Selection issues confront both New Zealand and England ahead of the second test starting tomorrow - but from vastly different standpoints.
In New Zealand's case, they will arrive at the Basin Reserve brimming with self belief on the back of their resounding 189-run win at Hamilton on Sunday.
They will be tempted to stick with the winning XI, but have a couple of options to consider depending on what they read in the pitch today and tomorrow morning. But essentially theirs will be a positive train of thought.
New Zealand coach John Bracewell is pushing that message.
"We have very few draws in test cricket these days because of the way we play our cricket," he said.
"We make no apology for that. It's the saviour of test cricket that there are results and intrigue over the last couple of days."
Bracewell said Australia had set the trend to play "result" cricket. Other countries are cottoning on.#"You never defend the scoreboard. We're looking to compete in every match - we've just got to get the skill base to compete over long periods of time," he added.
Captain Daniel Vettori yesterday hinted he would be keen to stick with his winning combination.
But the pitch is expected to have good pace and carry and that might call for an extra paceman, with Mark Gillespie coming in for offspinner Jeetan Patel.
There is, however, a powerful argument to play your best four bowlers whatever the conditions, using allrounder Jacob Oram to do the holding job, which he did expertly in Hamilton, with 25 overs for 29 runs.
Patel bowled well in Hamilton. There is a spring in his step to match the bounce he could get from the Basin pitch. He might also consider whispering in Bracewell's ear that the second-most recent test at the Basin - overlooking the Bangladesh test in January - produced 10 wickets each for Vettori and Sri Lankan Muttiah Muralitharan.
The most vulnerable batsman is Mathew Sinclair, as is so often the case in his curious test career. He didn't help his case with 8 and 2 in Hamilton, but will likely survive. Miss out again at the Basin and it could be curtains. The option is uncapped Grant Elliott who, with perfect timing, hit a century for Wellington while the test was in progress.
England's situation is different. They were so badly beaten, and performed so dispiritedly, in Hamilton, they have to find a bottle of happy pills smartly.
"It's a matter of inner strength," captain Michael Vaughan said. "We have no option now but to play positive cricket and have a go. We have to get back on the horse."
You might have thought international sport was about being positive in the first place, but, in Hamilton, England were not.
Coach Peter Moores has hinted at change. If they put out the same XI on the basis that they cannot perform so poorly again, that would be a negative mindset.
And if they did, it would mean retaining Steve Harmison, who is clearly a busted flush and should be axed.
The Harmison of 2004-05, when he took 113 of his 212 test wickets, is a distant memory.
The pace and bounce are gone; the fire has died out. He arrived in New Zealand underprepared and was a waste of space in the first test, when he bowled only four expensive overs in the second innings and took one for 121 in 27 overs in the match.
Stuart Broad should get his place. For a start he's 21, eight years less weary than Harmison, he is lively, gets lift and bowled impressively during the ODI series.
England might figure a hard, greenish Basin Reserve is Harmison's best chance of making an impact in the series. But the same applies to Broad.
Harmison pocketed almost £250,000 ($632,000) from the England Cricket Board last year for playing seven tests, and that's before his Durham county contract and other extras are included. He does not play one-day internationals. Even by current eye-popping standards, that's plain barmy.