Bradman’s best 10-innings stretch was during 1937-46, when he scored 1236 runs at an average of 154.50
The scores were 212, 169, 51, 144*, 18, 102*, 103, 16, 187 and 234.
Also relevant here is “Alex”‘s comment, reproduced below.
Also, regarding the ‘best 10-innings stretch’. Bradman scored 1370 runs in 10 innings during 1930 and 1931: 131, 254, 1, 334, 14, 232, 4, 25, 223, 152. There were no not-outs during this period however, so his average was ‘only’ 137.0.
3. The worst 10-innings stretch
Bradman’s worst 10-innings stretch started during the second body line test during 1932-33 and continued until 1934 when he scored 426 runs (in 11 innings) at an average of 38.72. He finished this streak with his monumental 304 at Headingley during 1934.
The scores were 8, 66, 76, 24, 48, 71, 29, 25, 36, 13 and 30.
4. Highest average reached (after 10 innings)
Bradman reached his highest career average of 112.29 after the Adelaide Test against South Africa, in which he scored 299*.
5. Lowest average reached (after 10 innings)
Bradman reached his lowest career average, after passing the initial period of 10 tests, of 89.56 after the Old Trafford Test against England during 1934. Not surprisingly this was the end of his worst streak, referred to elsewhere in this article.
6. When the average of 100.00 was reached
Surprisingly Bradman did not have a great start to his career. He reached an average of 100.00 (agreed very few have ever touched this milestone) only after 15 innings
7. Quality of opposition bowling
Surprisingly the bowling Bradman faced in his career was slightly below all time average. 29.62 against 29.50. However it must be noted that he faced this level of bowling almost all the time. The all-time average arrived consists of 40s and 20s scattered across the 1800 odd Test matches.
8. Runs scored in each batting position
Batting Position 3 4 5 6 7
Runs scored 5078 485 427 681 325
Batting Average 103.63 53.89 142.33 97.29 162.50
The No. 7 total is bolstered by that amazing innings of 270 referred to elsewhere in this article.
9. Analysis by batting position
Bradman’s Batting Position Average is 3.65, indicating that he batted at No. 3 most of the time. For the record he batted at No. 3 a total of 56 times (70%).
10. Analysis of 100s
This is the one measure where he has yielded to a contemporary batsman. The average of the 29 hundreds Bradman has scored in Test cricket is a very high 185.97. Till a few weeks back, he was the No.1 batsman in this regard. Sehwag overtook this figure with his 319 at Chennai. However Bradman’s 100s frequency of 1.8 Tests per hundred is way ahead of any one else.
11. Home/Away runs scored
Not so surprisingly, considering his success in England, Bradman’s away performance is superior to his Australian performances. He has scored 2674 runs away at an average of 102.85 while in Australia, he has scored 4322 runs at an average of 98.22.
12. How far ahead of the next
Just to show how far ahead Bradman is of the other batsmen, a relative scale table is shown below.
Measure Bradman % Next Best % Difference
Batting Avge 99.96 100.0 68.38 68.47 31.53 (Hussey)
Runs per test 134.53 100.0 99.54 74.00 26.00 (Headley)
Tests per 100 1.79 100.0 2.20 81.00 19.00 (Headley)
Inns per 100 2.76 100.0 4.00 69.00 31.00 (Headley)
13. Man of the Match awards
Hey what is this, no Man of the Match awards were given when Bradman played. True. So I have gone through the scorecards and using the Innings Rating points, determined which player could have got the MOM awards, if these were given. Bradman would have got no less than 16 MOM awards in the 52 tests played, a frequency of 3.25 tests per award. Compare this with the current leaders. The best is a frequency of 6.00.
Kallis 123 20 6.15
Muralitharan 123 19 6.47
Wasim Akram 104 17 6.12
Shane Warne 145 17 8.52
Ambrose 84 14 6.00
14. Movement of averages

Finally a footnote. I am not sure whether I would jump with joy if someone, as reported recently, conclusively proved that Bradman scored those elusive four runs, by mistake credited to Jack Ryder, during 1929. The figure of 99.94 is etched into the memory of people and sounds far better than 100.00. It also confirms a nice human element to one pervceived to be a super-human.