S Nampiina 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 | 62 | 805 | 897 | 17.1 | 89.7 | 10.4 | 50.4 | HIGH |
| overall | T20 | 190 | 145 | 18 | 4.6 | 8.1 | MEDIUM |
Why we like it
Splits where S Nampiina scores materially faster or lasts materially longer than their own baseline in the same format.
- Opposition: Namibia (T20)MEDIUM sample
251 runs off 236 balls in 16 T20 matches — strike rate 106.4 vs 89.7 overall, average 17.9 vs 17.1 overall.
- Phase: death (T20)MEDIUM sample
279 runs off 239 balls in 27 T20 matches — strike rate 116.7 vs 89.7 overall, average 17.4 vs 17.1 overall.
Risks
Splits pointing the other way — the conditions and opponents where the record is worse than usual.
- Phase: powerplay (T20)MEDIUM sample
105 runs off 148 balls in 19 T20 matches — strike rate 70.9 vs 89.7 overall, average 35.0 vs 17.1 overall.
- Opposition: Tanzania (T20)LOW sample
78 runs off 97 balls in 5 T20 matches — strike rate 80.4 vs 89.7 overall, average 26.0 vs 17.1 overall.
- Opposition: Canada (T20)LOW sample
56 runs off 71 balls in 5 T20 matches — strike rate 78.9 vs 89.7 overall, average 18.7 vs 17.1 overall.
- Venue: Lugogo Cricket Oval, Kampala (T20)LOW sample
56 runs off 71 balls in 5 T20 matches — strike rate 78.9 vs 89.7 overall, average 18.7 vs 17.1 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.
| Namibia | T20 | 16 | 251 | 236 | 17.9 | 106.4 | 14.0 | 46.2 | MEDIUM |
| Tanzania | T20 | 5 | 78 | 97 | 26.0 | 80.4 | 8.2 | 53.6 | LOW |
| Canada | T20 | 5 | 56 | 71 | 18.7 | 78.9 | 8.5 | 54.9 | LOW |
| Hong Kong | T20 | 4 | 63 | 70 | 21.0 | 90.0 | 12.9 | 54.3 | LOW |
| Rwanda | T20 | 5 | 54 | 64 | 13.5 | 84.4 | 12.5 | 56.3 | LOW |
| Zimbabwe | T20 | 3 | 48 | 54 | 16.0 | 88.9 | 7.4 | 44.4 | LOW |
| Kenya | T20 | 3 | 59 | 49 | 59.0 | 120.4 | 12.2 | 32.7 | LOW |
| Nepal | T20 | 2 | 27 | 48 | 27.0 | 56.3 | 2.1 | 62.5 | LOW |
| Thailand | T20 | 2 | 24 | 45 | 24.0 | 53.3 | 2.2 | 57.8 | LOW |
| Botswana | T20 | 1 | 42 | 34 | 42.0 | 123.5 | 14.7 | 41.2 | LOW |
| Netherlands | T20 | 1 | 21 | 33 | 21.0 | 63.6 | 6.1 | 60.6 | LOW |
Bowling
| Rwanda | T20 | 54 | 48 | 2 | 5.3 | 24.0 | LOW |
| Namibia | T20 | 42 | 32 | 4 | 4.6 | 8.0 | LOW |
| Tanzania | T20 | 36 | 38 | 3 | 6.3 | 12.7 | 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.
| Entebbe Cricket Oval | T20 | 10 | 174 | 194 | 24.9 | 89.7 | 8.8 | 47.9 | MEDIUM |
| High Performance Oval, Windhoek | T20 | 10 | 178 | 184 | 22.3 | 96.7 | 12.5 | 48.9 | MEDIUM |
| Namibia Cricket Ground, Windhoek | T20 | 5 | 68 | 83 | 13.6 | 81.9 | 12.0 | 59.0 | LOW |
| Gahanga International Cricket Stadium. Rwanda | T20 | 7 | 62 | 71 | 10.3 | 87.3 | 9.9 | 54.9 | LOW |
| Lugogo Cricket Oval, Kampala | T20 | 5 | 56 | 71 | 18.7 | 78.9 | 8.5 | 54.9 | LOW |
| Terdthai Cricket Ground, Bangkok | T20 | 4 | 41 | 56 | 13.7 | 73.2 | 8.9 | 57.1 | LOW |
| Asian Institute of Technology Ground, Bangkok | T20 | 2 | 23 | 47 | 23.0 | 48.9 | 2.1 | 61.7 | LOW |
| Gahanga B Ground, Rwanda | T20 | 4 | 42 | 44 | 14.0 | 95.5 | 11.4 | 45.5 | LOW |
| United Cricket Club Ground, Windhoek | T20 | 5 | 45 | 39 | 11.3 | 115.4 | 15.4 | 53.8 | LOW |
Bowling
| Gahanga B Ground, Rwanda | T20 | 70 | 41 | 5 | 3.5 | 8.2 | LOW |
| Gahanga International Cricket Stadium. Rwanda | T20 | 42 | 27 | 8 | 3.9 | 3.4 | LOW |
| United Cricket Club Ground, Windhoek | T20 | 42 | 32 | 4 | 4.6 | 8.0 | LOW |
By country
Conditions vary more by country than by ground; this is the broader pitch-and-conditions view.
| Unknown | T20 | 62 | 805 | 897 | 17.1 | 89.7 | 10.4 | 50.4 | HIGH |
Bowling
| Unknown | T20 | 190 | 145 | 18 | 4.6 | 8.1 | MEDIUM |
By match phase
Powerplay, middle overs and death. Phase splits drive the simulated scoring rate ball by ball.
| middle | T20 | 54 | 421 | 510 | 15.0 | 82.5 | 9.2 | 52.4 | HIGH |
| death | T20 | 27 | 279 | 239 | 17.4 | 116.7 | 13.8 | 40.6 | MEDIUM |
| powerplay | T20 | 19 | 105 | 148 | 35.0 | 70.9 | 8.8 | 59.5 | MEDIUM |
Bowling
| middle | T20 | 114 | 89 | 11 | 4.7 | 8.1 | LOW |
| death | T20 | 76 | 56 | 7 | 4.4 | 8.0 | LOW |
Against pace and spin
Record against each bowling type faced, rolled up when a finer category has too few balls.
| SPIN | T20 | 52 | 448 | 513 | 16.6 | 87.3 | 9.7 | 50.7 | HIGH |
| PACE | T20 | 44 | 272 | 293 | 20.9 | 92.8 | 11.9 | 51.2 | MEDIUM |
| UNKNOWN | T20 | 22 | 85 | 91 | 12.1 | 93.4 | 8.8 | 46.2 | 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.