NJ Pius 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 | 40 | 627 | 759 | 20.2 | 82.6 | 8.4 | 53.2 | HIGH |
| overall | T20 | 259 | 210 | 12 | 4.9 | 17.5 | MEDIUM |
Why we like it
Splits where NJ Pius scores materially faster or lasts materially longer than their own baseline in the same format.
- Phase: powerplay (T20)HIGH sample
263 runs off 359 balls in 32 T20 matches — strike rate 73.3 vs 82.6 overall, average 29.2 vs 20.2 overall.
- Venue: Gahanga International Cricket Stadium. Rwanda (T20)MEDIUM sample
158 runs off 155 balls in 6 T20 matches — strike rate 101.9 vs 82.6 overall, average 39.5 vs 20.2 overall.
- Opposition: Sierra Leone (T20)LOW sample
77 runs off 62 balls in 1 T20 match — strike rate 124.2 vs 82.6 overall, not yet dismissed vs 20.2 overall.
- Venue: Gahanga B Ground, Rwanda (T20)LOW sample
86 runs off 94 balls in 4 T20 matches — strike rate 91.5 vs 82.6 overall, average 28.7 vs 20.2 overall.
- Phase: death (T20)LOW sample
91 runs off 81 balls in 7 T20 matches — strike rate 112.3 vs 82.6 overall, average 45.5 vs 20.2 overall.
Risks
Splits pointing the other way — the conditions and opponents where the record is worse than usual.
- Opposition: Hong Kong (T20)LOW sample
68 runs off 99 balls in 5 T20 matches — strike rate 68.7 vs 82.6 overall, average 17.0 vs 20.2 overall.
- Venue: Namibia Cricket Ground, Windhoek (T20)LOW sample
66 runs off 93 balls in 5 T20 matches — strike rate 71.0 vs 82.6 overall, average 16.5 vs 20.2 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.
| Uganda | T20 | 6 | 113 | 148 | 22.6 | 76.4 | 10.1 | 60.8 | MEDIUM |
| Hong Kong | T20 | 5 | 68 | 99 | 17.0 | 68.7 | 4.0 | 53.5 | LOW |
| Canada | T20 | 2 | 71 | 82 | 71.0 | 86.6 | 3.7 | 42.7 | LOW |
| Nigeria | T20 | 3 | 49 | 62 | 16.3 | 79.0 | 9.7 | 59.7 | LOW |
| Sierra Leone | T20 | 1 | 77 | 62 | — | 124.2 | 16.1 | 37.1 | LOW |
| Kenya | T20 | 3 | 51 | 51 | 51.0 | 100.0 | 9.8 | 45.1 | LOW |
| Malawi | T20 | 1 | 45 | 41 | 45.0 | 109.8 | 17.1 | 51.2 | LOW |
| Namibia | T20 | 5 | 24 | 41 | 4.8 | 58.5 | 2.4 | 58.5 | LOW |
| Cameroon | T20 | 1 | 34 | 37 | 34.0 | 91.9 | 10.8 | 51.4 | LOW |
Bowling
| Rwanda | T20 | 48 | 29 | 2 | 3.6 | 14.5 | LOW |
| Uganda | T20 | 48 | 51 | 2 | 6.4 | 25.5 | 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.
| Gahanga International Cricket Stadium. Rwanda | T20 | 6 | 158 | 155 | 39.5 | 101.9 | 11.0 | 45.2 | MEDIUM |
| High Performance Oval, Windhoek | T20 | 6 | 102 | 124 | 20.4 | 82.3 | 9.7 | 59.7 | MEDIUM |
| Gahanga B Ground, Rwanda | T20 | 4 | 86 | 94 | 28.7 | 91.5 | 12.8 | 54.3 | LOW |
| Namibia Cricket Ground, Windhoek | T20 | 5 | 66 | 93 | 16.5 | 71.0 | 8.6 | 58.1 | LOW |
| Gymkhana Club Ground, Dar-es-Salaam | T20 | 2 | 71 | 82 | 71.0 | 86.6 | 3.7 | 42.7 | LOW |
| Hong Kong Cricket Club | T20 | 4 | 57 | 67 | 28.5 | 85.1 | 7.5 | 41.8 | LOW |
| Entebbe Cricket Oval | T20 | 3 | 34 | 42 | 17.0 | 81.0 | 7.1 | 52.4 | LOW |
| Asian Institute of Technology Ground, Bangkok | T20 | 4 | 8 | 39 | 2.0 | 20.5 | 0.0 | 82.1 | LOW |
Bowling
| Gahanga International Cricket Stadium. Rwanda | T20 | 74 | 37 | 4 | 3.0 | 9.3 | LOW |
| Hong Kong Cricket Club | T20 | 60 | 36 | 5 | 3.6 | 7.2 | LOW |
| Gahanga B Ground, Rwanda | T20 | 36 | 20 | 2 | 3.3 | 10.0 | LOW |
By country
Conditions vary more by country than by ground; this is the broader pitch-and-conditions view.
| Unknown | T20 | 40 | 627 | 759 | 20.2 | 82.6 | 8.4 | 53.2 | HIGH |
Bowling
| Unknown | T20 | 259 | 210 | 12 | 4.9 | 17.5 | MEDIUM |
By match phase
Powerplay, middle overs and death. Phase splits drive the simulated scoring rate ball by ball.
| powerplay | T20 | 32 | 263 | 359 | 29.2 | 73.3 | 9.2 | 62.1 | HIGH |
| middle | T20 | 29 | 273 | 319 | 13.7 | 85.6 | 7.5 | 48.6 | HIGH |
| death | T20 | 7 | 91 | 81 | 45.5 | 112.3 | 8.6 | 32.1 | LOW |
Bowling
| middle | T20 | 113 | 100 | 5 | 5.3 | 20.0 | LOW |
| powerplay | T20 | 78 | 60 | 4 | 4.6 | 15.0 | LOW |
| death | T20 | 68 | 50 | 3 | 4.4 | 16.7 | LOW |
Against pace and spin
Record against each bowling type faced, rolled up when a finer category has too few balls.
| PACE | T20 | 31 | 309 | 367 | 23.8 | 84.2 | 8.2 | 51.2 | HIGH |
| SPIN | T20 | 30 | 240 | 296 | 17.1 | 81.1 | 8.4 | 55.1 | MEDIUM |
| UNKNOWN | T20 | 12 | 78 | 96 | 19.5 | 81.3 | 9.4 | 55.2 | 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.