The Myth of Technique Training: A Case Study

[bryce87]

One of the first saves I started with when I purchased CC18 was Afghanistan. I technique trained the players religiously. I stopped playing the save when the team was decent enough for me to compete online. The game date was March 27, 2030.

Fast forward about five more saved games until I heard the call of Afghanistan again. I started another save with them.

In the interim, between these two Afghanistan saves, I had become disillusioned with technique training and had come to believe that it was just a gimmick that did not actually do anything.

Whenever questions are posed about technique training to those in the know they are seemingly always ignored. Over the years numerous threads have popped up with players (rightly) questioning "what does technique training actually do?".

Spoiler: these posts are not going to answer that definitively. But hopefully it will provide more insight than has previously been had.

You see I have reached the date of March 27, 2030 on this second Afghanistan save. Seeing as Afghanistan has a relatively small pool of quality players, the core of my team was much the same on both saves.

This has enabled me to compare the same players who were heavily technique trained and those who were not.

Seeing as so many people ask what technique training does, and given the uniqueness of this situation, I thought that other CC players may be interested in what I found out.

Obviously we cannot draw robust conclusions from analyzing these players records, as the sample size is too low and the natural variance of cricket too great, but hopefully we can learn something.

References to "Game 1" will be the save that I heavily technique trained and "Game 2" will be the game that I pretty much never technique trained.

Only technique training that was successful by way of notification is applied. For the purposes of this report fielding technique training will be completely ignored.

It should also be noted that I played the limited overs games in Game 2 more aggressively than in Game 1, so expect Game 2 to have higher limited overs strikerates and RPO.

Tests were played using almost identical tactics, with Game 2 being played only a fraction more aggressively.

[bryce87]

What better place to start than with the great Rashid Khan, the best bowler on CC18?

Game 1 Technique Training: General Batting (approx 6x increases in attempt to turn into allrounder), Aggressive Batting, Off-Side Batting, General Bowling

Game 2 Technique Training: none, although I left him with middle-order batting training for ten years, again hoping to turn him into an allrounder but nothing happened!

Batting Analysis: All of those general batting increases appear to have had little to no effect. There does appear to be some increase in strikerates, albeit small, owing to the aggression training

Bowling Analysis: He averaged a whole point better with the technique training in Tests at an almost two ball better strikerate.
For ODI's the difference is small given my more aggressive approach in Game 2 which explains the lower average , strikerate and higher RPO. T20 he was better with the technique training, despite the strikerates being eerily identical.

Verdict: We can pretty much say for sure that multiple increases in general batting technique training does not have any added effect, otherwise he would have had a few more centuries. Batting aggression training may do something. Bowling technique training looks like it may have an effect.

[bryce87]

Shahidullah. The opener allrounder who is actually a part-time bowler like half of the allrounders on CC18. The other half of them are lower-order batsmen.

Game 1 Technique Training: General Batting, Aggressive, Off-Side

Game 2 Technique Training: none

Batting Analysis: Striking difference with the technique training. Interesting how that in both games he has seven test centuries but the difference in consistency is huge. The ODI lower average and higher strikerate in Game 2 could be explained by my more aggressive approach adopted in this game. T20I very similar except higher strikerate in the game with aggressive training.

Verdict: Batting technique training looks to have had a big positive effect on Test match batting. Aggression training may have a small positive effect.

[bryce87]

Bahir Shah. Probably the only guy in the world averaging over 70 in first class cricket.

Game 1 Technique Training: General Batting, Aggressive, Back Foot

Game 2 Technique Training: none

Batting Analysis: Hands down looks a better player without the technique training, in all three formats. The aggression training in game 1 seems to have an effect as his strikerate is almost four points higher in test matches with the aggression training. Like Shahidullah the same amount of centuries but conversely much better consistency in the game without technique training. The slightly higher ODI average in Game 1 is negated by the much higher strikerate in Game 2.

Verdict: Aggression training may increase test match strikerates but also cause the average to drop. Other than that, technique training does absolutely nothing?

[bryce87]

Darwish Rasooli. Probably the only guy in the world averaging over 80 in first class cricket. Oh wait.

Game 1 Technique Training: General Batting

Game 2 Technique Training: none

Batting Analysis: Given that I played slightly more aggressively in Game 2 I am splitting hairs to come up with a difference here.

Verdict: Technique training does nothing.

.

[bryce87]

Imran. He starts the game off as a 16 year old.

Game 1 Technique Training: General Batting, Back Foot, Off-Side

Game 2 Technique Training: none

Batting Analysis: A huge difference with the technique training across every format.

Verdict: Technique training does everything.

[bryce87]

Karim Janat. The other type of allrounder.

Game 1 Technique Training: General Batting, Agression, Front Foot, General Bowling, OD Defensive

Game 2 Technique Training: OD Defensive

Batting Analysis: Obviously by Game 2 I had worked out that he was crap at tests, so lets get that out of the way first. Ain't much in the batting but looks like the aggression training may have had some effect.

Bowling Analysis: No type of training appears to have had a whole lot of effect. His ODI bowling is superior without the training but T20 better with the training.

Verdict: Aggressive batting training may have an effect. Bowling training seems to do little.

[bryce87]

What does everyone think? It seems to either do nothing or it seems to do a lot. The one thing it does not seem to do is make a player worse, so I guess that you should always give technique training?

[GrahamB]

It works best when you're playing with a domestic team.
However, in my Zimbabwe save, I gave a 19 year old bowler technique training and got a message to say that his defensive bowling (accuracy) had improved.

[bryce87]

It works best when you're playing with a domestic team.
However, in my Zimbabwe save, I gave a 19 year old bowler technique training and got a message to say that his defensive bowling (accuracy) had improved.

That is true, as opposed to a second tier country who plays a few matches a year! It will be interesting to see if you notice a difference. Is this Joubert or is he a bit older than 19?

[GrahamB]

That is true, as opposed to a second tier country who plays a few matches a year! It will be interesting to see if you notice a difference. Is this Joubert or is he a bit older than 19?

Joubert is currently 22. The player concerned was a pace bowler.

[Silly Point]

That is true, as opposed to a second tier country who plays a few matches a year! It will be interesting to see if you notice a difference. Is this Joubert or is he a bit older than 19?

I actually really enjoyed playing as Afghanistan. After the first few frustrating years you basically play four series every year consisting of two Tests, three ODIs and three T20Is. Ultimately the batsmen are set in stone as too good based on their stunning batting averages after one year with First Class status. Quality quick bowlers are hard to come by too.

Shahidullah was a huge asset for me, Rasooli a machine and Imran after a slow start became something else. Haji Murad was a dark horse before Ikram Ali Khil came good.

I kept providing training but even in real life people can train and still not progress. I can’t say I followed it closely enough but if my batsmen had got much better then it’d been silly.

Thanks for the effort and detail.

[Silly Point]

Any news on a 2019 release?

Sorry if I’m getting impatient but I’d love to know. Well into July again? I don’t get it.

Any enhancements, anything?

Sorry. Can I delete? I’ll put in other thread.

[bryce87]

I actually really enjoyed playing as Afghanistan. After the first few frustrating years you basically play four series every year consisting of two Tests, three ODIs and three T20Is. Ultimately the batsmen are set in stone as too good based on their stunning batting averages after one year with First Class status. Quality quick bowlers are hard to come by too.

Shahidullah was a huge asset for me, Rasooli a machine and Imran after a slow start became something else. Haji Murad was a dark horse before Ikram Ali Khil came good.

I kept providing training but even in real life people can train and still not progress. I can’t say I followed it closely enough but if my batsmen had got much better then it’d been silly.

Thanks for the effort and detail.

I really enjoy it for that reason too however in this current game I have a good army of quality quicks who are right up there with the best in the world and also a few nice allrounders. I will post some screenshots sooner or later. Right now I am worried about succession plans for the middle order players and Rashid Khan. I am currently 2nd in Test and ODIs and a lowly 6th in T20Is.

[bryce87]

Shahidullah was a huge asset for me, Rasooli a machine and Imran after a slow start became something else. Haji Murad was a dark horse before Ikram Ali Khil came good.

How good did Ikram Ali Khil get? 'Keeper has been one of my weak spots once Shazhad and Sahaq got too old to be good anymore.

I've tried Ikram Ali Khil for three test matches but he has a top score of 19.

Instead I have been using Gurbaz who has played 11 Test matches with literally only one good innings early in his career (see below).

I'm really hoping that some good youth 'keepers start appearing very soon!