Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
- Deadshot
- Posts: 3654
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 2:53 pm
- Contact:
Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
Ian White. Ranked 11th in the world has made it to a SINGLE televised quarter final since 2016 started. That being the 2017 UK Open.
No doubt there are plenty of other cases similar but the fact this black hole of entertainment is ranked so highly surely is a stunning indictment?
No doubt there are plenty of other cases similar but the fact this black hole of entertainment is ranked so highly surely is a stunning indictment?
- M H
- Site Admin
- Posts: 75630
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 10:24 am
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
No format will ever be perfect, just look how far Rob Cross and possibly Wright will drop this year should they fail to defend.
I do disagree to the extent that floor money is relevant and rewards achievement. That said I'm sure there's a better way
I do disagree to the extent that floor money is relevant and rewards achievement. That said I'm sure there's a better way
When you actually feel anger over a place like this it's time to get a life
- The Thorn
- Posts: 83253
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 5:36 pm
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
The rankings aren't perfect of course. However I don't think the ratio of floor and TV money is the cause of the problem to be honest.
Both is darts, the same game at the end of the day. I think everyone who follows darts knows White isn't really going to pull up any trees in TV events. It's up to people behind them to catch up. You would back Joe Cullen to beat White on TV but he can't win a game on the floor at all.
Rankings shouldn't only reward the better players but commitment as well. As soon as you increase the impact of TV money on the rankings, you put all the rank and file players in a harder situation and you give a big advantage to a select few. The advantage which they already have, qualifying for TV easier, being seeded in tour events, the various non-ranking events etc.
Both is darts, the same game at the end of the day. I think everyone who follows darts knows White isn't really going to pull up any trees in TV events. It's up to people behind them to catch up. You would back Joe Cullen to beat White on TV but he can't win a game on the floor at all.
Rankings shouldn't only reward the better players but commitment as well. As soon as you increase the impact of TV money on the rankings, you put all the rank and file players in a harder situation and you give a big advantage to a select few. The advantage which they already have, qualifying for TV easier, being seeded in tour events, the various non-ranking events etc.
Spread positivity and love. BDO4LIFE
- thegentle
- Posts: 14114
- Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 8:52 am
- Location: Watford
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
At the end of the day, floor money has to be rewarded too, and if there's a player like White who earns a disproportionate amount away from the cameras, that's not the Order of Merit's fault. Really, White is an outlier, I don't think anyone else is as good on the floor but as disappointing on TV, but what can you do? I dare say every other mid-ranking player's proportion of TV/ProTour earnings are a lot more in synch with each other.
If anything, the problem with the Order of Merit is the disproportionate amount on offer at the Worlds and the fact that a big win 2 years ago can keep you clinging on to a high ranking
If anything, the problem with the Order of Merit is the disproportionate amount on offer at the Worlds and the fact that a big win 2 years ago can keep you clinging on to a high ranking
- StevieBoy
- Posts: 4145
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 11:49 am
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
I think it does on the whole. When Hamilton, Newton form dropped they spiralled down the rankings. Pipe was prolific on the floor and now he's struggling. Gilding had his moment of glory.
Ok in Whites case I agree he's clung on and I don't know how.(Picking up a Euro win certainly helps)
For the Players Championship, maybe play the Q/f to the final on a stage. In the evening in front of a crowd.
Could be a solution. Also raise the prize money for the semi and the final only.
The lower ranked players carry on getting their prize money but the better players get the greater reward
Ok in Whites case I agree he's clung on and I don't know how.(Picking up a Euro win certainly helps)
For the Players Championship, maybe play the Q/f to the final on a stage. In the evening in front of a crowd.
Could be a solution. Also raise the prize money for the semi and the final only.
The lower ranked players carry on getting their prize money but the better players get the greater reward
- thegentle
- Posts: 14114
- Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 8:52 am
- Location: Watford
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
Not sure how that would work logistically, but that's a nice idea. White might still nab a title or two though just like he did on the Euro Tour last year lolStevieBoy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:09 pm I think it does on the whole. When Hamilton, Newton form dropped they spiralled down the rankings. Pipe was prolific on the floor and now he's struggling. Gilding had his moment of glory.
Ok in Whites case I agree he's clung on and I don't know how.(Picking up a Euro win certainly helps)
For the Players Championship, maybe play the Q/f to the final on a stage. In the evening in front of a crowd.
Could be a solution. Also raise the prize money for the semi and the final only.
The lower ranked players carry on getting their prize money but the better players get the greater reward
- cannibal
- Posts: 7159
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 12:41 am
- Location: Tipping cows in fields Elysian
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
The oom isn't the problem. Granted I think that a better distribution of prize money would make it more interesting in the 4 to 16 positions as it would be tighter race .
The problem is darts is a sport dominated by 2 or 3 players at a time. Don't know why that is but it seems it is. Think thru the past and it always seems that a small group consistently wins everything. Occasionally a price or a gurney wins a title bit for the most part everything else won by 1 or 2 players.
The problem is darts is a sport dominated by 2 or 3 players at a time. Don't know why that is but it seems it is. Think thru the past and it always seems that a small group consistently wins everything. Occasionally a price or a gurney wins a title bit for the most part everything else won by 1 or 2 players.
We Do Not Desire Tributes.
We Desire Information.
We Seek The Worm Drink Who Has Lately Betrayed His Nation
We Desire Information.
We Seek The Worm Drink Who Has Lately Betrayed His Nation
- tungsten tossers
- Posts: 129528
- Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2018 3:09 pm
- Location: Surrey
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
Good point...Phil said it many times, that if the players want to win tournaments, they have put the dedication and practice in.cannibal wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:58 pm The oom isn't the problem. Granted I think that a better distribution of prize money would make it more interesting in the 4 to 16 positions as it would be tighter race .
The problem is darts is a sport dominated by 2 or 3 players at a time. Don't know why that is but it seems it is. Think thru the past and it always seems that a small group consistently wins everything. Occasionally a price or a gurney wins a title bit for the most part everything else won by 1 or 2 players.
Many of these players are earning a decent living out of darts but don't seem to have the dedication as much as Phil and MvG.
I think a lot of them get caught up in their own hype, Snackpot being a prime example. After he won the worlds for a second time he thought he was unbeatable and seemed to lose focus, whether that was due to exbo's, lack of practice, too many pies etc, I don't know.
Tennis used to be the same, for many years dominated by two or three players, then someone retires and another takes their place.
The likes of Cullen, Smith, Chizzy and a few others don't seem to have the dedication and mentality to win a major...
Like him or not, White puts his dedication into the floor events and does well consistently on them, which is why he is where he is in the rankings. His TV issue is more a mental thing than anything to do with ability I think.
- PT13
- Posts: 4260
- Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2016 5:14 pm
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
The Order of Merit system based on prize money worked well from its introduction after the 2007 World Championship until about 2015. Since then, it's become increasingly distorted because of the growing gap between World Championship prize money and the prize money of the other big TV majors, and this pattern shows no sign of really changing. It needs to be addressed, either with a bigger increase in prize money at those other TV majors to narrow the gap with the World Championship (which seems unlikely, knowing capitalist shenanigans), or by a points system being introduced for the World Championship.
- The Ginge Reaper
- Posts: 39384
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 3:09 pm
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
Let me go and get a pen.
Big changes on the way ! We've heard it before but it's different this time !!!! , I believe Bdo gonna grow x
Tony O'Shea, 6th January 2016
Tony O'Shea, 6th January 2016
- JH01
- Posts: 800
- Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 5:35 pm
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
How would having a points system for the World Championship work alongside the order of merit for everything else? I think the PDC should have a fixed points system for all tournaments. The order of merit is unfair if prize money is continuing to rise year on year.PT13 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:43 pm It needs to be addressed, either with a bigger increase in prize money at those other TV majors to narrow the gap with the World Championship (which seems unlikely, knowing capitalist shenanigans), or by a points system being introduced for the World Championship.
- M H
- Site Admin
- Posts: 75630
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 10:24 am
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
I could counter that and say every player has the same chance to climb the rankings, or drop. Perform well and do well, lose it and drop. Same for allJH01 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:42 pmHow would having a points system for the World Championship work alongside the order of merit for everything else? I think the PDC should have a fixed points system for all tournaments. The order of merit is unfair if prize money is continuing to rise year on year.PT13 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:43 pm It needs to be addressed, either with a bigger increase in prize money at those other TV majors to narrow the gap with the World Championship (which seems unlikely, knowing capitalist shenanigans), or by a points system being introduced for the World Championship.
When you actually feel anger over a place like this it's time to get a life
-
- Posts: 3278
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:07 pm
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
Unfairness is being introduced by rising prize money only in the sense that it devalues the older of the two years covered by the OOM, since it's easier to collect the same amount of money in the later season. But given that nearly all people seem to think those older results should be valued at less than the full tariff anyway (at 0% for those in favour of a pure one-year list), I have no idea why anyone would have an issue with rising prize money as such.
- JH01
- Posts: 800
- Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 5:35 pm
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
It's a two-year system, thus the reward for making a world final for example one year should be the same as the previous year and the following year. I don't have a problem with the prize money rising, the more players that can make a comfortable living at the game the better, I just don't think it should be the factor that determines the rankings.
- PT13
- Posts: 4260
- Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2016 5:14 pm
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
In men's tennis, for example, it's 2000 points for winning 1 of the 4 majors. The next level down, the year-end ATP Finals is 1500 points if you win it undefeated, then the 9 Masters 1000 events with 1000 points for winning one of them, down to ATP 500 tournaments and then ATP 250 tournaments.
Can't darts do something similar?
Can't darts do something similar?
- thegentle
- Posts: 14114
- Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 8:52 am
- Location: Watford
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
Yes, it's called the BDO rankingsPT13 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:41 am In men's tennis, for example, it's 2000 points for winning 1 of the 4 majors. The next level down, the year-end ATP Finals is 1500 points if you win it undefeated, then the 9 Masters 1000 events with 1000 points for winning one of them, down to ATP 500 tournaments and then ATP 250 tournaments.
Can't darts do something similar?
I think the PDC could eventually follow suit, but I think at this stage, darts is still an emerging sport desperate for credibility, hence the need to highlight how much money is in the game (this is arguably counter-intuitive, but the game is growing and growing so there's no inclination to change it at the moment)
-
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:43 pm
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
It surprises me that Uncle Bazza hasn't revamped Darts to reflect the Snooker scheduling.
- Captain Hobo
- Posts: 15450
- Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 8:06 am
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
In what way?Dining Room Darts wrote: ↑Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:12 pm It surprises me that Uncle Bazza hasn't revamped Darts to reflect the Snooker scheduling.
"The United States will be the first nation to land an astronaut on Nars"
-
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:43 pm
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
Have 20-30 3 day+ tournaments, allows the newbies etc a bit of stage time in front of a crowd, less daunting if they get to play in the majors/TV events. And seriously taking proper competitive darts around the world, not just the World Series.
- Captain Hobo
- Posts: 15450
- Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 8:06 am
- Contact:
Re: Order of merit - Not fit for purpose?
The European Tour is good for allowing new players time on stage.
I really don't think you can compare the snooker and darts schedules too closely. Most snooker tournaments go for at least a week, and they seem to run back to back all the time. Darts can't fit much more in now anyway with the PL, World Series and European Tour.
I really don't think you can compare the snooker and darts schedules too closely. Most snooker tournaments go for at least a week, and they seem to run back to back all the time. Darts can't fit much more in now anyway with the PL, World Series and European Tour.
"The United States will be the first nation to land an astronaut on Nars"
Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot], Bing [Bot], Captain Hobo, Greipel, HappyBayer, Majestic-12 [Bot], Robinski, shenmue, skweezit, The Crow, Tommo and 100 guests