How the required runs are calculated in a rain inturrupted match with the help of Duckworth-Lewis rules??

Answer 1

Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis, inventors of the now well-known system of resetting targets in interrupted matches that bears their names~

Answer 2

Its all about the time of interruption and crucially the amount of wickets that have fallen
If you are batting first then you have the advantage with Duckworth-Lewis, especially if you have wickets in hand
Batting secong is a disadvantage because you know exactly what you are chasing use wikipedia

Answer 3

Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis, inventors of the now well-known system of resetting targets in interrupted matches that bears their names, have announced an update to their tables. This follows an extensive analysis of limited overs cricket matches in recent years that they have undertaken. "The nature of the one-day game is changing," said Duckworth "and our tables need to reflect developments in playing strategies". These changes come into effect for competitions starting on or after 1st September. And they have already been used for the tour match between the 'A' teams of South Africa and Australia on 4th September
Here is an extract of the new tables
Here is an extract of the new tables

Wickets lost
Overs left 0 2 5 7 9
50 100 85.1 49 22 4.7
40 89.3 77.8 47.6 22 4.7
30 75.1 67.3 44.7 21.8 4.7
25 66.5 60.5 42.2 21.6 4.7
20 56.6 52.4 38.6 21.2 4.7
10 32.1 30.8 26.1 17.9 4.7
5 17.2 16.8 15.4 12.5 4.6
HERE IS SOME EXAMPLES

EXAMPLE-1:
Premature curtailment of Team 2's innings
Team 1 have scored 250 runs from their 50 available overs and Team 2 lose 5 wickets in scoring 199 runs in 40 overs. Play is then stopped by the weather, the rain refuses to relent and the match is abandoned. A decision on the winner is required.


Team 1's innings: this was uninterrupted, so the resource percentage available is 100%



Team 2's innings: resource % available at start of innings = 100%

After 40 overs Team 2 have 10 overs left and have lost 5 wickets.
From table, resource % left at suspension of play = 26.1%

As play is abandoned all this remaining resource is lost.
Hence resource % available for Team 2's innings = 100 - 26.1 = 73.9%


Team 2 had less resource available than Team 1 and so to give the target Team 1's score must be scaled down by the ratio of resources, 73.9/100.
Team 1 scored 250, so Team 2's 'target' is 250 x 73.9/100 = 184.75. The next lower whole number, 184, is the score to tie, or the 'par score' for the match situation at the stoppage.

As there is to be no further play, the winner is decided according to whether or not the par score has been exceeded. With 199 runs on the board, they have exceeded this by 15 and so are declared the winners by 15 runs.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EXAMPLE 2:
Interruption to Team 2's innings
A one-day match has been shortened to 40 overs per side before it commenced. Team 1 have scored 200 runs from their 40 available overs and Team 2 lose 5 wickets in scoring 140 runs in 30 overs. Play is then suspended and 5 overs are lost.
What is Team 2's revised target?

Team 1's innings: At the start of 40 over innings resource percentage available = 89.3%
Team 2's innings: resource % available at start of 40 over innings = 89.3%
After 30 overs Team 2 have 10 overs left and have lost 5 wickets.
From table, resource % left at start of suspension = 26.1%
5 overs are lost, so when play is resumed 5 overs are left.
From table, resource % left at resumption of play = 15.4%
Hence resource % lost = 26.1 - 15.4 = 10.7%
so resource % available for Team 2's innings = 89.3 - 10.7 = 78.6%
Team 2 had less resource available than Team 1 and so to give the target Team 1's score must be scaled down by the ratio of resources, 78.6/89.3 Team 1 scored 200, so Team 2's 'target' is 200 x 78.6/89.3 =176.04 which rounds down to 176 to tie with a revised target of 177. They then require a further 37 runs to win from 5 overs with 5 wickets in hand.

NOTE:
Most other target resetting methods previously used would make no allowance for this interruption. They set the target of 191 simply because both teams are to receive the same number of overs. This is clearly an injustice to Team 1 who were pacing their innings to last 50 overs when it was curtailed, whereas Team 2 knew in advance of the reduction of their innings to 40 overs and have been handed an unfair advantage. D/L neutralises this by setting Team 2 an enhanced target over the number of runs Team 1 actually scored.

Answer 4

In principle, the chasing team's par score depends on how many overs and wickets they have left to reach their target. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duckworth-Lewis_method for the full details.

For more cricket info go to http://www.cricket-for-parents.com/cricket-information.html

Answer 5

Basically, all the details of the game thus far and put into a computer and it spits out what is required of the batting team. And for some reason we accept what the computer says.

Answer 6

Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis, inventors of the now well-known system of resetting targets in interrupted matches that bears their names, have announced an update to their tables. This follows an extensive analysis of limited overs cricket matches in recent years that they have undertaken. "The nature of the one-day game is changing," said Duckworth "and our tables need to reflect developments in playing strategies". These changes come into effect for competitions starting on or after 1st September. And they have already been used for the tour match between the 'A' teams of South Africa and Australia on 4th September
Here is an extract of the new tables
Here is an extract of the new tables

Wickets lost
Overs left 0 2 5 7 9
50 100 85.1 49 22 4.7
40 89.3 77.8 47.6 22 4.7
30 75.1 67.3 44.7 21.8 4.7
25 66.5 60.5 42.2 21.6 4.7
20 56.6 52.4 38.6 21.2 4.7
10 32.1 30.8 26.1 17.9 4.7
5 17.2 16.8 15.4 12.5 4.6
HERE IS SOME EXAMPLES

EXAMPLE-1:
Premature curtailment of Team 2's innings
Team 1 have scored 250 runs from their 50 available overs and Team 2 lose 5 wickets in scoring 199 runs in 40 overs. Play is then stopped by the weather, the rain refuses to relent and the match is abandoned. A decision on the winner is required.


Team 1's innings: this was uninterrupted, so the resource percentage available is 100%



Team 2's innings: resource % available at start of innings = 100%

After 40 overs Team 2 have 10 overs left and have lost 5 wickets.
From table, resource % left at suspension of play = 26.1%

As play is abandoned all this remaining resource is lost.
Hence resource % available for Team 2's innings = 100 - 26.1 = 73.9%


Team 2 had less resource available than Team 1 and so to give the target Team 1's score must be scaled down by the ratio of resources, 73.9/100.
Team 1 scored 250, so Team 2's 'target' is 250 x 73.9/100 = 184.75. The next lower whole number, 184, is the score to tie, or the 'par score' for the match situation at the stoppage.

As there is to be no further play, the winner is decided according to whether or not the par score has been exceeded. With 199 runs on the board, they have exceeded this by 15 and so are declared the winners by 15 runs.


------------------------------...

EXAMPLE 2:
Interruption to Team 2's innings
A one-day match has been shortened to 40 overs per side before it commenced. Team 1 have scored 200 runs from their 40 available overs and Team 2 lose 5 wickets in scoring 140 runs in 30 overs. Play is then suspended and 5 overs are lost.
What is Team 2's revised target?

Team 1's innings: At the start of 40 over innings resource percentage available = 89.3%
Team 2's innings: resource % available at start of 40 over innings = 89.3%
After 30 overs Team 2 have 10 overs left and have lost 5 wickets.
From table, resource % left at start of suspension = 26.1%
5 overs are lost, so when play is resumed 5 overs are left.
From table, resource % left at resumption of play = 15.4%
Hence resource % lost = 26.1 - 15.4 = 10.7%
so resource % available for Team 2's innings = 89.3 - 10.7 = 78.6%
Team 2 had less resource available than Team 1 and so to give the target Team 1's score must be scaled down by the ratio of resources, 78.6/89.3 Team 1 scored 200, so Team 2's 'target' is 200 x 78.6/89.3 =176.04 which rounds down to 176 to tie with a revised target of 177. They then require a further 37 runs to win from 5 overs with 5 wickets in hand.

NOTE:
Most other target resetting methods previously used would make no allowance for this interruption. They set the target of 191 simply because both teams are to receive the same number of overs. This is clearly an injustice to Team 1 who were pacing their innings to last 50 overs when it was curtailed, whereas Team 2 knew in advance of the reduction of their innings to 40 overs and have been handed an unfair advantage. D/L neutralises this by setting Team 2 an enhanced target over the number of runs Team 1 actually scored.

Source(s):

The explanatory booklet Your comprehensive guide to the Duckworth/Lewis method for target resetting in one-day cricket by Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis is temporarily out of print, pending an update to incorporate the new tables. Recent purchasers of this booklet should see page 61 for information on how to obtain the updated tables.

The computer program CODA, which carries out all calculations of D/L targets and provides many features besides, has also been updated. Arrangements for obtaining this program have now changed. These will be advised on this website in due course. Existing owners of CODA should email Tony Lewis as below requesting information