who is best? Sachin or Bradman?

With an average of 99.94 and the next best being almost 40 runs less in his era, Bradman is the best ever. In the modern era Tendulkar, Ponting, Kallis, Dravid, Hayden, Lara and numerous others have all averaged within 1 or 2 runs of each other over a long career. This shows none of those batsman are easily the best of the modern era. The same comparison can not be made in Bradmans era despite numerous other greats also averaging between 50-60 in his day.

Bradman would be the best batsman because in his era the bowlers had no limits they could bowl bouncers as many as they want while in today's era they have the limit and also boundary lengths were different they were long at that time.A batsman needed not only to hit it with power but also time the shot.Nowadays miscue shots are going for sixes while in that era that was not possible.

Bradman had a good conversion rate of making century.

no comparison can be made between the two best players.

both played in different conditions.

Bradman played tests and sachin had the opportunity to play both tests, ODI,

Even Bradman adulated Sachin by saying " I saw him playing on television and was struck by his technique, so I asked my wife to come look at him. Now I never saw myself play, but I feel that this player is playing much the same as I used to play, and she looked at him on Television and said yes, there is a similarity between the two... his compactness, technique, stroke production... it all seemed to gel: 'Sir Donald Bradman.

Actually we can not compare these two persons.

The cricket is different.

The no. of games they played are different.

The stamina required is different.

The speed of game is different.

You can not predict if Bradman was born now what would have been his performance.

You also can not predict if Sachin was born 50 years ago what would have been his performance.

We should not compare Chocolate with Toyota car.

Debates as to who is the greater between Bradman and Tendulkar are irrelevant and basically a waste of time. It is time for cricket followers to just celebrate that two such legends have played this wonderful game of ours. A place on the Mount Olympus cricket field is there for both of them. Bradman believed that Tendulkar reminded him of himself and that is maybe a good place to leave this particular argument.

They have played different cricket at different time so its difficult but cricket was more difficult at the time of Bradman

bradman. sachin mostly played to score centuries

They were born in different eras. So there should be no comparison between these two. Sachin's fans would say Bradman couldn't have survived the mental challenge of the modern day cricket. He faced the bowlers when there was not much cricket and they had not much skills and weapons that modern day bowlers have. Today there is so much competition that only the bests get to play international cricket. At Bradman's time, the scenario was totally different. Cricket was not so popular and those who knew how to play got to play the game. Bradman wouldn't have averaged 99 in modern days. It is totally a rubbish that anyone can score 100 in every match. Then, there would be no meaning of sport if only one side dominated. In short, bowlers were just so so. Btw, I am a fan of Sachin :-)

yes Sachin

You'd have to go with Sachin.

Sachin had to deal with ridiculous pressure, has survived almost 20 years of international cricket (at a far more rigorous pace than that of Don) and has also adapted to the other forms of the game exceedingly well.

In Bradmans day he only very rarely played, which game him ample time to prepare. Along with this he never had to play revised forms of the game, which would have put more pressure on him to score. He also had the added benefit of playing in an extremely good team that came up against bowlers that failed to match the ability of those found in Australia. This is seen in his First Class average being lower than his test average. (99.94 vs 95).