The Darts Forum

The forums magnum opus that should have been done before now, or has been and I've forgotten

Table so far

1 taylor

2nd bristow
3rd mvg
4th lowe
5th gando
6th barney
7th priestley
8th jocky
9th part
10th bob Anderson
11th Lewis
12th wade
13th wright
14th cross
15th Thornton
16th Harrington
17th lloyd
18th rees
19th price
20th dellar
21st warriner
22nd whitlock
23rd waites
24th dulla
25th adams
26th merv
27th hankey
28th gurney
29th fordham
30th beaton
31st evison
32nd Manley

Eric and mvg tied in the 1st poll so Eric takes 2nd virtue of winning more world titles

4th lowe won the vote by a landslide

Gando edges barney in the race for 5th
Barney romps to victory in the poll for 6th
The menace takes the 7th place poll
Jocky romps into 8th
Jp edges bob for 9th
Bob takes 10th
Fatpot takes 11th
Wade sneaks 12th
Wright clear in 13th
Cross romps to 14th
Thorn edges god for 15th
God romps to 16th
Lloyd 17th
Rees 18th
price 19th
Keith 20th
Warriner 21st
Whitlock clear in 22nd
Waites edges 23rd
Glenn edges 24th
Adam's takes 25th
Merv romps to 26th
Ted edges 27th
Gurney 28th
Fordham easily takes 29th
Beaton edges 30th
Evison takes 31st
Manley edges dfw for 32nd

Instead of polls I propose we cast our votes by writing. The post count, you know. But I like the idea

MVG second but could make a case for Bristow.

But MVG second.

You know Hankey belongs in this

Jimmi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:52 am MVG second but could make a case for Bristow.

But MVG second.

No objection to number 1?

This is DartsDatabase's top 20 of their All-Time Greats ranking:
1. Phil Taylor
2. Raymond van Barneveld
3. John Lowe
4. Eric Bristow
5. Jocky Wilson
6. Dennis Priestley
7. Michael van Gerwen
8. Bob Anderson
9. James Wade
10. Gary Anderson
11. Cliff Lazarenko
12. Martin Adams
13. Mike Gregory
14. Alan Warriner-Little
15. Adrian Lewis
16. Dave Whitcombe
17. Mervyn King
18. Ronnie Baxter
19. John Part
20. Rod Harrington

Names that missed out: Steve Beaton, Colin Lloyd, Peter Wright, Keith Deller, TED HANKEY, Glen Durrant (haha even below Hankey).
Cross isn't even in the top 50. Nor is Lim, or Price, or Suljovic, or Mark Webster.
Denis Ovens is 80th.

vizIIsto wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 11:10 am This is DartsDatabase's top 20 of their All-Time Greats ranking:
1. Phil Taylor
2. Raymond van Barneveld
3. John Lowe
4. Eric Bristow
5. Jocky Wilson
6. Dennis Priestley
7. Michael van Gerwen
8. Bob Anderson
9. James Wade
10. Gary Anderson
11. Cliff Lazarenko
12. Martin Adams
13. Mike Gregory
14. Alan Warriner-Little
15. Adrian Lewis
16. Dave Whitcombe
17. Mervyn King
18. Ronnie Baxter
19. John Part
20. Rod Harrington

Names that missed out: Steve Beaton, Colin Lloyd, Peter Wright, Keith Deller, TED HANKEY, Glen Durrant (haha even below Hankey).
Cross isn't even in the top 50. Nor is Lim, or Price, or Suljovic, or Mark Webster.
Denis Ovens is 80th.

That's bollocks

Randall wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 11:15 am

vizIIsto wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 11:10 amDenis Ovens is 80th.

That's bollocks

Quite right.

So a while back the FDI Twitter account, who ranks players in a way that works like the ELO ratings in chess, did a Fantasy Grand Slam with the 31 World Champions + Trina Gulliver and he put them into four pots based on peak FDI - the higher the better they were at their prime.
Although not individually ranked (I tried to here) these were the pots:

Pot 1: Taylor, Van Gerwen, Van Barneveld, Bristow, Lowe, Part, Adams, Durrant
Pot 2: Gary Anderson, Lewis, Wright, Cross, Priestley, Hankey, Waites, Wilson
Pot 3: Bunting, Webster, Mitchell, Klaasen, Fordham, Kist, Warren, David
Pot 4: Bob Anderson, Beaton, Deller, Burnett, Rees, Wallace, Walton, Gulliver

Which suggests that for example Durrant and Adams in their prime are better than Gary and Wright in their prime, and Wayne Warren beats Bob Anderson.

Of course there are also great players to have never won the worlds. Although they probably don't really belong high up in a top 20.

vizIIsto wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 11:23 am So a while back the FDI Twitter account, who ranks players in a way that works like the ELO ratings in chess, did a Fantasy Grand Slam with the 31 World Champions + Trina Gulliver and he put them into four pots based on peak FDI - the higher the better they were at their prime.
Although not individually ranked (I tried to here) these were the pots:

Pot 1: Taylor, Van Gerwen, Van Barneveld, Bristow, Lowe, Part, Adams, Durrant
Pot 2: Gary Anderson, Lewis, Wright, Cross, Priestley, Hankey, Waites, Wilson
Pot 3: Bunting, Webster, Mitchell, Klaasen, Fordham, Kist, Warren, David
Pot 4: Bob Anderson, Beaton, Deller, Burnett, Rees, Wallace, Walton, Gulliver

Which suggests that for example Durrant and Adams in their prime are better than Gary and Wright in their prime, and Wayne Warren beats Bob Anderson.

Senna's gonna love this.

lets just get taylor and mvg out the way and we can crack on with the ones up for debate

oohh just seen the poll

vizIIsto wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 11:23 am So a while back the FDI Twitter account, who ranks players in a way that works like the ELO ratings in chess, did a Fantasy Grand Slam with the 31 World Champions + Trina Gulliver and he put them into four pots based on peak FDI - the higher the better they were at their prime.
Although not individually ranked (I tried to here) these were the pots:

Pot 1: Taylor, Van Gerwen, Van Barneveld, Bristow, Lowe, Part, Adams, Durrant
Pot 2: Gary Anderson, Lewis, Wright, Cross, Priestley, Hankey, Waites, Wilson
Pot 3: Bunting, Webster, Mitchell, Klaasen, Fordham, Kist, Warren, David
Pot 4: Bob Anderson, Beaton, Deller, Burnett, Rees, Wallace, Walton, Gulliver

Which suggests that for example Durrant and Adams in their prime are better than Gary and Wright in their prime, and Wayne Warren beats Bob Anderson.

More bollocks

vizIIsto wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 11:23 am So a while back the FDI Twitter account, who ranks players in a way that works like the ELO ratings in chess, did a Fantasy Grand Slam with the 31 World Champions + Trina Gulliver and he put them into four pots based on peak FDI - the higher the better they were at their prime.
Although not individually ranked (I tried to here) these were the pots:

Pot 1: Taylor, Van Gerwen, Van Barneveld, Bristow, Lowe, Part, Adams, Durrant
Pot 2: Gary Anderson, Lewis, Wright, Cross, Priestley, Hankey, Waites, Wilson
Pot 3: Bunting, Webster, Mitchell, Klaasen, Fordham, Kist, Warren, David
Pot 4: Bob Anderson, Beaton, Deller, Burnett, Rees, Wallace, Walton, Gulliver

Which suggests that for example Durrant and Adams in their prime are better than Gary and Wright in their prime, and Wayne Warren beats Bob Anderson.

This perfectly demonstrates that FDI only works if the players actually compete against each other. When PDC and BDO players don't play each other, the best BDO player will have a hugely inflated rating, which makes the whole system a joke.

Baxter at 18 should be a lot higher!!

Randall wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 11:04 am

Jimmi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:52 am MVG second but could make a case for Bristow.

But MVG second.

No objection to number 1?

Nope.
Taylor is and will always be the greatest.
Shame he's a bit of a cock but there you go.

vizIIsto wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 11:23 am So a while back the FDI Twitter account, who ranks players in a way that works like the ELO ratings in chess, did a Fantasy Grand Slam with the 31 World Champions + Trina Gulliver and he put them into four pots based on peak FDI - the higher the better they were at their prime.
Although not individually ranked (I tried to here) these were the pots:

Pot 1: Taylor, Van Gerwen, Van Barneveld, Bristow, Lowe, Part, Adams, Durrant
Pot 2: Gary Anderson, Lewis, Wright, Cross, Priestley, Hankey, Waites, Wilson
Pot 3: Bunting, Webster, Mitchell, Klaasen, Fordham, Kist, Warren, David
Pot 4: Bob Anderson, Beaton, Deller, Burnett, Rees, Wallace, Walton, Gulliver

Which suggests that for example Durrant and Adams in their prime are better than Gary and Wright in their prime, and Wayne Warren beats Bob Anderson.

Fucking hell.

Pot 4 for bob
Absolutely ridiculous

Randall wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:18 pm Pot 4 for bob
Absolutely ridiculous

Those models are bullshit in general.

Pseudo-science.

sennafan24 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:19 pm

Randall wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:18 pm Pot 4 for bob
Absolutely ridiculous

Those models are bullshit in general.

Pseudo-science.

They are not. They are not applicable to every situation, which doesn't mean they are useless. You just have to know how to use and interpret them.

Like saying averages don't matter is obviously bullshit. They are a good indicator of performance and very useful in a lot of cases. That doesn't mean they are 100% reliable though.