Is Darts Becoming a Young Man's Game? 19 Years of PDC Rankings Reveal a Generational Shift

 

Quest For Q School | Q4QS Statistical Research

Luke Littler has changed the way people think about age in professional darts. Here is a player who reached the very top of the sport before most people have even worked out what they want to do for a living.

And he isn't alone. Players such as Josh Rock and Gian van Veen have emerged through the professional ranks, while younger talents like Mitchell Lawrie suggest there could be plenty more to come.

But it got me thinking.

Is professional darts genuinely getting younger, or have a handful of exceptional young players simply made it look that way?

I decided to investigate using 19 years of PDC world rankings, examining the top 20 players in every year from 2007 through to 2025.

That's 380 ranking positions across 19 annual snapshots. I matched the players with their dates of birth and examined how the average age and the balance between different age groups have changed.

The results were quite revealing.

The PDC top 20 is getting younger

In 2007, the average age of a player in the world's top 20 was 38.70 years.

By 2025, that figure had fallen to 35.15 years.

That's a reduction of 3.55 years.

However, the really interesting part is what happened between those dates.

Year	Average age	Players aged 40+
2007	38.70	11
2010	39.65	11
2015	39.80	11
2020	40.50	11
2021	37.20	7
2022	37.10	6
2023	36.90	5
2024	36.55	5
2025	35.15	5

For much of the period, the average age fluctuated around 39 or 40.

Indeed, as recently as 2020, the world's top 20 averaged 40.5 years old.

Then something changed.

The average has fallen in each of the five subsequent annual snapshots. By 2025, the top 20 was more than five years younger on average than it had been in 2020.

So this doesn't look like a steady decline spanning the whole 19 years. It looks more like a relatively stable period followed by a substantial recent change.

It's not just about the teenagers

Perhaps my favourite finding concerns players in their thirties.

When discussing younger players, it's tempting to concentrate entirely on teenagers and those in their early twenties. But they are only part of the story.

Look at how the top 20 was divided into age groups in 2007, 2020 and 2025.

Age group	2007	2020	2025
Under 25	2	0	3
25–29	0	2	2
30–39	7	7	10
40 and over	11	11	5
Total	20	20	20

Back in 2007, more than half of the top 20 were aged 40 or older.

Even in 2020, the same was true.

By 2025, there were only five.

Meanwhile, players aged 30–39 now account for half the world's top 20.

That suggests something more significant than a few teenage prodigies suddenly appearing.

The age profile of professional darts is changing across an entire generation.

Players in their thirties are increasingly occupying places that, historically, were more commonly held by players in their forties and fifties.

And at the same time, more players under 30 are appearing alongside them.

Are players breaking through at younger ages?

I also looked at players entering the top 20 between successive annual ranking snapshots.

The findings support the wider age trend.

Period	Top-20 arrivals	Average arrival age
2008–2014	26	39.65
2015–2020	22	36.82
2021–2025	17	32.76

The average age of an arriving player has dropped by almost seven years between the earliest and latest periods.

In 2008–2014, only three of the 26 arrivals were under 30.

In 2021–2025, seven of the 17 arrivals were under 30.

There is an important qualification here: these figures include players returning to the top 20, not just players making their first-ever appearance. They also use annual snapshots, so a player who briefly entered and left between snapshots would not be captured.

Nevertheless, the direction is striking.

The changing age of players entering the elite appears to be one of the main reasons the overall top 20 is getting younger.

Is the Development Tour making a difference?

This is where the investigation becomes particularly interesting.

The PDC Youth Tour began in 2011, developing into the Development Tour we know today. The Junior Darts Corporation also helped create a more structured competitive environment for younger players.

Could these developments be contributing to the changes we are now seeing?

There are certainly some compelling examples.

Michael van Gerwen won a PDC Youth Tour event in 2011 and appeared in our 2012 top-20 snapshot.

Luke Humphries won Development Tour events in 2017 and appeared in our top 20 in 2021.

Josh Rock enjoyed Development Tour success in 2022 and was in the top 20 by 2024.

Luke Littler won Development Tour events in 2023 before entering the top 20 in 2024, aged just 17.

Gian van Veen is another example of a player progressing through the youth system into the world's elite.

However, not everyone follows the same path.

Martin Schindler and Mike De Decker both had Development Tour success several years before reaching the top 20.

This tells us that the route from promising youngster to established professional is far from identical for everyone.

It also suggests that the development system may be helping to produce a larger pool of potential elite players, rather than simply making every player progress faster.

Our research has established a connection between some top-20 players and the Development Tour. It has not established that the Tour caused the overall decline in age.

That is an important distinction.

What do the Development Tour rankings tell us?

I've also started collecting the final Development Tour rankings for 2020–2025.

They contain plenty of familiar names.

Ryan Meikle topped the 2020 rankings, Nathan Rafferty headed the 2022 list, Gian van Veen led in 2023 and Wessel Nijman finished first in 2024.

Luke Littler was second in the 2023 standings, while Josh Rock was second in 2022.

But here's the question I find particularly interesting.

How many Development Tour players actually go on to become established members of the world's top 20, 32 or 64?

And is that percentage increasing?

We shouldn't judge the 2024 or 2025 Development Tour players too quickly. Many have barely begun their professional careers, while the earlier generations have had years to establish themselves.

A future Q4QS study will compare different Development Tour generations over equivalent periods, looking at how many reach the professional elite and how long it takes.

That should help us understand whether the youth development system is genuinely improving the progression rate.

Will the PDC top 20 continue getting younger?

The obvious next question is whether this trend will continue.

I think there are reasonable grounds to suspect it might, although I wouldn't expect the average age to keep falling at the extraordinary rate seen since 2020.

After all, today's young stars will eventually get older themselves.

Luke Littler will be 28 in 2035. A player can spend more than a decade near the top of professional darts and still be relatively young compared with some of the established stars of previous generations.

But maintaining a younger top 20 requires a continuing supply of talented newcomers.

If the Development Tour, JDC and wider junior darts structure continue producing players capable of competing at the highest level, the balance could shift further.

A cautious illustrative scenario would put the average top-20 age somewhere around 34–36 by 2030, with a similar or slightly younger profile by 2035.

That isn't a formal prediction. We would need a more detailed model of player progression, retirement and ranking turnover to produce one.

For now, the historical evidence is strong enough to say that the PDC top 20 has undergone a substantial change in its age profile.

It is not strong enough to guarantee that the same rate of change will continue.

Has darts entered a new era?

I began this investigation wondering whether Luke Littler was simply an extraordinary exception.

And, of course, he is an extraordinary talent.

But the figures suggest that something much broader is happening.

For much of the period between 2007 and 2020, the world's top 20 remained dominated by players approaching or beyond 40.

Since then, the balance has changed considerably.

Players in their thirties now make up half the top 20. There are fewer players aged 40 and over, and the players arriving in the rankings are generally younger.

Perhaps the biggest change isn't that darts has suddenly become a sport for teenagers.

It's that players no longer appear to need quite as many years of professional experience before they can establish themselves among the world's best.

Whether this represents a permanent structural change or an exceptional generation is something the next decade should help reveal.

And that is why I'll be following the Development Tour generations particularly closely.

The players who could shape the PDC rankings of 2030 and 2035 may already be playing in those competitions today.

---

Research notes and sources

This article uses 380 PDC top-20 ranking positions from 19 annual snapshots between 2007 and 2025. Player ages were calculated at the dates of those snapshots, generally in November, rather than on 31 December.

Birth dates were cross-referenced against historical player records and Wikipedia. Annual arrivals were identified by comparing consecutive top-20 snapshots. All age comparisons are descriptive; they do not establish causation.

Research and analysis were undertaken for Quest For Q School (Q4QS), with AI assistance in data processing and drafting.

Sources:

• Darts1 — Historical PDC Order of Merit, 2007–2025

• Darts Rankings — Historical Development Tour rankings

• Global Darts — Historical Youth and Development Tour records

• Mastercaller — PDC Development Tour records

• Wikipedia — individual player birth dates.

European Championship 2026 Preview: Humphries Withdraws – Who Can Take Advantage in Dortmund?

Luke Humphries' withdrawal has changed the complexion of the European Championship before a dart has been thrown. With the world number two absent, can Luke Littler add another major title, or will one of the chasing pack take advantage? I've been examining the Q4QS Database to see who arrives in form.

Well, that's thrown something of a spanner in the works.

I'd been looking through the Q4QS Database ahead of this weekend's European Championship, analysing recent performances, averages, winning percentages and results to see which players might be arriving in Dortmund in the best form.

And one of the strongest candidates was Luke Humphries.

Unfortunately, Humphries has now withdrawn from the tournament after suffering from gastroenteritis.

The world number two was due to face Ryan Searle in the opening round, but his place has been taken by Kim Huybrechts, the highest-ranked player on the European Tour Order of Merit who hadn't qualified.

It's a significant change to the tournament, and one that could have consequences for several players.

Humphries was the top-ranked player in the Q4QS Database, with a rating of 794.12 and an average of 99.61.

He was also arriving in outstanding form, having won the World Grand Prix and reached the final of the Swiss Darts Trophy.

His absence removes one of the strongest contenders and potentially opens up opportunities elsewhere in the draw.

But who is best placed to take advantage?

Littler now the man to beat?

It would have been difficult to look beyond Luke Littler as one of the favourites anyway, but the absence of Humphries makes his prospects even more interesting.

Littler sits third in the Q4QS rankings, with a rating of 770.42 and a Q4QS average of 99.40.

More importantly, he's won nine of his last ten matches recorded in the database.

His World Matchplay triumph remains one of the outstanding performances of the season.

Across five matches, Littler produced a remarkable tournament average of 111.04.

That included a 111.53 average against Gerwyn Price in the final, a 110.88 against Dirk van Duijvenbode and a 109.57 against Josh Rock.

Those are extraordinary numbers, even by Littler's standards.

Of course, darts doesn't always work quite as simply as that.

Littler suffered an early exit at the World Grand Prix, and even the best players can have an off-night.

But looking at his overall performances and recent results, he is certainly the player everyone else will be looking to stop.

His first-round opponent is William O'Connor, with Nathan Aspinall or Cristo Reyes waiting in the second round if Littler progresses.

Gerwyn Price – perhaps the strongest challenger

If there's one player who might particularly fancy his chances following Humphries' withdrawal, it could be Gerwyn Price.

Price is second in the Q4QS rankings, with a rating of 772.06 and an average of 98.79.

What stands out is his consistency in reaching the latter stages of major tournaments.

The database records him reaching the finals of the World Matchplay, World Series Finals and World Grand Prix.

He averaged 100.42 during his run to the World Series Finals final, including a 104.07 performance in a victory over Jonny Clayton.

He might not have converted every final appearance into a title, but consistently getting that far against the strongest opposition is an achievement in itself.

Price opens against Rob Cross.

Cross has plenty of major tournament experience, and his recent Swiss Darts Trophy performances suggest he is capable of providing a serious challenge.

The winner will face either Niels Zonneveld or Cameron Menzies.

There are no guarantees, but Price certainly looks capable of going a long way.

Chris Dobey – the statistical outsider?

One player who keeps appearing whenever I look at recent Q4QS performances is Chris Dobey.

He's fifth in the overall Q4QS rankings, with a rating of 756.63 and an average of 97.25.

But it's his recent individual performances that really catch my attention.

At Players Championship 29, Dobey reached the quarter-finals with a tournament average of 105.88.

That run included a 106.62 average against Josh Rock, 106.09 against Maik Kuivenhoven and an outstanding 112.73 against Wesley Plaisier.

And here's the interesting part.

Dobey faces Josh Rock in the first round in Dortmund.

Having recently beaten Rock with a 106-plus average, Dobey will surely approach that match with some confidence.

Rock remains a dangerous opponent, but the recent statistical evidence certainly suggests Dobey has a realistic chance of progressing.

He's one of the players I'll be watching particularly closely.

Ross Smith – top seed and a genuine contender

Ross Smith heads the European Championship seedings, and his recent results suggest he has every reason to be confident.

He sits ninth in the Q4QS rankings, with an average of 95.98.

His most significant recent achievement was winning the World Series Finals.

Smith averaged 99.10 across the tournament, including a 103.89 performance in an 11-5 victory over Gerwyn Price.

He also defeated Gian van Veen and Josh Rock during that successful run.

Those results demonstrate his ability to beat the very best players over longer formats.

Smith begins against Karel Sedlacek, with James Wade or Damon Heta potentially waiting in the second round.

Given his seeding, recent performances and tournament experience, he belongs firmly among the leading contenders.

Wessel Nijman – the numbers remain impressive

Wessel Nijman has been one of the more interesting players to follow statistically.

He is fourth in the Q4QS rankings, with a rating of 762.55 and an average of 97.30.

His results haven't always matched the quality of his scoring, with five wins and five defeats across his last ten recorded matches.

However, his performances at Players Championship 29 included a tournament average of 103.79.

That sort of scoring power makes him dangerous against almost anybody.

Nijman begins against Martin Schindler, another player capable of producing excellent averages.

Schindler's recent results haven't been particularly consistent, but he has shown signs of improvement in his scoring.

This is one of those matches where I wouldn't be surprised by either result.

The players arriving with momentum

There are a few players who deserve particular attention because of their most recent tournament performances.

Niels Zonneveld

Zonneveld arrives following his Dutch Darts Championship victory, having won six consecutive matches and averaged 96.35 across the tournament.

His run included victories over Danny Noppert, Stephen Bunting, Wessel Nijman and Gerwyn Price.

That's an impressive list of opponents.

His Q4QS ranking of 46 doesn't necessarily reflect just how dangerous he could be when producing those performances.

He begins against Cameron Menzies and could potentially meet Price or Cross in the second round.

Danny Noppert

Noppert was beaten by Zonneveld in that final, but his own performances deserve recognition.

He averaged 99.40 across the tournament and recorded a remarkable 113.42 against Luke Woodhouse.

He also defeated Gian van Veen and Jermaine Wattimena during the event.

Noppert has won seven of his last ten recorded matches, and his recent form suggests he could be particularly dangerous.

He faces Stephen Bunting in the opening round.

Gian van Veen

The defending champion arrives with another impressive run of results behind him.

Van Veen has won seven of his last ten recorded matches and recently reached the final of Players Championship 29.

He followed that by reaching the semi-finals of the Dutch Darts Championship, where he averaged 101.92 across his matches.

He'll begin his title defence against Andrew Gilding.

With Humphries absent, Van Veen must fancy his chances of another deep run.

Jonny Clayton

Clayton's victory at the Swiss Darts Trophy was another performance worth highlighting.

He averaged 102.95 across the event and defeated Luke Humphries in the final.

His route also included victories over Gian van Veen and Rob Cross.

Those results suggest Clayton is approaching this tournament with plenty of confidence.

He opens against Niko Springer, with the winner facing either Josh Rock or Chris Dobey.

That section of the draw could produce some excellent matches.

Kevin Doets – another potential surprise

Kevin Doets is seventh in the Q4QS rankings, with an average of 96.11.

He has won seven of his last ten recorded matches and has enjoyed some impressive Players Championship results.

He reached the final of Players Championship 27 and followed that with a semi-final appearance at Players Championship 29, averaging 100.29 during the latter event.

His problem is the draw.

Doets faces Michael van Gerwen in the first round.

Van Gerwen's recent results have been somewhat inconsistent, but his experience and ability to produce his best darts on the big stage cannot be underestimated.

Nevertheless, Doets has the scoring and recent results to make this a particularly interesting encounter.

I certainly wouldn't regard it as a straightforward opening match for Van Gerwen.

What does Humphries' withdrawal change?

The obvious consequence is that one of the tournament's strongest players is no longer in the field.

But the more interesting question is what it means for the draw.

Kim Huybrechts comes in to face Ryan Searle, with the winner meeting Danny Noppert or Stephen Bunting in the second round.

Searle will understandably see an opportunity, although Huybrechts is experienced enough to make life difficult.

Further down the tournament, players in that section of the draw may also view Humphries' absence as a significant opportunity.

It doesn't mean their path to the final is suddenly easy.

Far from it.

But a player who was performing exceptionally well, and who had recently won the World Grand Prix, is no longer there to stop them.

And that undoubtedly changes the tournament.

The opening matches I'll be watching

Several first-round ties stand out.

Gerwyn Price v Rob Cross: Two established major winners, both capable of going deep into this tournament.

Josh Rock v Chris Dobey: One of the most interesting matches statistically, particularly given Dobey's recent scoring performances.

Kevin Doets v Michael van Gerwen: An opportunity for Doets to demonstrate that his strong Q4QS ranking reflects his ability against the biggest names.

Wessel Nijman v Martin Schindler: Nijman's impressive overall numbers against a player capable of producing strong individual performances.

Danny Noppert v Stephen Bunting: Noppert arrives following a final appearance, while Bunting reached the semi-finals of the same tournament.

Kim Huybrechts v Ryan Searle: A late change to the draw and an unexpected opportunity for both players.

And I'll also be keeping an eye on Cristo Reyes against Nathan Aspinall.

Reyes has shown some excellent recent form, including a quarter-final appearance at the Swiss Darts Trophy and a tournament average of 101.17 at Players Championship 29.

He could be one of the more dangerous outsiders in the field.

So who wins the European Championship?

Before Humphries' withdrawal, I would have placed him alongside Littler as one of the two strongest contenders.

His absence changes that assessment.

Luke Littler is now my leading candidate, based on the Q4QS statistics and his ability to produce extraordinary performances over several matches.

Gerwyn Price would be my next choice.

His consistent appearances in major finals suggest he's rarely far away from challenging for titles.

Ross Smith, Wessel Nijman and Chris Dobey also deserve serious consideration.

And I certainly wouldn't dismiss Gian van Veen, particularly given his recent results and status as defending champion.

If we're looking for players who could surprise people, Kevin Doets, Niels Zonneveld and Cristo Reyes are all interesting candidates based on their recent performances.

But one of the things I've learned from looking through the Q4QS data is that statistics don't always tell us everything.

A player might be averaging 98 or 99 over several tournaments and still lose to somebody who produces one exceptional match.

That's darts.

What the figures can do is identify players performing well consistently, those whose form is improving and those who perhaps deserve more attention than they're receiving.

And with one of the strongest players in the world now missing from the tournament, the European Championship looks even more intriguing.

My leading contender: Luke Littler.

Main challengers: Gerwyn Price, Ross Smith, Wessel Nijman and Gian van Veen.

Player to watch: Chris Dobey.

Potential surprises: Kevin Doets, Niels Zonneveld and Cristo Reyes.

We'll see how well the Q4QS figures stand up over the next four days.

Q4QS analysis uses recorded match results and player rankings supplied on 22 October 2026. Rankings and averages refer to the Q4QS Database, not the official PDC Order of Merit. Match coverage may be incomplete, and predictions are statistical assessments rather than guarantees.

Who Are the World's Best 16 Darts Players? Comparing Four Ranking Systems

 

What Does It Really Mean to Be a Top-16 Darts Player?

Four different rankings, four different answers. Comparing the PDC Order of Merit, 2026 prize money, Darts Orakel and Q4QS reveals just how differently we can define the world's leading darts players.

In professional darts, being described as a top-16 player sounds straightforward enough. Look at the rankings, find the first 16 names and there's your answer.

But what exactly is a ranking supposed to measure?

The official PDC Order of Merit measures ranking prize money accumulated over a rolling two-year period. Look only at prize money earned during 2026 and the picture already starts to change.

Introduce performance-based rankings and it changes again.

This isn't an attempt to prove that the official Order of Merit is right or wrong, or indeed to argue that Q4QS has found a better way.

In fact, the differences reveal something much more interesting.

There isn't necessarily one answer to the question of who the world's best 16 darts players are.

It depends on what we choose to measure.

Four different top 16s

I've taken four different approaches to ranking players and compared their leading 16.

The official PDC Order of Merit rewards ranking prize money over two years. The 2026 prize-money list looks at earnings during this calendar year. Darts Orakel and Q4QS provide alternative, performance-based assessments.

Here are the four rankings side by side.

Pos	PDC 2-Year OoM	2026 Prize Money	Darts Orakel	Q4QS
1	Luke Littler	Luke Littler	Luke Littler	Luke Humphries
2	Luke Humphries	Gerwyn Price	Luke Humphries	Gerwyn Price
3	Gian van Veen	Luke Humphries	Gerwyn Price	Luke Littler
4	Gerwyn Price	Wessel Nijman	Ross Smith	Wessel Nijman
5	Jonny Clayton	Ross Smith	Jonny Clayton	Chris Dobey
6	James Wade	James Wade	James Wade	Sebastian Bialecki
7	Danny Noppert	Gian van Veen	Wessel Nijman	Kevin Doets
8	Josh Rock	Jonny Clayton	Gian van Veen	Michael van Gerwen
9	Gary Anderson	Luke Woodhouse	Kevin Doets	Ross Smith
10	Michael van Gerwen	Danny Noppert	Nathan Aspinall	Rob Cross
11	Nathan Aspinall	Kevin Doets	Chris Dobey	Luke Woodhouse
12	Wessel Nijman	Nathan Aspinall	Luke Woodhouse	Derek Coulson
13	Stephen Bunting	Josh Rock	Rob Cross	James Wade
14	Ross Smith	Chris Dobey	Gary Anderson	Gian van Veen
15	Ryan Searle	Niels Zonneveld	Cristo Reyes	Jeffrey de Graaf
16	Jermaine Wattimena	Jermaine Wattimena	Ryan Searle	Dirk van Duijvenbode

Ranking comparison compiled in October 2026. The PDC two-year positions reflect the live rankings after European Tour 15 on 18 October. Rankings are a snapshot and will change as further events are played.

The differences are immediately apparent, but there is also a surprising amount of agreement.

Seven players everyone agrees on

Only seven players appear in the top 16 of all four systems:

Luke Littler, Luke Humphries, Gerwyn Price, Wessel Nijman, James Wade, Gian van Veen and Ross Smith.

Even here, agreement over who belongs in the top 16 doesn't necessarily mean agreement over where they should be.

Take Ross Smith.

He is 14th on the official Order of Merit, but fifth on 2026 prize money, fourth with Darts Orakel and ninth with Q4QS.

Wessel Nijman is another interesting example. Officially 12th, he is fourth on this year's prize money, seventh with Darts Orakel and fourth with Q4QS.

Nobody is really disputing that these players belong among the elite. What changes is how highly their performances are valued under different methods.

And it's when we move beyond those seven names that things become particularly interesting.

The really interesting players are outside the official 16

Three players immediately stand out.

Kevin Doets

Ranking	Position
PDC Two-Year Order of Merit	26th
2026 Prize Money	11th
Darts Orakel	9th
Q4QS	7th

For me, Doets is perhaps the clearest example in the entire comparison.

The official ranking has him 26th, yet three other systems place him comfortably inside the world's leading 16.

That doesn't establish that 26th is somehow wrong. The official ranking is doing precisely what it is designed to do.

However, it demonstrates how differently a player's standing can look when the measurement changes.

Chris Dobey

The same pattern appears with Chris Dobey.

• PDC Order of Merit: 17th

• 2026 Prize Money: 14th

• Darts Orakel: 11th

• Q4QS: 5th

Dobey is just outside the official top 16, but inside it on the other three measures.

Interestingly, Q4QS rates him particularly highly, placing him fifth.

Luke Woodhouse

Then there's Luke Woodhouse.

• PDC Order of Merit: 18th

• 2026 Prize Money: 9th

• Darts Orakel: 12th

• Q4QS: 11th

Again, three different measures place him inside the leading 16, while the longer-term ranking has him just outside.

Together, Doets, Dobey and Woodhouse provide one of the most interesting findings from the exercise.

This isn't simply one alternative statistical model disagreeing with the official Order of Merit.

Three different ways of assessing players all suggest these three belong among the leading 16.

And that's surely worth examining.

But achievement matters too

Of course, there's another side to this argument.

Take Danny Noppert.

• Official Order of Merit: 7th

• 2026 Prize Money: 10th

• Darts Orakel: 24th

• Q4QS: Outside the top 16

The two performance systems are considerably less enthusiastic about Noppert.

But here's the thing.

He has actually achieved the tournament results necessary to accumulate enough prize money to sit seventh in the world.

That isn't a theoretical assessment. It's what he's achieved on the oche.

Shouldn't that count for something?

There's a perfectly reasonable argument that professional sport should ultimately reward results rather than an underlying statistical assessment of how well someone is playing.

The same question arises with Josh Rock.

He is eighth on the official ranking and 13th on the 2026 money list, yet Darts Orakel and Q4QS place him outside their leading 16.

Does that mean Rock is over-ranked?

Not necessarily.

It simply means the systems are rewarding different things.

And I think that's an important distinction.

Performance rankings can create questions of their own

I'm certainly not suggesting performance-based rankings are automatically superior.

In fact, looking at the Q4QS figures raises some interesting questions about my own system.

Sebastian Bialecki is sixth with Q4QS, compared with 20th on Darts Orakel and considerably lower on the official Order of Merit.

Derek Coulson also appears 12th with Q4QS, despite not featuring in the top 16 of the other three systems.

Now, that doesn't automatically mean Q4QS is wrong either.

But it does raise an important question.

How much should the strength of opposition influence a player's ranking?

A player performing consistently well against comparatively weaker opposition might produce impressive statistics.

Another player could be averaging slightly less but regularly facing the best players in the world.

Are those performances directly comparable?

And if not, how should a ranking account for the difference?

One possibility is to introduce more opponent-strength adjustments. But that brings another problem.

Every additional calculation makes a ranking more complicated, and potentially harder for people to understand.

There's a balance to be found between creating a useful performance measure and producing something so complex that nobody quite understands how the rankings are calculated.

It's certainly something worth considering as Q4QS develops.

What about simply shortening the Order of Merit?

Perhaps one of the most interesting aspects of this comparison is that we don't even need an alternative statistical model to produce substantial differences.

All we need to do is shorten the period being measured.

Look at some of the established names.

On the official two-year ranking:

• Gary Anderson is ninth.

• Michael van Gerwen is tenth.

• Stephen Bunting is 13th.

• Ryan Searle is 15th.

Yet none of those four appears in the top 16 for 2026 prize money alone.

Instead, we see players including Luke Woodhouse, Kevin Doets, Chris Dobey and Niels Zonneveld moving into the picture.

And nothing about the fundamental ranking method has changed.

We're still counting prize money.

The only thing we've changed is the period over which we count it.

To me, that demonstrates just how much the timescale can influence what we consider to be an accurate reflection of a player's standing.

So which ranking is right?

Perhaps that's actually the wrong question.

Each system tells us something slightly different.

The official Order of Merit tells us who has accumulated the most ranking prize money over its rolling two-year period.

The 2026 prize-money list tells us who's earned the most this year.

Darts Orakel provides an alternative statistical assessment of players.

Q4QS takes another performance-based approach, using its own ranking calculations and tournament data.

None of these is necessarily measuring exactly the same thing.

And that's the important point.

The most successful player, the best-performing player and the strongest player right now aren't necessarily the same person.

A player may have achieved enough in major tournaments to deserve a lofty Order of Merit position while simultaneously experiencing a less successful spell.

Another might be producing outstanding performances without having accumulated the ranking prize money to reflect them.

Neither situation means the ranking is wrong.

It depends entirely on what we're asking the ranking to tell us.

Why the top-16 question matters

If rankings were simply numbers beside players' names, this would mainly be an interesting statistical exercise.

But rankings can have genuine consequences.

They can influence seedings, qualification, draws and the opportunities available to players.

That makes the underlying question rather more important.

Should those opportunities be determined by achievements over a sustained period?

Should recent form carry greater weight?

Should we consider the strength of opposition?

Or does trying to incorporate everything risk creating a ranking system that is theoretically impressive but unnecessarily complicated?

There's something to be said for simplicity.

Everyone understands a prize-money table.

An alternative system involving averages, opponents, consistency, tournament strength and other calculations might provide a different assessment, but it's also much harder to explain.

And if players and supporters don't understand what produces a ranking, how much confidence can they really have in it?

What does it really mean to be top 16?

Perhaps the biggest finding from this comparison is how much agreement exists around the very best players, but how quickly that agreement begins to disappear further down.

Luke Littler, Luke Humphries and Gerwyn Price occupy the top three positions with both Darts Orakel and Q4QS, albeit in a different order.

They also occupy three of the leading positions in both prize-money comparisons.

But beyond that group, things become considerably less certain.

Kevin Doets can simultaneously be the official world No.26 and rank seventh, ninth and 11th by three other measures.

Danny Noppert can be the official world No.7 while sitting considerably lower in two performance rankings.

And someone like Sebastian Bialecki can appear sixth in one statistical system while being nowhere near that position in another.

None of those examples proves one system right and another wrong.

Instead, they highlight something we perhaps forget when looking at a ranking table.

A ranking doesn't simply tell us who is best. It tells us who is best according to whatever that particular ranking has been designed to reward.

The official Order of Merit rewards tournament achievement through ranking prize money.

Other systems can tell us different things about playing performance, consistency and results.

So perhaps the real question isn't:

Who are the top 16?

It's:

What do we actually want being a top-16 darts player to mean?

And looking at these four rankings, I'm not sure there's a straightforward answer.

I'd be interested to hear what others think. Should the official rankings reward prize money over two years, or would a shorter period or performance-based approach give a better picture of the players currently at the top of the game?

World Grand Prix 2026 Preview: Does Double-In Really Change Everything?

The World Grand Prix is one of the tournaments I always find interesting because it asks the players to do something they simply do not have to do anywhere else on the PDC circuit.

Every leg is double-in, double-out.

Before a player can start scoring, they have to hit a double. They then have to finish on one in the usual way.

It sounds like a relatively small change, but we all know what can happen. Miss a few darts trying to get away and your opponent can already be well into the leg before you have scored a point.

The obvious question, though, is how much difference does it really make at this level?

My feeling going into the tournament is perhaps not as much as we sometimes think.

These are elite double hitters

The theory is that the World Grand Prix should favour the better double hitters.

That makes perfect sense.

But we also have to remember who we are talking about. This is a 32-player field made up of elite professionals. There will obviously be differences between their doubling percentages, but every player in this tournament is capable of hitting doubles consistently.

For me, the format probably creates more volatility rather than completely changing who the strongest players are.

If someone misses six darts getting away, suddenly a leg can disappear very quickly. Over a short match, a couple of legs like that can decide everything.

Over the course of a whole tournament, though, I still expect the better players to come towards the top.

We will find out.

Littler and Humphries set the standard again

It is difficult to start anywhere other than Luke Littler and Luke Humphries.

They are currently the top two players in the Q4QS rankings and their recent numbers back that up.

Littler has been producing some extraordinary averages and has won nine of his last ten matches in the database. His World Matchplay run included an event average above 111, which tells you the level he can reach when everything is working.

Humphries remains number one in the Q4QS rankings and continues to produce deep runs and tournament victories.

The double-start format gives everyone another problem to solve, but it is difficult to imagine either player being particularly fazed by it.

Gerwyn Price remains right in the picture

Gerwyn Price is another player coming into the tournament with plenty of strong form behind him.

He is third in the current Q4QS rankings with an average just under 99 and has recently reached a World Matchplay final as well as another televised semi-final.

His opening match against Sebastian Bialecki is one I am particularly interested in.

Bialecki is much further down the established PDC pecking order, but the Q4QS numbers are very positive. He has already won a Players Championship event this season and sits surprisingly high in our current rankings.

If Price starts quickly, his scoring power should give him the advantage.

But this is exactly the sort of tournament where an outsider getting away cleanly while the favourite struggles on the starting doubles can suddenly change everything.

Ross Smith arrives as a recent champion

Ross Smith certainly deserves a mention after winning the recent World Series of Darts Finals.

That is a serious piece of form to bring into another televised tournament.

Smith has also won on the Players Championship circuit this season, so this isn't simply one good weekend appearing from nowhere.

He is capable of producing big averages, he scores heavily and he has just shown that he can put together a complete run against top-class opposition on a major stage.

His opening match against Cameron Menzies isn't straightforward, but Smith comes into the tournament with genuine momentum.

Chris Dobey is one I will be watching

Chris Dobey's recent numbers have been particularly strong.

He sits fifth in the current Q4QS rankings, has won eight of his last ten recorded matches and recently averaged over 105 across a Players Championship run.

He has also produced individual match averages comfortably above 110.

Dobey faces Jermaine Wattimena, who is hardly short of form himself.

Wattimena recently won a Players Championship event and has also won eight of his last ten matches in the database.

That could be one of the best matches of the opening round.

Nijman continues to climb

Wessel Nijman is another player whose numbers keep catching my attention.

He is currently fourth in the Q4QS rankings and has been regularly producing averages around or above the 100 mark.

His opening match against Rob Cross should tell us plenty.

Cross has obviously been there and done it on the biggest stages and has also won on the Players Championship circuit this season.

But Nijman increasingly looks comfortable alongside this level of player rather than simply being someone trying to break into it.

That makes this a particularly interesting first-round match.

Plenty of danger throughout the field

There are a number of other players who could easily have a big week.

Michael van Gerwen remains capable of beating anyone when his game clicks.

Gary Anderson's best performances are still extremely strong.

James Wade has spent a career finding ways of winning matches in formats where pressure and doubling matter.

Kevin Doets has been producing good results and recently reached a Players Championship final.

Danny Noppert continues to put together solid numbers, while players such as Gian van Veen, Nathan Aspinall, Stephen Bunting and Damon Heta make this a very strong field throughout.

There really aren't many comfortable matches.

So how much will double-in actually matter?

This is probably the thing I want to follow most closely throughout the tournament.

My starting position is simple:

It matters, but I don't think it completely changes the hierarchy.

At lower levels of darts, differences in doubling ability can be enormous.

At this level, those differences are much smaller.

The really interesting part may therefore be what the format does psychologically.

One missed dart at double 16 means very little.

Three misses becomes frustrating.

Six misses while your opponent is already halfway down the board becomes pressure.

And once that happens in a short set format, strange things can happen very quickly.

That is probably why the World Grand Prix feels different even if, by the end of the week, many of the familiar names are still standing.

I'll be interested to look back when the tournament is finished and see whether the double-in format genuinely produced more surprises than we would normally expect.

Because there are really two different questions.

Does double-in change individual legs and matches?

Almost certainly.

Does it actually change who the best players are?

I'm not so sure.

This week should give us a pretty good opportunity to find out.

How Do You Beat Luke Littler? Six Defeats Reveal the Best Chance of Stopping Darts’ Dominant Player

 The World Series of Darts Finals arrive in Amsterdam this week, and once again Luke Littler will start as the man everyone wants to stop.

With another major title on offer, the question facing the 31 other players in the field is becoming increasingly familiar: how do you beat Luke Littler?

There is a growing feeling around darts that Littler may simply keep winning. His level in 2026 has been extraordinary, and when he gets into the longer televised formats he has often looked almost impossible to stop.

So ahead of the World Series Finals, rather than simply asking who might beat him in Amsterdam, I wanted to look at a slightly different question.

How do you actually beat Luke Littler?

The Q4QS data gives us six examples from 2026.

Littler’s current profile shows 41 wins from 47 matches, an 87.2% win rate, with six defeats.

Those six defeats are:

• Gerwyn Price, 6-2 — Bahrain Masters

• Niels Zonneveld, 6-5 — Belgian Open

• Luke Humphries, 7-5 — Nordic Masters

• Luke Humphries, 8-7 — US Masters

• Jermaine Wattimena, 6-5 — Players Championship 27

• Brendan Dolan, 7-4 — Players Championship 28

Five of those defeats are grouped in Littler’s profile, with the Dolan loss appearing among his most recent matches.
And there is one thing that jumps out immediately.

Every single defeat came in a relatively short format.

None of Littler’s defeats in the Q4QS 2026 data came in the sort of long race we see later in the biggest televised events.

That may be the first real clue.

Short Formats Give You a Chance

The theory is simple.

If Littler is producing a higher level than almost everybody else over a sustained period, then the longer the match goes, the more opportunity that superiority has to show itself.

A shorter race creates more variance.

One missed double, one 12-dart leg from the opponent, one poor visit at the wrong time, and suddenly there may not be enough match left for Littler to recover.

Jermaine Wattimena’s win is a perfect example.

Wattimena beat Littler 6-5 at Players Championship 27 while averaging just 92.36. Littler averaged 95.68.
That was not a case of somebody producing a 110 average and blowing Littler away.

It was a short match, Littler dropped below his usual level, and Wattimena took the opportunity.

Gerwyn Price did something similar in Bahrain.

Price won 6-2 with a 97.43 average while Littler averaged 94.04.
Again, it was not a superhuman performance.

It was simply good enough at exactly the right time.

But Waiting for Littler to Play Badly Is Not Enough

There is another side to this.

Niels Zonneveld beat Littler 6-5 at the Belgian Open despite Littler averaging 103.20.

Luke Humphries has beaten him twice, and both performances were at genuinely elite level.

Humphries averaged 105.42 in a 7-5 win and 104.05 in an 8-7 victory.

That gives us two different ways Littler has been beaten this year.

The first is to catch him on an ordinary day and punish it immediately.

The second is to play outstanding darts yourself and stay with him right through the short race.

The second route is obviously much harder.

But Humphries has already shown twice that it is possible.

Humphries Has the Strongest Case

If I were looking for the player with the clearest evidence that they can beat Littler rather than simply hope Littler has an off day, Humphries would be top of the list.

He is the only player in the six defeats to have beaten Littler twice.

More importantly, neither win came because Littler collapsed.

Littler still averaged 100.85 and 99.50 in those defeats.

Humphries simply played better.

That matters.

There are plenty of players capable of beating Littler if he averages 94 or 95.

There are far fewer who look capable of beating him when he is around 100 or above.

Humphries has done it.

Of course, even that does not make him some sort of Littler kryptonite.

Littler beat Humphries 6-5 at the World Masters earlier in the year, averaging 104.72.

He also beat him in the recent Czech Darts Open final.

So this is not a one-sided rivalry.

It is simply the strongest evidence in the field that somebody can go toe-to-toe with Littler at a high level and still come out on top.

Price Has Beaten Him — But the Longer Match Told a Different Story

Gerwyn Price is another obvious threat.

He has already beaten Littler this year, winning 6-2 in Bahrain.

But the World Matchplay showed how dramatically things can change when the format gets longer.

Price averaged 104.97 in the final.

That is the sort of number that wins most matches.

Against Littler, it was nowhere near enough.

Littler won 18-9 and averaged 111.53.
That may be the best single example of why a long format is such a problem.

Price had already proved he could beat Littler over a shorter race.

Later in the year he actually played far better against him — and lost heavily.

That is not proof that format alone caused the difference, but it is certainly consistent with the wider pattern.

Over a long match, Littler has more time to find his best level.

And once he does, even an opponent averaging 104 or 105 can be in serious trouble.

Van Gerwen Has a Different Kind of Case

Michael van Gerwen has not beaten Littler in the Q4QS 2026 profile data.

Littler beat him 8-5 in Saudi Arabia.

So purely on this season’s evidence, Van Gerwen would not rank above Humphries or Price as the most proven threat.

But the World Series Finals are in Amsterdam.

And that changes the feel of the story.

Van Gerwen is the defending champion, having beaten Littler 11-7 in the 2025 final at the same venue.

That does not mean history will repeat itself.

But if there is one place where Van Gerwen should walk onto stage believing he can beat Littler, Amsterdam is probably it.

He has already done it there when the title was on the line.

Wattimena Has Already Shown the Blueprint

Jermaine Wattimena may actually be one of the most interesting names in this discussion.

His win over Littler came recently, it came over a short distance, and it came without an enormous average.

He simply stayed close enough and took his opportunity.

That is probably far more realistic for most of the field than trying to produce 110 darts.

Wattimena’s example says something important.

You do not necessarily need to be the better player over 20 or 30 legs.

You need to be the better player over the legs that actually get played.

That is a very different challenge.

The Opening Rounds in Amsterdam May Be the Danger

That brings us directly back to this week's World Series Finals.

Danny Noppert gets the first chance at Littler.

On paper, Littler is the obvious favourite.

Noppert has already lost 10-6 to him at the UK Open this year.

But if the short-format pattern is real, the early rounds may actually provide the best opportunity for an upset.

A player like Noppert does not need to prove he is better than Littler across an entire season.

He does not even need to prove he is better across a long match.

He needs one sharp spell, one strong finishing run, and perhaps one ordinary patch from Littler.

That is why an early-round opponent can sometimes be more dangerous than a bigger name waiting later in the tournament.

So Who Can Stop Him in Amsterdam?

Based on the evidence I have, I would split the main threats into different categories.

Luke Humphries is the strongest proven high-level threat. He has beaten Littler twice while producing elite averages.

Gerwyn Price has already beaten him and has the scoring power to do it again, although the Matchplay showed just how hard the task becomes over longer distances.

Jermaine Wattimena has the most recent proof that a short-format upset does not require a massive average.

Michael van Gerwen has the Amsterdam history, the crowd and the memory of beating Littler in last year’s final.

And then there are players such as Wessel Nijman, Gian van Veen and Nathan Aspinall who may not have the same direct 2026 evidence against Littler, but have shown they can produce high enough levels against elite opposition to be dangerous on the right night.

The Best Way to Beat Littler May Be to Beat Him Quickly

The most obvious conclusion from the six defeats is not that Littler has a particular weakness against one specific player.

It is that the window for beating him appears to be much wider when the match is short.

If Littler averages 94 or 95, there are several players capable of punishing him.

If he averages around 100, Humphries and Zonneveld have shown he can still be beaten.

But once the match becomes long enough for Littler to settle, recover from poor spells and repeatedly produce his best scoring, the job appears to become dramatically harder.

That makes the early stages of the World Series Finals particularly interesting.

Noppert gets the first opportunity. If Littler survives that and starts finding his range, the challenge facing everyone else could become progressively harder.

So perhaps the message for Amsterdam is simple.

Do not give him time.

Do not assume you will get another chance.

And if Littler opens the door, go through it immediately.

Because if the match becomes a long one, his 2026 results suggest that door may close very quickly.

PDC Czech Darts Open Preview: Littler Returns to a Stacked European Tour Field

 

The European Tour returns this weekend with ET12, the Czech Darts Open in Prague, from September 4-6, and there is very little missing from this field.

Luke Littler is back. Luke Humphries returns to one of his favourite venues. Gerwyn Price, Michael van Gerwen, Gian van Veen, Josh Rock, Stephen Bunting, Gary Anderson and plenty more are here, while Beau Greaves gets another opportunity on the European Tour.

And perhaps the biggest question is simply: who makes the headlines in a field this strong?

Littler's appearance is particularly significant. This is his first European Tour event since March, having been absent from the circuit for several months. Humphries, meanwhile, is chasing a remarkable third successive Czech Open title, having beaten Josh Rock in last year's final and Kim Huybrechts in 2024.

Littler returns – and the numbers remain frightening

Despite his European Tour absence, there is little suggestion that Luke Littler needs time to rediscover his best darts.

He has won nine of his last ten recorded matches in the Q4QS database, while his recent World Matchplay victory came with a remarkable 111.04 tournament average. That run included 113.68 against Nathan Aspinall, 109.57 against Josh Rock, 110.88 against Dirk van Duijvenbode and 111.53 in the final against Gerwyn Price.

Since then, Littler has reached the quarter-finals and semi-finals of Players Championships 27 and 28 respectively.

The European Tour hasn't seen much of him lately. It might be about to be reminded what it has been missing.

Can anyone knock Humphries off his Prague throne?

If Littler is the returning headline act, Luke Humphries is the man with ownership of this tournament.

Humphries has won in Prague in 2022, 2024 and 2025, and victory this weekend would complete a Czech Open hat-trick of consecutive titles.

His current form hardly discourages the idea. Humphries is 8-2 across his last ten in the Q4QS database and won Players Championship 28 last time out, going 7-0. He has also won Players Championship 17 this season with a huge 104.74 event average.

There's an intriguing potential Saturday opener too. Humphries will face the winner of Daryl Gurney v Beau Greaves.

Price has another big title in him

Gerwyn Price has already shown this year that he remains a major European Tour threat.

He won the European Darts Grand Prix with a 100.26 tournament average, while his recent World Matchplay campaign ended only in the final against Littler. Price's database includes wins over Wessel Nijman, Martin Schindler and Chris Dobey during his recent run, and he remains inside the Q4QS top three.

In a tournament containing virtually every major name, Price still looks one of the players most capable of simply taking the event away from everybody else when his scoring catches fire.

Don't overlook Wessel Nijman

Perhaps Wessel Nijman doesn't yet carry quite the same headline status as Littler, Humphries, Price or Van Gerwen.

His 2026 results suggest that might need to change.

Nijman has already won the Slovak Darts Open this season, averaging 99.45 across the tournament, and followed that with a semi-final at Players Championship 27. He is 7-3 across his latest ten recorded matches and has recent victories over Rob Cross, Ross Smith, Mike De Decker and Stephen Bunting.

His wider 2026 record is exceptional too: he has collected multiple Players Championship titles as well as European Tour success.

If we're looking beyond the most obvious names for Sunday's headlines, Nijman has to be very high on the list.

Van Gerwen remains Van Gerwen

There have been times over the past few seasons when Michael van Gerwen hasn't looked quite as untouchable as he once did.

Writing him off remains a dangerous game.

Van Gerwen has a 7-3 recent record in the Q4QS data and already has title-winning form this season. His recent results also include a victory over Humphries in a final, while he has recorded a 101.55 win over Jonny Clayton.

The most striking number on the Six to Follow graphic is his 122.34 best recorded match average. When MVG finds that sort of level, rankings, form and draw positions become rather less important.

Beau Greaves could create the weekend's biggest story

This is the selection that makes the Six to Follow particularly interesting.

Beau Greaves isn't one of the 16 seeds. She has to start on Friday against Daryl Gurney and, if she wins, her reward is defending champion Luke Humphries.

Not exactly the gentle route through Prague.

But Greaves is becoming increasingly difficult to judge by conventional expectations. Her Q4QS record shows 10 wins from her last ten recorded matches, back-to-back Women's Series titles and Players Championship averages of 94.75 and 95.45 in her latest two appearances.

She also averaged over 104 on her European Tour debut last weekend despite losing to Rob Cross.

Getting through Gurney and then Humphries would be an enormous ask. But if she does, it could become one of the stories of the European Tour season.

Six Players to Watch

Luke Littler – Back on the European Tour for the first time since March and still producing extraordinary numbers. Nine wins from ten and the obvious title threat.

Luke Humphries – The king of Prague. Chasing a third successive Czech Open title and arriving immediately after another Players Championship victory.

Gerwyn Price – A European Tour winner already this season and a World Matchplay finalist. More than capable of another big weekend.

Wessel Nijman – One of 2026's outstanding ProTour performers. Already a European Tour champion this year and increasingly difficult to regard as an outsider.

Michael van Gerwen – Still capable of producing a level very few players can live with. His Q4QS data contains the highest peak match average of these six.

Beau Greaves – The fascinating wildcard. A brutal route awaits, but her recent scoring suggests she is capable of making headlines rather than merely making up the field.

And that's only six…

That's the problem with trying to pick six from this tournament.

Gian van Veen has reached the semi-finals of the World Matchplay and two recent Players Championships and is 8-2 in his last ten.

Rob Cross is also 8-2 and has already won Players Championship 22. Luke Woodhouse has a final, semi-final and quarter-final among his recent Players Championship results. Cameron Menzies has won Players Championship 23.

Then there is Josh Rock, Gary Anderson, Stephen Bunting, Nathan Aspinall, Chris Dobey, Ross Smith, Damon Heta, Dirk van Duijvenbode and a host of others.

That's what makes Prague so interesting.

Littler's return provides the headline before a dart has been thrown. By Sunday night, there's every chance somebody else will have stolen it.

PDC Round-Up: Littler Makes His Players Championship Return as Wattimena and Humphries Take the Titles

 

It was a busy few days on the PDC circuit, with the World Series of Darts Finals Tour Card Holder Qualifier followed by Players Championship 27 and 28.

There was plenty to take from all three tournaments. Jermaine Wattimena and Luke Humphries collected the Players Championship titles, four players booked World Series Finals places, and Luke Littler made his first Players Championship appearances of the 2026 season.

Littler's return to the floor was always going to attract attention, and despite not taking either title, a quarter-final and semi-final represented an impressive first couple of days back.

Four come through World Series qualifier

The week's action began on 24 August with the Tour Card Holder Qualifier for the World Series of Darts Finals.

The four players to emerge from the field were Callan Rydz, Rob Cross, Kevin Doets and Karel Sedlacek.

Rydz came through with five victories and a 96.44 tournament average, eventually beating Daryl Gurney 6-2 with a 98.95 average in his qualifying match.

Cross also produced some excellent darts. His route culminated in a 6-3 victory over Dirk van Duijvenbode, averaging 98.41, having previously edged Peter Wright 6-5.

Doets completed his run by defeating Maik Kuivenhoven 6-3.

But statistically, one of the performances of the qualifier belonged to Karel Sedlacek.

The Czech averaged 99.53 across his five victories, and saved his best for the decisive match. Sedlacek averaged 105.22 in a 6-4 win over Owen Bates to secure his place.

There was plenty of quality elsewhere too, with Cristo Reyes producing a 106.67 during the tournament and Van Duijvenbode, Mickey Mansell and Keane Barry also recording individual averages above 103.

Four places were available, though, and they ultimately belonged to Rydz, Cross, Doets and Sedlacek.

Wattimena wins Players Championship 27

The first of the week's two Players Championship events produced a title for Jermaine Wattimena.

Wattimena completed a perfect seven-match run by beating Kevin Doets 8-6 in the final, averaging 93.81 against Doets' 93.22.

His overall tournament average was an impressive 95.20, but perhaps the most significant thing about his victory was the quality of opposition he negotiated towards the end.

In the semi-final he defeated Luke Woodhouse 7-4 with a 100.71 average.

Before that came one of the biggest matches of the week.

Wattimena faced Luke Littler in the quarter-finals and edged a tight contest 6-5.

Littler actually produced the higher average at 95.68 to Wattimena's 92.36, but it was the Dutchman who found the decisive leg before going on to take the title.

Nijman produces the performance of the day

Wattimena took the trophy, but Wessel Nijman produced some spectacular numbers.

Nijman averaged 109.77 in a 6-1 Last 16 victory over Bradley Brooks and finished the tournament with a 97.49 overall average.

He eventually lost 7-5 to Doets in the semi-finals despite averaging 97.31.

Luke Woodhouse was another player to enjoy a strong run, reaching the last four with a 95.71 tournament average, while Cameron Menzies, Kim Huybrechts and Mickey Mansell all reached the quarter-finals.

But the big additional talking point was Littler.

Littler's first Players Championship of 2026

For all Luke Littler has already achieved, this was something we had not seen during 2026 – Littler competing on the Players Championship circuit.

And his first appearance certainly wasn't a token visit.

He began with a 6-2 victory over Archie Self before defeating Arno Merk 6-3 with a 105.12 average.

William O'Connor was beaten 6-3 before Littler whitewashed Chris Dobey 6-0 in the Last 16.

That set up the quarter-final against eventual champion Wattimena.

Littler lost 6-5, but finished his first floor tournament of the season with four wins, one defeat and a 97.47 tournament average.

Not bad for a first appearance.

And he wasn't finished.

Humphries takes PC28 – Littler goes one better

Players Championship 28 belonged to Luke Humphries.

The former World Champion went unbeaten through seven matches, defeating Brendan Dolan 8-6 in the final.

Humphries averaged 97.63 across the tournament and produced several outstanding individual displays along the way.

His peak came earlier in the event with a 108.66 average, while he also averaged 99.70 in his 6-5 Last 16 victory over Danny Noppert and 99.97 when defeating Mike De Decker 7-4 in the semi-final.

Dolan's appearance in the final was perhaps less predictable.

His overall tournament average was only 88.38, but he repeatedly found ways to win – and his biggest victory came against Littler.

Littler reaches the semi-finals

Having reached the last eight 24 hours earlier, Littler went one round further at PC28.

And this time his overall numbers were even better.

He averaged 98.36 across six matches, the best tournament average among the four semi-finalists.

His route included a 6-1 demolition of Martin Schindler in the Last 32 with a huge 107.23 average.

Andy Boulton was beaten 6-3 before Littler faced Krzysztof Ratajski in the quarter-finals.

That was an excellent contest.

Littler averaged 100.65, Ratajski 99.99, with Littler coming through 6-4.

That put him into his first Players Championship semi-final of the season at only the second attempt.

Dolan stopped him there.

The Northern Irishman produced one of his best performances of the tournament when it mattered most, averaging 97.63 to Littler's 96.42 in a 7-4 victory.

Humphries then denied Dolan the title in the final.

Two events, nine wins for Littler

The temptation whenever Littler enters a tournament is to judge anything short of victory as a disappointment.

The numbers don't really support doing that here.

Across his first two Players Championship appearances of 2026, Littler recorded:

9 wins from 11 matches

Quarter-final at PC27

Semi-final at PC28

97.47 tournament average at PC27

98.36 tournament average at PC28

105.12 best average at PC27

107.23 best average at PC28

And his only defeats came against the eventual PC27 champion Wattimena and PC28 runner-up Dolan.

There was no title, but there was very little evidence of difficulty adapting to the floor environment.

If anything, the second day suggested he was getting stronger.

A good week for Kevin Doets

Another name running throughout the week's results was Kevin Doets.

First he qualified for the World Series Finals by defeating Maik Kuivenhoven.

Twenty-four hours later he reached the PC27 final.

Doets beat Rob Cross, Cameron Menzies and Wessel Nijman during the latter stages before Wattimena finally stopped him 8-6.

That made it an excellent couple of days for the Dutchman: a World Series Finals place followed by a Players Championship final.

Woodhouse consistently goes deep

Luke Woodhouse didn't quite get the headline result, but his consistency deserves mentioning.

He reached the PC27 semi-finals and followed it with a PC28 quarter-final.

Across PC27 he averaged 95.71, including a 101.97 in his quarter-final win over Mickey Mansell.

At PC28 he averaged 96.95 across five matches and produced a 101.61 against Daniel Ayres.

Two events, two deep runs and some very solid numbers.

PC28 produces some huge averages

There were also several eye-catching individual performances away from the latter stages.

Martin Schindler hit 109.52, the highest match average in the PC28 data.

Humphries reached 108.66.

Littler produced 107.23.

Jimmy van Schie averaged 105.36, while Owen Bates, Chris Dobey and Kim Huybrechts were among several others to break through the 100 barrier.

It reinforced just how unforgiving these floor tournaments can be.

An excellent performance can still leave a player several rounds away from the title.

A week with several different stories

If there was one theme running through the week's PDC action, it was probably opportunity.

Rydz, Cross, Doets and Sedlacek took theirs to reach the World Series Finals.

Wattimena converted an excellent PC27 run into a title.

Humphries did the same a day later.

Doets enjoyed one of the week's most consistent spells, while Nijman produced one of its biggest individual performances.

And then there was Littler.

His decision to make his first Players Championship appearances of 2026 added another dimension to both tournaments.

A quarter-final followed by a semi-final may not have produced the trophy, but nine victories from 11 matches and tournament averages of 97.47 and 98.36 suggest his first venture onto the floor this season was hardly unsuccessful.

Whether we see considerably more of him in the remaining Players Championship events remains to be seen.

But his first two appearances certainly made the floor tournaments even more interesting.

Floor vs Stage: Do Some Players Perform Better Under the Lights? A Q4QS Analysis of the 2026 PDC Season

 

One of the oldest debates in professional darts is whether certain players are better suited to the Players Championship circuit or the sport's biggest televised stages.

Some players seem to produce their very best performances in front of packed arenas and television cameras, while others quietly build exceptional records on the ProTour week after week.

But is there actually any evidence to support that idea?

To find out, I compared my 2026 Q4QS Knockout Pedigree Rankings from two very different environments:

• Players Championship events

• Televised ranking tournaments

Rather than comparing averages or prize money, these rankings measure knockout success during the 2026 season. I then compared where every player ranked in each list to see who climbed the rankings under the lights and who built their strongest record on the Players Championship circuit.

Before diving into the numbers, there are two important points to make.

Firstly, these are Q4QS Rankings, not the official PDC Order of Merit.

Secondly, this comparison only covers the 2026 season. Players with insufficient participation have been excluded. Most notably, Luke Littler does not feature, having not competed in a Players Championship event during 2026. Without a Players Championship ranking, it simply isn't possible to make a fair comparison.

Biggest Movers Towards the Televised Rankings

The following players achieved a significantly higher Q4QS Televised Ranking than their Q4QS Players Championship Ranking.

Player	Q4QS Players Championship Rank	Q4QS Televised Rank	Movement
Josh Rock	62	6	▲ 56
Ryan Joyce	70	17	▲ 53
Gian van Veen	50	7	▲ 43
Mike De Decker	71	27	▲ 44
Gerwyn Price	43	2	▲ 41
Niels Zonneveld	55	15	▲ 40
Nathan Aspinall	47	9	▲ 38

Josh Rock heads the list, climbing an incredible 56 places between the two rankings. Ryan Joyce also makes a huge leap, while Gian van Veen continues to strengthen his reputation whenever the biggest tournaments come around.

Gerwyn Price and Nathan Aspinall are perhaps less surprising. Both have built reputations over many years as players capable of producing some of their very best darts on the sport's biggest stages.

Biggest Movers Towards the Players Championship Rankings

These players recorded considerably stronger Q4QS Players Championship Rankings than their televised rankings.

Player	Q4QS Players Championship Rank	Q4QS Televised Rank	Movement
Andrew Gilding	5	29	▼ 24
Chris Dobey	2	20	▼ 18
Gary Anderson	30	40	▼ 10
Kevin Doets	3	12	▼ 9
Wessel Nijman	1	8	▼ 7
Luke Woodhouse	4	11	▼ 7
James Wade	9	13	▼ 4

Wessel Nijman's place at the top of the Players Championship rankings underlines just how impressive his ProTour campaign has been.

Chris Dobey, Kevin Doets and Luke Woodhouse have also put together exceptional Players Championship seasons, while Andrew Gilding's consistency on the floor has been rewarded with a remarkably high Q4QS ranking.

These results shouldn't be viewed as a weakness in televised tournaments. Instead, they demonstrate just how consistently these players have performed throughout the demanding Players Championship schedule.

Consistency Across Both Rankings

Some players don't show a dramatic difference between the two rankings.

Luke Humphries is a good example. While he ranks slightly higher in the televised list, he remains among the elite in both environments.

The same can be said for Michael van Gerwen, whose rankings remain consistently high regardless of whether he is playing on the Players Championship circuit or under the television cameras.

Those players may simply possess an ability to adapt to every environment they encounter.

Why Do The Rankings Differ?

There is probably no single explanation.

One obvious factor is match format.

Players Championship matches are generally played over shorter distances, meaning there is less time to recover from a slow start. Most televised ranking tournaments become progressively longer as the event develops, rewarding players capable of maintaining a high level over an extended contest.

The seeding system may also influence results.

Players Championship events are seeded using the Players Championship Order of Merit, whereas televised ranking tournaments are generally seeded using the main PDC Order of Merit. That can produce very different draws, particularly in the early rounds.

Participation is another important consideration.

Several leading players have reduced their Players Championship schedules during 2026, while others have entered almost every event. That inevitably affects the opportunities available to build a strong knockout pedigree.

Finally, there is the atmosphere itself.

Some players appear to relish performing in front of thousands of spectators, while others quietly produce outstanding results on the ProTour week after week.

Whether that's down to mentality, experience, preparation, playing style or something else entirely is impossible to measure—but it's certainly an intriguing discussion.

Final Thoughts

This analysis isn't designed to say that one player is better than another.

Instead, it highlights where players have built their strongest knockout records during the 2026 season.

Some have climbed the rankings when the television cameras arrive.

Others have quietly dominated the Players Championship circuit.

And a select few continue to perform at an exceptionally high level regardless of where they play.

As with any statistical comparison, there are caveats, but the trends are fascinating—and they raise an interesting question.

What do you think explains the differences? Is it the atmosphere, the format, the draw, the scheduling... or simply the mark of players who adapt to every challenge?

Just How Difficult Is It To Break Into The PDC Top 20?

 

One of the biggest debates in professional darts centres around the PDC Order of Merit. Are the world's top players simply the best players, or does the structure of the professional game make it harder than ever for new names to break into the elite?

It's a question I've heard discussed countless times, particularly around the European Tour. The Top 16 receive automatic entry and seeded positions, while those further down the rankings often have to battle through qualifiers before they've even thrown a dart on the main stage.

Rather than simply offering an opinion, I wanted to look at the numbers.

A remarkably exclusive club

Looking at the year-end PDC Top 20 between 2010 and 2025 reveals just how difficult it is to join the sport's elite.

Across those sixteen seasons there were 321 Top 20 positions available (2019 included a tie for 20th), yet they were occupied by just 63 different players.

That immediately tells us one thing.

Breaking into the Top 20 is far harder than many people probably realise.

Even more striking is the annual turnover. On average, over 82% of the previous year's Top 20 remained there the following season. In a typical year, only three or four places became available.

Think about that for a moment.

A player isn't realistically competing for one of twenty places. They're competing for one of perhaps three opportunities, while the remaining positions are occupied by players who have already established themselves.

Staying there is just as impressive

Once players reach the elite, many stay there for years.

James Wade appeared in every year-end Top 20 from 2010 through to 2025.

Michael van Gerwen has spent fourteen consecutive years inside the Top 20.

Dave Chisnall has managed thirteen consecutive appearances, while Peter Wright and Simon Whitlock both enjoyed runs of twelve straight seasons.

This isn't simply a list of talented players. It demonstrates remarkable consistency over long periods.

At the other end of the scale, only eleven players appeared in the year-end Top 20 on just one occasion during the study period. Reaching the Top 20 is rarely a one-season fluke.

So is the system fair?

This is where opinions begin to differ.

One argument is simple.

The best players win the biggest tournaments, therefore they deserve to be seeded, receive automatic entries and benefit from those rewards.

It's difficult to argue against success being rewarded.

However, there is another side to the debate.

Once a player reaches the Top 16, they gain regular access to the biggest ranking events, avoid qualification for many tournaments and often receive more favourable draws through seeding.

Those advantages don't guarantee victories, but they do provide more opportunities to earn ranking money than players trying to break through from outside the elite.

The statistics alone don't prove that the system keeps players in the Top 20.

What they do show is that very few places become available each year, meaning the pathway into the elite is incredibly narrow.

Is there a changing of the guard?

Yes, but perhaps not as quickly as many people think.

The early part of the study was dominated by names such as Phil Taylor, Adrian Lewis, Raymond van Barneveld, Terry Jenkins and Simon Whitlock.

Gradually they were replaced by Michael van Gerwen, Gary Anderson, Peter Wright, Michael Smith and Gerwyn Price.

Now we're seeing another generation emerge, led by Luke Humphries, Luke Littler, Gian van Veen, Josh Rock and Martin Schindler.

What's interesting is that this change rarely happens overnight.

Most players don't jump from outside the Top 100 into the Top 20 in a single season. Instead they tend to climb steadily over several years before finally making the breakthrough.

Luke Littler is the obvious exception. His rise has been extraordinary and almost certainly shouldn't be viewed as the normal route to the top.

Can we spot the next breakthrough?

This is where I think statistics become really interesting.

The PDC Order of Merit measures prize money won over a two-year period.

My own Q4QS rankings are designed to measure current playing strength using a different methodology.

That means they don't always agree.

Sometimes a player appears high in the Q4QS rankings long before they reach the very top of the PDC Order of Merit.

That doesn't mean they'll definitely become a Top 20 player.

But history suggests that players who consistently produce high averages, win regularly and continue to climb the rankings often follow a similar pathway to those who have broken through before them.

Over the coming months, I'll be comparing today's Q4QS leaders with previous generations of players to see whether we can identify the next stars before they establish themselves on the biggest stages.

The verdict

The figures leave little doubt that breaking into the PDC Top 20 is one of the hardest achievements in professional darts.

With only a handful of places changing hands each year, new players need sustained excellence rather than one outstanding season.

Whether the current structure simply rewards the very best players or also makes it harder for newcomers to force their way through is a debate that will continue.

What the numbers do prove is that reaching the Top 20 is only half the battle.

Staying there is an achievement in itself.

This is only the first part of the research. Over the coming weeks I'll be looking more closely at the journeys of previous breakthrough players, comparing them with today's emerging talent and asking one simple question:

Who will be the next player to force their way into the PDC's elite?