General Chat

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

We all know it's skewed because it's based on money - his runner-up spot (£200K) at PDCWC via a softish draw in late 2018 is worth more (almost 2x so) than winning most other ranking events. That'll disappear from the rankings in 5 months and he'll be in a more realistic spot then.

Here's a thought though - Why not design your own ranking system and update it after each event? It could be a fun exercise and useful on your website. Maybe you can use points instead of money to reduce the WC loading, or change the weightings so that this years events are rated higher than last years.

It's important to be honest though, if there comes a month when it's giving you a result you don't like then you can't tweak it.

I suggested as an initial thought months back that a ranking system be based on the same system , however instead of using the real money won, the actual winners of comps got double or treble the imaginary money for their title win.


for example, a floor comp winner would get 20k on his ranking, instead of the 10k he gets in real life.
Dimi would get 200k of ranking points instead of 100k for the matchplay.
World champion gets double etc.


This way actual winners get a clear advantage for winning comps. Would make it apply only to ranking comps




MVG, Cross, Price, Gurney, and others would be far clear of smith


Possibly reduce the rolling from a two year to a one year.


Either way something has to be easier than a system that has Smith , Chizzy and White this high despite all 3 never winning a thing of note

US2 wrote: »

Heres another ranking list with only major events counting.

I agree justin winning tournaments should count more but someone who reaches say 10 major finals is better and more consistent than someone who loses in 1st round 9 times but wins it once.

Whilst that is a better list and more realistic looking oom, the problem shows durrant at 12, higher than what he is in the real OOM.


He has won nothing, failed in all 4 major semis he took part in.


As for a player with 10 finals, yes that is consistency, lots of money earned, but akin to terry jenkins where you have to question the mentality of said player.


Factor in Taylor is retired, MVG was knocked out early, in fact all top 4 seeds went out early and Smith still found a way to lose it, as I said he would.


Itr was never a sinle doubt he would falter.

hardly, women players are utter rubbish compared to the men, that is a fact backed up by averages, checkout percentages,results in head to heads, tournaments, etc

the only woman who could ever get a tourcard was lisa ashton, and she can now barely win a game and of the 128 players with tourcards she is ranked...wait for it....#127....again another fact.

If the women were as good as they foolishly think they are then they should have won tourcards, but they did not because they were not good enough ...another fact.

They want equality, but are quick to accept gender preferential treatment when it suits their cause.

The PDC do not care if you are male or female, straight or gay, black or white, the PDC is open to all if you are good enough....barry hearns words, not mine, so if women can play in all the events why cannot the men do the same ?

Call it a publicity stunt, call it promotional, call it pc, call it whatever, but it is gender bias when one gender is excluded from comps and the other gender can enter all if they are good enough and even have comps for that gender alone.

If the pdc held a mens only comp, and told tourcard lisa ashton she was not allowed enter because she was a woman, there would be people complaining how that would be sexist.

well done on completely missing the point entirely.
The pdc is not the mens game, or have you not grasped this yet ?
The pdc is open to both men and women....why cannot the women qualify on merit like the men.
Why should they get preferential treatment if they seek equality
seems like hypocrisy to me.,

As said if the pdc ran an event and said lisa ashton was not allowed enter because she was a woman there would be uproar.
But they can run comps and say no men allowed, despite the PDC being gender neutral. You seemed to ignore this.


Allow me to give you a little history lesson
Cast your mind back a few years, when all the then top women players moaned non stop about opportunities not being available to them, and were crying and spouting lies like "we are as good as the men"...and the bdo made false promise after false promise.
Along came Barry Hearn willing to run a PDC womens world champs, offering better money than the BDO one, and how did those women repay him ?
Thats right , Gulliver, Hedman, and almost every single woman at the top of the rankings at the time, barring Anastasia would not even enter.
That is how they repay the kindness offered by Barry Hearn by snubbing him and his money.


Only because being "pc" to the point of ridiculous is common place now, it is why Barry Hearn is giving them another chance, and make no mistake its a glorified publicity stunt, as Barry Hearn is well aware the women are rubbish in comparison and when the play in the PDC Worlds they will be just there as an excuse for the PDC to whore themselves out for publicity.
Nor does it change the truth, that the very same hypocrites who claim to want equality, have no problem accepting preferential treatment when there is something in it for them.

Why is it there is a need for a womens comp ?
Because they are not good enough to qualify on actual ability, so they need gender bias to qualify for gender free PDC World title.

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Almost every other sport has separate competitions/tour events for women.
Therefore Justin, you are arguing from a position of 'darts is right and every other sport is wrong' which is quite a leap of faith.

But lets suppose for a moment that darts is correct.
That still leaves the problem that the darts method will actively block women players coming through.
Like if I have a Sport Billy 10 year old daughter - lets say she can knock in 21 darts legs, run 1K in 3 minutes, and break 90 on a golf course.
All promising figures and the potential with training to be competitive at pro level in 10 years. Which would you recommend she concentrates on? The ones where there'll be a sex-segregated path to fame and money, or the one where'll she have to battle her way past men? You know what I'm doing, I'm tearing the dart board down and investing in a better set of golf clubs or running gear.

So the long-winded point is that the way darts does it may appear to be all fair and inclusive - however the actual result is it will prevent girls and young women attempting to become pro in the first place, which keeps the standard down and makes it less likely that the next generation has anyone to emulate. So a vicious circle ensues.

your point is rendered useless because the very company that is holding said event is a company that is already a unisex code.




You dont see the issue when a unisex code, is holding a womens only event so the winners can compete in a unisex event ?
If that does not tell you that even the pdc acknowledge the women are rubbish nothing will




Or are you saying there should be a code for women and a code for men with both getting the same coverage, same money etc ????
The PDC tried that, and were snubbed.
Here is the reality , womens event do not sell tickets, never have, never will.

Their matches are lesser quality
The public dont care about womens darts, these are all facts.



A unisex code holding a womens only event in order to get women to qualify for a unisex code ......do you not see how retarded that is ?

US2 wrote: »

I must agree with Justin, its either a unisex sport or its not. If you want to play in the pdc world championships you should have to qualify like everyone else. Lisa went the legit route and tried to grind it out all year against the men.

If fallon sherrock didn't exist this new tour wouldn't exist let's be honest.

Correct.


This is all done for the media attention and publicity, in the hope fallon does what she did last year, because she is the only woman that can give a man a game.


Fallon is not typical of the womens game, she is the exception and even she got lucky getting as far as she did.

This is why there is 4 events, in case Fallon slips up in any of the events.


No person in their right mind will tune to see Maria O Brien or Laura Turner throwing 51 averages.
Womens only events wont sell tickets, and with covid and no crowds, now is the only time they would get away with this rubbish.


Tell me Peteed, what if Ashton enters and fails to qualify, does she get a second go to qualify alongside the men as well



or am I imaging that preferential treatment as well ?