Winning the toss...

[PowerForGood]

Aus 176W, 90L vs 154W, 93L (66% vs 62%)
Eng 152W, 102L vs 154W, 149L (60% vs 51%)
SAF 65W, 55L vs 54W, 65L (54% vs 45%)
WI 85W, 76L vs 67W, 70L (53% vs 49%)
Ind 55W, 62L vs 43W, 74L (47% vs 37%)
Pak 45W, 39L vs 58W, 50L (54% vs 54%)
SL 34W, 28L vs 22W, 39L (55% vs 36%)
NZ 37W, 72L vs 29W, 67L (34% vs 30%)
Zim 5W, 29L vs 3W, 20L (15% vs 13%)
Ban 1W, 25L vs 0W, 27L (4% vs 0%)
Overall - 655W, 584L vs 584W, 655L (53% vs 47%)
Overall (excl Zim, Ban) 649 W, 530L vs 530W, 649L (55% vs 45%)
Overall (since 1970 excl Zim, Ban) 406W, 338L vs 338W, 406 L (55% vs 45%)

This means that, on historical average, winning the toss provides a 10% advantage before a ball is bowled. This statistic is independent of covered pitches vs uncovered pitches (chosen a nominal year of 1970, but the data seems consistent regardless of era)

[dr nick]

why would you exclude zim and bangladesh?

[Team Mo']

why would you exclude zim and bangladesh?
Because they are so shit that the result of the toss has no effect on how they play. :rolleyes:

Pretty simple.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

To me the toss is crucial in places like India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. To me if you don't bat first there your chance of winning isn't nil, but it is greatly diminished. The team winning the toss is on the front foot before a ball is bowled on a flat deck they are nearly assured 400+ taking the other team all but out of the game.

[Simon_Nesbit]

Looking at that India and Sri Lanka have the greatest advantage (or reliance) on winning the toss. Both have traditionally flat wickets, with batsmen and spinners dominating.

Australia, New Zealand and Pakistan seem to have the least. Pakistan have had some great fast bowlers, and the other two generally prepare the 'best' pitches (helping the quicker bowlers early on, but balanced for both sides).

[DaRick]

why would you exclude zim and bangladesh?

Neither are test-class teams. Both teams just serve to skew batting and bowling averages greatly.