Test: 9 out of 10
ODI: 10 out of 10
T20s: 10 out of 10

No other batsman come close. Even if you give Kohli 9 in ODIs and Test he will still be the best among all formats

Smith is exceptional in test and good in ODIs but mediocre in T20s

Amla Good in Test, exception in ODIs but average in T20s

In reply to cricketmygame

Kohli and Joe Root are the only 2 players to average 40+ in all formats. Kohli the only to average 50 in all.

bump for Larr

In reply to jen

Root and Williamson complete the top 5

In reply to cricketmygame

I would give Kohli a 7.5 in Tests. His consistency needs to improve. His conversion rate is spectacular, but his scores of 50 or more per innings needs work. He also needs to address that wafting outside off stump and his horror tour in England.

His test average has only been above 50 on a few occasions.

Cricinfo did a good sly thing on this

I Will look for the video

here is the video

Watch until the end

Hola....there is no such thing as BEST batsman...it cannot be proven.....what Kohli presently is a batsman with a tremendous ability to accumulate runs at test,odi and T20 levels....
no such thing as best..
Adios
CB

In reply to CITYBOY

you do not have a brain: you do not see yours

In reply to doosra

Hola...I will allow that comment to pass...after all you are from WCB..somewhere in Cotton Tree and you are supposedly a UG grad
take care.
Adios
CB

In reply to CITYBOY

7 sacks of cement?

In reply to doosra

Hola...doosie you is agood man...you see i graduated from UG...thats why I so stupidee...lighten up bro...life is short..
Coming down this xmas to do Santa Claus parade in WCB...hope to see you there.
Adios
CB

In reply to CITYBOY

u see how fast the cement soften you?

He is arguably the best at this time in Asian conditions, yet to impress outside Asia. There are also some very good batsmen as well Amla, Smith, Root, Taylor, Williamson, etc.

Who is the the best bowler?

My point in asking about the bowlers is that the game has changed over the years heavily in favor of the batsmen. There are no outstanding bowlers as there is batsmen. The bats are bigger, the wickets are slower and lower, the grounds are smaller, the bowlers are more restricted.

I wonder how Kohli would have performed against the WI & Aus greats of the 70’s & 80’s under those playing rules and conditions?

Agree. Kohli is the best flat track bully of this era adept at accumulating tons and tons of runs on the sub continent curry powder wickets against dung heap level bowling. When last has he left the sub-continent?

And b4 some people utter a word - Flat tracks are not only found on the subcontinent.

In reply to carl0002

Why travel when the BCCI can bring lame bowlers home for him to bully!

In reply to azadtnt

Yet to impress outside? He averages 62 in Australia after 16 innings with 5 100's.

More than half of his 52 international tons have been scored outside of India.

Khaga asked a question earlier, which minefield of a pitch did Lara score runs on?

Lara scored 14% of his runs at the ARG. Of course that includes his two highest scores in Test cricket(no coincidence), 400 and 375.

Why did Lara fail to score Test centuries against Donald and Pollock in a 5-Test series, or Wasim and Waqar in a 3-Test series?

In reply to Devin

As I asked name me the great or outstanding bowlers currently as how Kohli is being considered as the best batsmen? Also you have ignored all the other factors I’ve mentioned where the game favors the batsmen.

In reply to azadtnt

If the game favours the batsmen to the degree some folks think, then why is the ICC considering 4-day test matches? Why are Test matches regularly ending inside 4 days, and why are so few Tests drawn?

Kohli has scored runs against Steyn, Morkel, and Philander in South Africa. Check their averages at home and get back to me.

He has scored runs in New Zealand against Southee and Bolt.

He has scored runs against Johnson, Hazelwood, and Harris in Australia. Then Starc, Hazelwood and co. Check their bowling averages at home and get back to me.

In reply to Devin

And how many runs has he scored against Anderson, Broad and Jordan (yes Jordan) in England??

In reply to azadtnt

Look, don't bother with Devin... he is lovestruck with the vi-Rat. My only issue with him is that he needs to denigrate other great batsmen in order to prop up his god!

In reply to cricketmygame

Currently, like while the series is currently being played on home soil in India?

In reply to Devin

What kinda dotish reasoning is that. Because of t20, batsmen are no longer willing to graft an innings. Batsmen are looking for fast easy runs. Hence more wickets are falling and games finish a hell of a lot faster now
And yes virat has one century on a dead wanderers pitch that ended in a draw. So what the hell does that mean? Marlon Samuels has a two hundreds again steyn, morkel and ntini. He also has a hundred against england in england, something Virat has not done as yet. Does that make him better than Kohli? Certainly not

In reply to Jumpstart

Dead Wanderers wicket? Perhaps as the match progressed. India batted first and scored 280. Kohli scored 119(181) at a strike rate of 65.74, and Rahane scored 47(137) at a strike rate of 34.3. That was it for India.

India's run rate was 2.72. Philander took 4 and Morkel took 3.

South Africa replied with 244. Zaheer Khan took 4, Ishant 4, and Shami 2.

Both teams piled up 400+ in their 2nd innings.

In reply to Jumpstart

So players are no longer willing to graft, but you have a lot of guys average 50 or thereabouts without their batting resembling anything from T20 cricket?

Waste Indies have been getting hammered in three and four days for the past 20 years. Long before T20 cricket.

Every test team has at least one or two slow poke batsmen. That hasn't changed.

In reply to Devin

And suddenly West Indies is the example? Batsmen are more attacking these days. 3/4 of Ab De villears' hundreds are under 100 ball. Steve Smith occasionally grats. David Warner is always attacking and so is kohli. Brendan Mccullum was the same. Even the keepers are attacking- de kock and bairstow. It is not that bowlers are better in this time. In fact that is one of the big complaints about pacers now. I think another issue is that players technically are not as good as the players say from the early to mid nineties hence when they come up against a real test, they are found wanting. For example, when they go to England or when they played on the WACA in Perth. Steyn and possibly Starc are the only bowlers to me who could make a test side in the 80s/90s which is the benchmark for me for pacers
Anyways, back to the kohli issue. Kohli has one hundred vs SA in SA. Marlon Samuels has two and both against steyn, morkel and co. He also has a hundred in England, something which has evaded kohli for his two trips there. Are you saying by that reasoning that Samuels is better than kohli?

In reply to Devin

And devin who scored centuries during that series. Who was in any frame of mind to play cricket after the players strile which was instigated by Pat Rousseau's arrogance. Brian scored a hundred against donald in an Odi in Bloefontein in 1992. You think scoring a test hundred against donald was outside of his ability? Similarly with the pakistan series, although lara instigated the bachanal on that tour. Nobody was in any mood to play cricket. Lara scored 96 against waqar and wasim at QPO in 1993 where the highest first innings total was 125 by pakistan. Pacers had taken the vast majority of the wickets. He was out by a spinner trying to cut for a hundred. Asif Mujtaba i believe. That same tour he scored hundreds against them in odis at sabina and kensington oval. Are you saying that lara could not score a test hundred vs wasim and waqar? Waqar already feels Brian Lara was the best batsman he bowled against in international cricket after Viv

In reply to Jumpstart

If people are going to ask me when Kohli has ever scored runs against a good bowling attack away from home, what do you expect me to say?

Obviously he scored runs against Steyn and co. in South Africa, Johnson, Harris, Hazelwood and co. in Australia, and Boult and Southee is New Zealand.

The reason why Marlon Samuels isn't better is because after 71 Test matches and 127 innings, he averages 32.64 with just 7 centuries.

In reply to Jumpstart

Man, you are making a lot of excuses for Lara. I don't care whether he had the ability to score a test ton against Donald, or Wasim and Waqar, the fact is, it didn't happen. You are blaaming the board for Lara's failures? Please.

The ODI century he scored came with West Indies chasing 186 for victory. And Donald bowled 10 overs for 24 in that match. The other bowlers were a bunch of nobody's.

In reply to Devin

Fannie De Villears was a nobody?.....ok
That is not the same person who took 3 wickets for one run against the soon to be world champions, Australia. When you start watching cricket de boss? That is like saying flintoff was garbage because he averages because his bowling average was 32. He also scored 123 vs Waqar and Wasim in that ODI tri-series

Bossman, how does that even make sense when the other 50% not scored in India is still on the subcontinent distributed between Sri lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, UAE and who knows where else. He still on the subcontinent. Apparently only India got flat tracks.

In reply to carl0002

EXACTLY. And the west indies pitches are essentially subcontinental wickets as well

In reply to carl0002

You dumb fu#king cu#t. How much cricket has he played in Pakistan? He has never played in the UAE.

17 of his 28 away tons have come outside of the subcontinent.

In reply to Devin

Devin more than half of his hundreds in tests have come on the sub continent.

In reply to cricketmygameThe best since Donbradman

In reply to Jumpstart

22 of Lara's 34 100's came in the West Indies, Sri Lanka and Pakistan(minus Waqar and Wasim).

In reply to Devin

The only place lara didn't score runs was in new zealand which was in 99/2000 purely based on foul decisions which even the NZ team and umpires admit to now and shane bond who was amazing when fit. That being said,back then, no pitch in the west indies was flat
Lara's 213 came on a ground where the australia's total was 256 so it clearly couldn't be a batting paradise.
Lara's 153 came against what wisden described as fast bowling of the highest quality.
And that is just a sample

In reply to Devin
Wow! how filthy, but I suppose that is not too much of a surprise considering it is said your head is shoved so far up Kholis colon, whatever is there need to get out some how.

In reply to Jumpstart

Kohli's 119 came against Steyn, Morkel, and Philander in South Africa. India scored 280. The second highest score came from Rahane(47). Kohli scored his runs quickly, everyone else struggled for dear life.

The pitches in the Caribbean have been dead for 20+ years.

In reply to Devin

Really. Using your logic, brian lara's 213 came after Australia(the world's #1 side) managed 256 in their first innings. In their second innings they did even worse, they made 177. Is that a batting pitch by your logic? And this was in 1999

In reply to Devin

Only TWO Test matches in SA.... He's played 5 Tests (10 innings) in England without scoring a single 50 and averages a paltry 13.40. Why don't you deal with that, you dumbass!

In reply to NineMiles

Even Tino best has a higher test score than kohli in england

In reply to Jumpstart

Whaaaahhhhhhh...................................!!