Not even the best batsmen in history get "in" consistently: Brian Lara is one of the best in the history of the game and not even he passes 30 in much more than 4 innings out fo 9... and I suspect most top players fall somewhere nearer 4 in 10.

In terms of making a big impact.. even Jayasuria and Gilchrist have struggled to get past 50 in more than 1 in 4 games.... and I suspect most (like Sehwag, Symonds and Flintoff) struggle to manage a big impact in more than 1 game in 5.

Michael Clarke plays lower risk shots and looks to score off a higher proportion of delivieries: by cutting out the dot balls he not only manages a better strike rate than Chris Gayle, Ricky Ponting, Brian Lara and co... he posts the 8th highest batting average of all time (putting him in the company of greats like Kaheer Abbas and fractionally ABOVE Tendulkar).

Now the interesting bit: Clarke gets starts (30+) in more than half his innings (54%). He gets to 50 in MORE than 1 game in 4 (27%). It's this consistency that merits the no 4 spot.

On the broader theme... nudging and nurdling from the end of the power-plays until the 40th over has ALWAYS struck me as the way to go in ODIs: once the field goes back there's a single available off nearly every ball if you're good enough to find the gaps... and as such players don't take big risks anyway.. they can generally deliver a top strike rate in situations where the clatter of wickets the other end might oblige a big hitter to reign in his strokeplay.

Put it this way... If you had a stack of clones of Cameron White playing... the chances are that in 1 game in 3 or so... opponents would at some stage have the side becalmed as the side tried to halt the steady fall of wickets and found that without big hitting... they couldn't score. Sure, in one game in 3 they might post a HUGE total.... but winning tournaments is about posting competitive totals in every game not managing a mix of high and low scores!