Think a higher average always means a better performance in darts? Think again. While a three-dart average brilliantly showcases a player’s scoring power, it often fails to tell the full story of victory or defeat. Legendary matches, like Phil Taylor’s 115.80 average loss, prove that clutch checkouts, strategic timing of scores, and converting doubles are often more critical than raw scoring numbers alone. Don’t let the headline average fool you – true mastery in darts goes far beyond just hitting big scores.
The Illusion of the High Average: When Numbers Lie
In darts, a three-dart average is often seen as the ultimate measure of a player’s skill. A 103 average looks undeniably better than a 97, suggesting a far superior scoring performance. Yet, this simple number can be incredibly deceptive, especially when it comes to determining who truly played better or, more importantly, who won the match.
Perhaps the most famous example of this paradox is the 2015 Premier League clash between Phil Taylor and Raymond van Barneveld. Taylor, known as ‘The Power’, achieved an astonishing average of 115.80 – at the time, the highest losing average ever recorded in televised darts. Despite this colossal scoring feat, he lost the match 7-4 to Van Barneveld, who averaged a respectable but significantly lower 104.18.
How could a player average almost 116 and still lose so decisively? The answer lies in understanding what the average truly represents and what it misses.
What a Three-Dart Average Really Shows:
- Scoring Power: It’s an excellent indicator of how quickly a player reduces their score. A 105 average generally means much heavier scoring than an 85.
- General Standard: Over a full match, it gives a good guide to a player’s overall scoring capability.
What a Three-Dart Average Fails to Explain:
- Individual Leg Wins: It doesn’t detail why specific legs were won or lost.
- Clutch Moments: The impact of crucial scores or checkouts at critical points in a match.
Beyond the Scoreboard: The True Factors in Victory
The Taylor vs. Van Barneveld match is a perfect illustration. Taylor hit nine 180s in 11 legs, dominating the scoring. Van Barneveld hit just three maximums. Yet, Van Barneveld converted seven of his 16 attempts at double, compared to Taylor’s four from 12. This difference in finishing was the decisive factor.
This wasn’t an isolated incident. At the 2017 World Championship semi-final, Raymond van Barneveld averaged an exceptional 109.34 against Michael van Gerwen. In almost any other match, this would have been a winning performance. However, Van Gerwen averaged a record-breaking 114.05, turning Van Barneveld’s brilliant display into yet another highest losing average for the tournament.
Why Averages Alone Are Misleading:
Averages smooth out the nuances of 10, 20, or even 30 legs into a single figure. Darts matches, however, are rarely so neat. Consider these crucial elements that averages often overlook:
- The Timing of Scores: A 180 when your opponent is far back on 300 is excellent, but a well-timed 100 visit that leaves you on a crucial double (like 40) when your opponent is waiting on a finish can be far more impactful. It creates pressure and offers a chance to punish a missed double.
- The Power of the Checkout: A player who takes out a 121 finish when their opponent is waiting on 32 has completely altered the momentum of the match. The average simply records the darts thrown; it doesn’t convey the psychological blow or the shift in advantage. This is why checkout percentage deserves attention alongside the headline average.
- Context of Missed Doubles: Three missed darts at double when your opponent is on 250 is very different from three misses when they are waiting on 20. The latter can be devastating, handing your opponent a leg they might not have otherwise won.
The Enduring Value of the Average (With Caveats)
Stripping away all importance from averages would be going too far. Over an entire season, consistently high averages are a robust indicator of a player’s overall level. Strong scoring means:
- Reaching finishes sooner.
- Putting opponents under constant pressure.
- Creating more opportunities to win legs.
This is why averages remain a primary statistic shown during television coverage. They are quick to grasp and provide a useful benchmark for comparing general scoring prowess.
While some alternative metrics, like ‘REAL’ averages (which estimate average leg length based on scores left), attempt to offer a more representative picture, they don’t render the traditional three-dart average obsolete. Instead, they highlight why modern darts analysis has evolved beyond treating it as the sole, complete performance rating.
The Verdict: Watch the Darts
If your question is “Who scored more heavily across the match?”, then the higher average provides a very good answer. However, if your question is “Who played better, or who deserved to win?”, then the numbers alone are insufficient. You need to watch the darts, observe the crucial moments, and understand the context of each visit and each finish.
Phil Taylor’s 115.80 average and 7-4 defeat against Van Barneveld serves as perhaps the ultimate proof. Scoring creates the opportunity to win legs, but players still need to finish them, protect their own throws, and produce the right visit when the match tightens. Averages certainly deserve their place on the screen, but they should never have the final word on who truly excelled.
Source: Based on an article from Darts Planet TV.
