needs to stick around for 10 overs even if he scoring at just run a ball. How does he not get frustrated and keep a healthy scoring rate….Answer: SINGLES

I am really happy about the IPL and what it is doing for cricket specially Indian cricket, but we need to remember something, BPL is the worlds biggest league but England dont win the world cup. The limit of 4 overseas players is a good rule and they should always keep it otherwise IPL will become another BPL, very glamorous and loads of money but no contributions to tha national cause.

Age is one criteria that i dont always agree with: Youth … Youth … Youth i belive is the worst thing that can happen to Indian cricket. Agreed Ganguly is way past his prime and this is the perfect time for him to hang up his boots even if he has a couple of good knocks left in him. Sehwag Gambir Sharma Yuvraj are good. but except for Rohit Sharma none of the others are exactly YOUTH YOUTH YOUTH. they are all 27 years old atleast which is the time when normal great crickets mature (unlike Tendulkar who went through that at 20) They are ready for  the one day cricket and i agree with that. But, to drop Laxman and Dravid to accomodate Yuvraj in test team would be foolish.

THis is where i like what IPL is doing, it is showin the character of a player, I particulary like this Gony guy  who plays for chennai, Chawla is begginning to show that he is a real quality bowler, Yousuf pathan should figure in the scheme of things. I still dont like Munaf patel as a bowler and i would pick a trivedi over him in my line up anyday. The other guy who has gone unnoticed but has impressed me is this guy called Vijay who bowls for deccan. He is a nobody who has the best bowling figures in that team. IPL is definitely good for these blokes.

Well it was more like a phone call between us and me talking for a long time without being interrupted 🙂


Agree to the last line to the T, just that in our conversations, dude, one never gets to speak for so long without the other barging in 🙂


3 thoughts on “The art of scoring 180 runs in a 20-20 match

  1. I dont think the formula for 180 runs work. For starters, the assumptions:

    a) score run-a-ball for 120 balls and
    b) score boundaries in between

    are contradictory. The only way this can happen if the bowling team is so generous to offer at least one front foot no-ball every over so as to enable a free hit AND the batting team utilizes each free hit to score the distributed boundaries. Kinda unlikely.

    I also dont agree that openers score at a uniform rate (the maximum being 6 singles per over). Their rate of scoring is usually exponential and their peak is usually reached just before they get out (which I guess is somewhere between 10-15 overs). Extending this logic, I would probably state that if we were to assign a scale factor to the contribution of openers towards a competitive score in a cricket match, then this factor would be higher in 20-20 version than in any other version. I say so because it is much easier to reach 160+ in 20 overs if you are say 100 at the end of 12 overs than reaching 500 if you are say 250-1 in a Test match.

  2. This whole analysis of scoring rates and peak and exponential or non-exponential rates with scaling factors is exactly what plagues 20-20 cricket according to me. It’s more like what the sports journalists sell these days by trying to sounds more intelligent than the average indivisual.

    Now, if you read the mail again, it clearly specifies that 6 singles in every over is not possible but there will always be the 2’s and 3’s also hence averaging to a 6 runs scored by running between the wickets.

    Also you dont need a easy over pitched delivery to score ur hits off, in case u doubt that watch a couple more of the IPL games and see how many hits have come off perfectly good text book deliveries.

    Infact I think that the Royals use this stratergy very well, Grame Smith is the one who plays sheet anchor and trys to stay there till over 10 atleast and yes if he feels like he can hit the ball a long way he will go for it, but not by takings undue risk. Just check the number of runs he scores of singles in the early part of his innings and that is exactly why the royals are doing so well.

  3. I suppose the trend of stats-heavy reporting of T20 games exists, but you cant blame journos for throwing numbers when the game itself has been stats-heavy.

    Quite agree with ur point of 2s and 3s but not very practical because most teams prefer a boundary and a dot ball instead of 2 2s. Considering the reckless pace of the game, players can get dog-tired in one match if they were to run so much. However, with increasing levels of fitness and expert help at hand, it may not be too long before singles more than boundaries can make the difference.

    Also, I think there is one other strategy to reach 180 when u aren’t scoring run a ball. French cuts! 🙂 Cud be a bit of a surprise if we cud know how many runs have been scored off French cuts (now, there’s another stat to keep track of)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s