What Batting Average Really Means — and Its Limits
Batting average is cricket's primary measure of batting quality — but it has significant limitations that sophisticated analysts work around. This article explains exactly how batting average is calculated, what it tells you, what it misses, and how modern cricket analytics tries to supplement it.
How Batting Average Is Calculated
Batting average = total runs scored ÷ number of times dismissed. The key: not-out innings (where the batsman ended the innings without being dismissed) are not included in the dismissal denominator but are included in the runs numerator. A batsman who scores 50 not out does not have a dismissed innings added to their denominator — the 50 runs count, but the innings does not count as a completed innings for average purposes. This treatment of not-out innings is intentional: a batsman who was never given the opportunity to be dismissed (because their team won or declared while they were still batting) should not be penalised for the match situation. The result: batsmen who score many not-outs (typically lower-order batsmen who finish on the winning side frequently, or finishers who are not out in match-winning innings) have averages inflated by the not-out treatment.
What Average Tells You
Batting average tells you approximately how many runs a batsman scores for each time they are dismissed — a direct measure of how long they survive (and score) relative to how often they get out. An average of 50 in Tests means the batsman scores 50 runs every time they're dismissed — which is well above the median Test batting average (approximately 25-30 for most batsmen who play at international level). The average captures sustained quality: a batsman who scores 100 occasionally and 0 frequently has the same average as a batsman who scores 50 consistently — but they feel very different to their team. One 100 and ten 0s averages 9.1; eleven 50s averages 50. The average is outcome-correct but texture-blind.
What Average Misses
Batting average's significant limitations: it doesn't account for match context (a 30 saving a Test draw is more valuable than a 30 in a won-in-3-days match); it doesn't weight for bowling quality faced (averaging 45 against the 2001 Australian attack is more impressive than averaging 45 against a weakened Test nation); it treats all runs equally regardless of when they were scored (an innings accelerating from 50 to 100 in 30 balls for the team is as valuable as a cautious 100 in 200 balls that wasn't match-relevant); and the not-out treatment inflates lower-order averages. Modern cricket analytics supplements batting average with: ball-by-ball run rates, pressure-index-adjusted batting, win-probability-added metrics, and batting in specific match phases as separate performance dimensions.
Frequently asked questions
Is a batting average of 40 good in Tests?
Yes — a Test batting average of 40 is generally considered a strong benchmark for top-7 batsmen. The median Test batting average for players with 20+ Tests is approximately 30-33, meaning 40 is well above average. A recognised opening batsman averaging 40 has performed at a high level; a number 3 averaging 40 is performing well but not at elite level. However, context matters significantly: averaging 40 as a number 7 all-rounder is phenomenal (because number 7 batsmen rarely have the opportunity to build long innings); averaging 40 as a specialist number 3 against weaker opponents may be somewhat inflated. The 'good' threshold for batting average varies by position, era, and the quality of bowling faced.
Who has the highest career ODI batting average?
Michael Bevan (Australia) held the highest career ODI batting average among batsmen with significant innings played — approximately 53.58 across an ODI career focused on the middle and lower order. Bevan's high average was partly a product of the not-out treatment: he frequently finished matches not out (as Australia's finisher in the 1990s-2000s) which inflated his average relative to the completed innings he played. Among current-era batsmen with high ODI averages, Virat Kohli has maintained averages above 55 at certain career points. Records should be verified against current ICC or ESPNcricinfo databases as active player averages continue to evolve.
Can batting averages be compared across eras?
Era comparison of batting averages is one of cricket statistics' most contested topics. The factors that make cross-era comparison difficult: bowling quality changes (bowling actions and deliveries available have evolved significantly from the 1880s to the 2020s); pitch quality and preparation standards have changed (modern pitches are more consistently prepared than early 20th century pitches); field sizes and playing conditions differ; and the number of Tests played per year (a batsman in the 1930s played significantly fewer Tests, against fewer opponents, than a modern player). Statistical adjustments that attempt to control for era include: normalising averages by the average scoring rate of the specific era and conditions played in; and comparing how many standard deviations above the era average a batsman's own average sits. These methods suggest Bradman is uniquely dominant regardless of era-adjustment methodology.