WADC Vault 3.0 in Numbers: The Players, Performances and Strongest Venues

 

Yesterday, we took a look at ADC Vault 19, examining the players who won the most matches, the range of winning averages and the venues that produced the strongest competition.

Today, it's the turn of WADC Vault 3.0.

And once again, there are some fascinating numbers.

Using the Q4QS Database, I've been looking at the players who stood out, those who accumulated the most victories, and some of the performances that perhaps deserve a little more recognition.

As with the ADC series, there is more than one way to measure success.

Over 600 Players in the Rankings

Let's start with participation.

The WADC Vault 3.0 export contains 602 ranked players, with a combined total of 4,373 match wins and the same number of recorded losses.

That represents 4,373 recorded match results, based on the player statistics in the export.

It's a substantial amount of competitive darts, and behind those figures are players with very different experiences and ambitions.

Some will have entered numerous tournaments throughout the series. Others may have played just once or twice.

But every one of them has contributed to the competition.

Who Won the Most Matches?

When it comes to match victories, one player stands out.

Eve Watson recorded 68 victories from 73 matches, giving her an impressive winning percentage of 93.2%.

But she wasn't the only player accumulating victories.

Player	Wins	Losses
Eve Watson	68	5
Kelly Stevens	64	10
Jane Price	62	15
Cerys Skyrme-Davies	51	34
Joanne Oldershaw	48	2
Lynsey Childs	48	12
Susan Ramsay	46	19
Bridget McGuire	42	7
Rhian O'Sullivan	40	9
Anna Pearce	40	7

There are some interesting differences here.

Kelly Stevens and Jane Price both passed 60 victories, demonstrating the value of regular participation and consistently winning matches.

Cerys Skyrme-Davies played 85 matches, winning 51 of them. That is a considerable amount of competitive experience across one series.

Meanwhile, Joanne Oldershaw's 48 victories came with just two defeats.

And that brings us to another interesting set of figures.

Winning Is One Thing — Hardly Ever Losing Is Another

A high number of match victories is impressive, but what about the players who were particularly difficult to beat?

Looking at players with at least 20 recorded matches, some of the standout winning percentages were:

Player	Record	Win percentage
Joanne Oldershaw	48 wins, 2 losses	96.0%
Jackie Brighton	20 wins, 1 loss	95.2%
Eve Watson	68 wins, 5 losses	93.2%
Sue Davies	27 wins, 2 losses	93.1%
Dani Kearns	36 wins, 3 losses	92.3%
Amanda Harwood	31 wins, 3 losses	91.2%

These are outstanding records.

Joanne Oldershaw losing only twice in 50 matches is particularly striking.

Eve Watson's achievement is equally impressive when you consider that she played 73 matches.

Of course, players enter different numbers of tournaments and face different levels of opposition, but these figures certainly deserve recognition.

There were also two players with unbeaten records across at least ten matches: Rebecca Rose, with 14 wins from 14, and Steph Clarke, with ten wins from ten.

The Scoring Performances

Averages are only one measure of a player's performance, but they can tell us something about the standard being produced.

Among players with at least 20 recorded matches, the highest overall match averages in the export were:

Player	Average	Matches
Rhian O'Sullivan	77.28	49
Eve Watson	72.95	73
Jackie Brighton	63.78	21
Joanne Oldershaw	62.46	50
Sue Davies	61.88	29
Sarah Roberts	61.80	25
Amanda Harwood	61.13	34
Dani Kearns	60.72	39

Rhian O'Sullivan leads this particular measure, averaging 77.28 across 49 recorded matches.

Eve Watson's 72.95 across 73 matches is another outstanding achievement.

What makes these figures interesting is the number of matches involved. Producing a high average in one short match is one thing; maintaining a strong standard over dozens of matches is quite another.

These are the overall averages reported by the Q4QS Database, rather than the highest individual match averages.

Where Was the Competition Strongest?

We have also been examining tournament strength across the WADC Vault 3.0 venues.

The Q4QS tournament-strength measure is designed to give an indication of the level of competition, rather than simply rewarding the venues with the most entrants.

Our five leading venues were:

Venue	Q4QS tournament strength
Briton Ferry Workies	1.151
Penybanc RFC	1.077
Copa, Caernarfon	1.009
The 9 Darter, Port Talbot	0.997
Arrows Darts Venue, Resolven	0.986

Briton Ferry Workies finished comfortably ahead in this measure, with Penybanc RFC in second.

It is also interesting to see the strength of competition across several Welsh venues.

These rankings measure the strength of individual tournament fields, rather than declaring that every event at one venue was stronger than every event elsewhere.

The Numbers Don't Tell Every Story

There is always a temptation with darts statistics to concentrate on the players at the top.

And rightly so, because some of these performances are exceptional.

But I also think we should recognise the players who keep entering, keep competing and keep trying to improve.

Not everybody is going to win 60 matches or average over 70.

For some, reaching a knockout stage might be a major achievement. For others, winning a first match or taking a stronger opponent close could be the highlight of their series.

And sometimes, just having the confidence to enter a tournament in the first place is an achievement.

That's why I enjoy looking at these figures.

They celebrate the outstanding players, but they also remind us how much darts is being played beyond the professional game.

WADC Vault 3.0 has produced some excellent performances, plenty of competitive matches and a growing collection of statistics worth celebrating.

And with another series to come, there will be plenty more stories to tell.

All player figures are taken from the Q4QS Database WADC Vault 3.0 ranking export. Tournament-strength figures are from the separate Q4QS venue-strength analysis. Figures reflect the records available in those datasets.