E Gebhard betting stats, splits & projections
Batter
Every figure below is counted from stored ball-by-ball deliveries — no estimates, no averages copied from elsewhere. Splits with fewer balls behind them are marked LOW sample and carry less weight in the model.
Record by format
Formats are never pooled: a twenty-over record tells you nothing about fifty-over scoring, so they are modelled and shown separately.
| overall | T20 | 11 | 292 | 303 | 41.7 | 96.4 | 7.6 | 45.9 | HIGH |
| overall | T20 | 21 | 34 | 0 | 9.7 | — | LOW |
Why we like it
Splits where E Gebhard scores materially faster or lasts materially longer than their own baseline in the same format.
- Opposition: Belgium (T20)MEDIUM sample
182 runs off 154 balls in 4 T20 matches — strike rate 118.2 vs 96.4 overall, average 91.0 vs 41.7 overall.
- Venue: Pierre Werner Cricket Ground (T20)MEDIUM sample
213 runs off 209 balls in 7 T20 matches — strike rate 101.9 vs 96.4 overall, average 53.3 vs 41.7 overall.
- Phase: middle (T20)MEDIUM sample
161 runs off 147 balls in 8 T20 matches — strike rate 109.5 vs 96.4 overall, average 40.3 vs 41.7 overall.
Risks
Splits pointing the other way — the conditions and opponents where the record is worse than usual.
- Phase: powerplay (T20)MEDIUM sample
104 runs off 135 balls in 10 T20 matches — strike rate 77.0 vs 96.4 overall, average 52.0 vs 41.7 overall.
- Opposition: Norway (T20)LOW sample
72 runs off 83 balls in 2 T20 matches — strike rate 86.7 vs 96.4 overall, average 36.0 vs 41.7 overall.
- Venue: Banks Field, Vinor (T20)LOW sample
79 runs off 94 balls in 4 T20 matches — strike rate 84.0 vs 96.4 overall, average 26.3 vs 41.7 overall.
Against each opponent
Head-to-head record by format. Small head-to-head samples move the model very little — read the sample column before leaning on a line here.
| Belgium | T20 | 4 | 182 | 154 | 91.0 | 118.2 | 8.4 | 35.1 | MEDIUM |
| Norway | T20 | 2 | 72 | 83 | 36.0 | 86.7 | 12.0 | 60.2 | LOW |
| Switzerland | T20 | 2 | 29 | 53 | 14.5 | 54.7 | 0.0 | 54.7 | LOW |
By venue
Ground-by-ground record. Venue effects are real but slow to prove, so grounds with few balls are shown for transparency rather than used as evidence.
| Pierre Werner Cricket Ground | T20 | 7 | 213 | 209 | 53.3 | 101.9 | 6.2 | 39.7 | MEDIUM |
| Banks Field, Vinor | T20 | 4 | 79 | 94 | 26.3 | 84.0 | 10.6 | 59.6 | LOW |
By country
Conditions vary more by country than by ground; this is the broader pitch-and-conditions view.
| Unknown | T20 | 11 | 292 | 303 | 41.7 | 96.4 | 7.6 | 45.9 | HIGH |
By match phase
Powerplay, middle overs and death. Phase splits drive the simulated scoring rate ball by ball.
| middle | T20 | 8 | 161 | 147 | 40.3 | 109.5 | 9.5 | 38.8 | MEDIUM |
| powerplay | T20 | 10 | 104 | 135 | 52.0 | 77.0 | 6.7 | 57.0 | MEDIUM |
Against pace and spin
Record against each bowling type faced, rolled up when a finer category has too few balls.
| PACE | T20 | 11 | 185 | 207 | 46.3 | 89.4 | 7.2 | 48.3 | MEDIUM |
| UNKNOWN | T20 | 5 | 62 | 54 | 31.0 | 114.8 | 3.7 | 33.3 | LOW |
| SPIN | T20 | 2 | 45 | 42 | 45.0 | 107.1 | 14.3 | 50.0 | LOW |
How these splits are used
The same aggregates feed the ball-by-ball simulation behind every projection: format baselines, phase scoring rates, the bowling types a batter will face and the expected attack. See the current match projections on the cricket betting hub and the model's tested record on the cricket model performance page.