can you measure..................

[Randall]

how much taylor is better than the others using last nights stats?

was thinking at work today, last night playing awful by his standard with a double in her averaged smack on 90. in this he had 55 darts that didnt score at the start of legs.

take someone like winstanley or lloyd who have that as years average straight in.

is it possible to say that over 9 sets he is those 55 darts better than the those players? is that a quantifiable measure or have i cocked up my thinking?

[Noisycrowds]

hes a god randall

[Sprocket501]

Hey Randall.....




























Hush now!

[The Ginge Reaper]

You cant compare an average in a double start against an average in a straight start. Even if Taylor did hit 40 with his first dart every time, in normal matches he has the option of hitting 60 with his first dart every time. So the two are uncomparable.

[M H]

Bradders is totally correct that the comparison isn't there, but.

To average 90 with 55 scoring darts scoring nothing says quite a bit in itself. It's rare that Taylor gets beat playing well and his B or C game has been enough on many occasions to win. The point being that to beat Taylor his opponent has to play his A game and Taylor turn up on an off day. That's how far ahead of the rest he really is.

[Randall]

Bradders is totally correct that the comparison isn't there, but.

To average 90 with 55 scoring darts scoring nothing says quite a bit in itself. It's rare that Taylor gets beat playing well and his B or C game has been enough on many occasions to win. The point being that to beat Taylor his opponent has to play his A game and Taylor turn up on an off day. That's how far ahead of the rest he really is.

i wasnt thinking about the ones that went in tops but like you say the ones he missed altogether.

55 darts scoring nothing and ends with winstanleys year average suggests he could give him a 55 dart advantage and still win.

what am i missing?

[M H]

Bradders is totally correct that the comparison isn't there, but.

To average 90 with 55 scoring darts scoring nothing says quite a bit in itself. It's rare that Taylor gets beat playing well and his B or C game has been enough on many occasions to win. The point being that to beat Taylor his opponent has to play his A game and Taylor turn up on an off day. That's how far ahead of the rest he really is.

i wasnt thinking about the ones that went in tops but like you say the ones he missed altogether.

55 darts scoring nothing and ends with winstanleys year average suggests he could give him a 55 dart advantage and still win.

what am i missing?

Nothing in my opinion mate, as I said I think it shows how far Taylor really is ahead of the chasing pack.

[Randall]

followed to its logical conclusion for 13 legs winstanley could play with 4 darts and they would be equal!

[M H]

followed to its logical conclusion for 13 legs winstanley could play with 4 darts and they would be equal!

To follow to a logical conclusion you'd have to excluse the WGP completely but I don't know what Taylor has averaged this year. I'd also add that the difference between a ton and a 90 average is give or take one dart but in reality it doesn't work that way.

Player 1 with the throw goes out in 15 averaging a ton, player 2 is left on 32 averaging 115 for the leg.

Averages are a decent guide but dont tell the full story

[Randall]

you can make statistics say pretty much anything in truth.

taylor averaging 110 straight in against some averging 80, somewhere down the line they would get beat with more darts.

[Noisycrowds]

taylor is a legend and is the highest scorere ever in darts , thats what people have to live with
many players average over 100 for a set or two or 6 legs but taylor does it over 7 sets or 30 legs
there lies the difference

taylor is consistantly brilliant others are sporadic

right now that shits sorted who wants to see a cock