IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ecj/econjl/v119y2009i534p1-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rational Adversaries? Evidence from Randomised Trials in One Day Cricket

Author

Listed:
  • V. Bhaskar

Abstract

In cricket, the right to make an important strategic decision (bat first or field first) is assigned via a coin toss. I use these 'randomised trials' to examine the consistency of choices made by teams with strictly opposed preferences and the effects of these choices upon the outcomes in the game. I find significant evidence of inconsistency, with teams often agreeing on who is to bat first. Estimated treatment effects show that choices are often poorly made and "reduce" the probability of the team winning, a particularly surprising finding given the intensely competitive environment and opportunities for learning. Copyright © The Author(s). Journal compilation © Royal Economic Society 2009.

Suggested Citation

  • V. Bhaskar, 2009. "Rational Adversaries? Evidence from Randomised Trials in One Day Cricket," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(534), pages 1-23, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:119:y:2009:i:534:p:1-23
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. McGinn Eamon, 2013. "The effect of batting during the evening in cricket," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 141-150, June.
    2. Praveen Puram & Soumya Roy & Deepak Srivastav & Anand Gurumurthy, 2023. "Understanding the effect of contextual factors and decision making on team performance in Twenty20 cricket: an interpretable machine learning approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(1), pages 261-288, June.
    3. González-Díaz, Julio & Palacios-Huerta, Ignacio, 2016. "Cognitive performance in competitive environments: Evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 40-52.
    4. Kassis, Mark & Schmidt, Sascha L. & Schreyer, Dominik & Sutter, Matthias, 2021. "Psychological pressure and the right to determine the moves in dynamic tournaments – evidence from a natural field experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 278-287.
    5. Jose Apesteguia & Ignacio Palacios-Huerta, 2010. "Psychological Pressure in Competitive Environments: Evidence from a Randomized Natural Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2548-2564, December.
    6. Colin Cannonier & Bibhudutta Panda & Sudipta Sarangi, 2015. "20-Over Versus 50-Over Cricket," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 16(7), pages 760-783, October.
    7. Michael Allgrunn & Christopher Douglas & Sebastian Wai, 2024. "Optimal Timeout Choices in Clutch Situations in the NBA," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 25(2), pages 217-230, February.
    8. Brian Goff & Stephen L. Locke, 2019. "Revisiting Romer: Digging Deeper Into Influences on NFL Managerial Decisions," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 20(5), pages 671-689, June.
    9. Chowdhury, Subhasish M. & Jewell, Sarah & Singleton, Carl, 2024. "Can awareness reduce (and reverse) identity-driven bias in judgement? Evidence from international cricket," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    10. Sebastian Bervoets & Bruno Decreuse & Mathieu Faure, 2014. "A Renewed Analysis of Cheating in Contests: Theory and Evidence from Recovery Doping," AMSE Working Papers 1441, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France, revised Jun 2015.
    11. Sarah Jewell & James Reade, 2014. "On Fixing International Cricket Matches," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2014-08, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    12. Sarah Jewell & J. James Reade & Carl Singleton, 2020. "It's Just Not Cricket: The Uncontested Toss and the Gentleman's Game," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2020-10, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    13. Sudipta Sarangi & Emre Unlu, 2011. "Key Players and Key Groups in Teams," Departmental Working Papers 2011-10, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    14. Abhinav Sacheti & Ian Gregory-Smith & David Paton, 2016. "Managerial Decision Making Under Uncertainty," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 17(1), pages 44-63, January.
    15. Mr. Shekhar Aiyar & Mr. Rodney Ramcharan, 2010. "What Can International Cricket Teach Us About the Role of Luck in Labor Markets?," IMF Working Papers 2010/225, International Monetary Fund.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:119:y:2009:i:534:p:1-23. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing or Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.