Sources: David Percy Research (web.archive.or...) Patrick Chaplin Article (patrickchaplin...) Thanks For Watching Darts World! Please Subscribe And Like To Support The Channel.
Given how good they are, it would have a very small impact on professionals, so there's no reason for the PDC to change. The amateur player is going to want to use the same board as the pros. Consequently, its adoption would be a very hard sell. Having said that, all you need is a new number ring and manufacturers could always include both rings with the board, at a small increase in cost and it would increase their profits slightly. So, maybe the drive towards the new board will come from the manufacturers.
The biggest error with the thinking behind this board in is assuming that 'bad players' are likely to hit the target NEXT to the one that they are aiming for when in fact they can go all over the place. So for example a bad dart at the 20 segment, instead of hitting 12 on the standard board might hit 16 on this board. So the 'cluster averages' are meaningless for 'bad players'. For good players they remain meaningless because they expect to hit the big number they aim at most of the time... so any miss is equally bad, whether it's 5 or 3 - no practical difference in the context of the leg. You're still a 'mark' behind in cricketing terms. The 'cluster averages' talked about are nothing more than pedantic. The only good bit of thinking is the even / odd binary configuration, cutting out the percentages wire shot for 8 / 16 etc but even that you could argue is not an improvement because it reduces the amount of 'strategy' and learning involved in practicing with a board: choosing your shots, percentages etc, developing a deeper understanding of the board. These quirks enrich a game, they don't diminish it. If it's accuracy only why not just have the Bull, treble and double ring and forget the numbers? That would encourage total accuracy but would ir eally be as engaging a game?
I used to play against a bloke who’s darts were all over the place but the amount of times he dropped one in treble 12, when aiming at the 20 segment, happened so frequently you’d think he was aiming for it🤣
All that is needed for a new layout is a different number ring!! What's the difficulty in that? Lots of people could do that with coat hangers and a small welder!. Winmau or others don't need to release new boards, just the rings!!
Don’t really buy into this whole poor player getting results because of the board argument, thought experience that rarely happens & they might have a lucky leg but cream rises to the top over the course of the match
Dart board makers could just sell a seperate optimal number ring. But i’m pretty sure i would accidentally throw to wrong the wrong large single/triple/double because its so auto in the beginning
The poorer players in my club get very lucky a lot of the time - they spray the darts randomly around the board and get triples almost every time - and never the triple 1 or 20 - always the 13, 19, 17. Their only problem is hitting a double......
Just realized my comment on this never actually posted (possibly because links were included?) so reposting now. Your subsequent video just reinforced my feeling on this! Thanks for this vid! Can't wait to read that research paper and the proposed changed layout is awesome (I'm definitely going to model and 3D print that!) I'm a relatively new player and not that good yet (only low 30s 3DA), but am a huge nerd so was already thinking about how aiming for 16 instead of 20 in '01 could net me a higher average at the same accuracy level (figuring accuracy would improve over time). Just last Friday night while sitting out by the fire I sketched out a mapping of the trebles, singles, and sum of adjacent segments to try and visualize where greater average scores could lie. The biggest thing seems to be that 3 near misses on a 16 would have a minimum of 21 instead of 3 from a 20, which seems significant. Also a 31 instead of the common 26 "breakfast" is an improvement as well. In my initial research on the topic I also found a Statistical Computing course at Carnegie Mellon that provides all kinds of useful R sample code, though some assumptions about the accuracy of throws that I don't agree with, so I was going to try and run my own simulations based off it to get more accurate estimations. Ultimately I'd like to integrate it as an extension to Autodarts so that it could provide suggestions for the highest probability targets automatically.
the consensus is that it wasn’t until the year 1896 that a carpenter from Lancashire named Brian Gamlin invented the number system we now know so well. The Gamlin Cup is played in the czech republic as a rememberance to the person who made the beautiful game of darts
No mention off the rare Wensleydale board? This comprises 6 segments scoring 1, 2, 3, 10, 20 and 35, a three ring bull (100, 50, 25), a lucky dip area where hitting a point on the board causes a flap to spin. Can settle on 2x, 3x, 50 or LOSE. Tests the good players
After my comment over at your 'The Day BDO Darts Died' video this looks as if it could develop into another schism in the sport. Could we see a separate traditional board and optimal board circuit evolving?
But if the whole point of playing and practicing is to get better and sharper at accuracy.. then what point is there in having a board where the average score is just all over the board lol
In the realm of darts, precision sought, Where players aim, with every thought, A debate ensues, a fiery song, "Why the PDC dartboard is wrong." On boards of red and green so bright, Where targets gleam in evening light, The PDC board, with its numbered array, Invites contention, in the darting fray. For traditionalists, it's a matter of lore, The standard board they adore, With its numbering, time-honored, true, A legacy cherished, tried and true. Yet the PDC board, with its subtle shift, In numbering, brings a different gift, To the darting world, a new frontier, Where strategy and skill intertwine, clear. But why is it wrong, some may ask, In the game of darts, this curious task? It's not the board, but the challenge it brings, That ignites the debate, where passion sings. For in the heart of darting lore, Tradition and innovation war, But in the end, let skill decide, As players take aim, with passion, wide. So whether PDC or traditional fare, In the game of darts, let us share, The joy of competition, the thrill of flight, As arrows soar through the darting night.
It’s only considered optimal if you want to make the game harder. It’s meant to be fun and if you want new players to start and stick with it, you need to maintain an element of luck/fun.
But in Cricket, luck is part of the game. At least if you're playing it correctly. There's luck, strategy and skill and you can will using either of them.
I agree with others, the 16 is at the wrong place, also the 18 is wrong. The 16 should swap with the 12 and the 18 with the 14 on the alternative board. Then for me, it would be fair and in a way logic. The original board is as it is, but the allocation of the numbers is not plausible and in my opinion not beautiful, aright, proportionate or simply perfect. It seems always a little bit wrong and not clever. But it is a it is.
I wouldnt worry about the position of the numbers , unless its the biggest insider joke ever pro darts players have said the trebles are slightly bigger on the tv competition boards . 😮
![Ultimate Darts Tips For Intermediate! [ NOBODY KNOWS ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/jeCYBk3WzT8/mqdefault.jpg)
![Ultimate Darts Tips For Intermediate! [ NOBODY KNOWS ]](/img/tr.png)
Biggest difference for me is my constant scores of 26 would plummet down to 24 on the new board...for that reason, i'm out.
😂
You're getting 26....I'm still throwing 11 😅
Laffin 26 chips n peas
Bighead.
900 dart finish.
Given how good they are, it would have a very small impact on professionals, so there's no reason for the PDC to change. The amateur player is going to want to use the same board as the pros. Consequently, its adoption would be a very hard sell. Having said that, all you need is a new number ring and manufacturers could always include both rings with the board, at a small increase in cost and it would increase their profits slightly. So, maybe the drive towards the new board will come from the manufacturers.
The biggest error with the thinking behind this board in is assuming that 'bad players' are likely to hit the target NEXT to the one that they are aiming for when in fact they can go all over the place. So for example a bad dart at the 20 segment, instead of hitting 12 on the standard board might hit 16 on this board. So the 'cluster averages' are meaningless for 'bad players'. For good players they remain meaningless because they expect to hit the big number they aim at most of the time... so any miss is equally bad, whether it's 5 or 3 - no practical difference in the context of the leg. You're still a 'mark' behind in cricketing terms. The 'cluster averages' talked about are nothing more than pedantic.
The only good bit of thinking is the even / odd binary configuration, cutting out the percentages wire shot for 8 / 16 etc but even that you could argue is not an improvement because it reduces the amount of 'strategy' and learning involved in practicing with a board: choosing your shots, percentages etc, developing a deeper understanding of the board. These quirks enrich a game, they don't diminish it. If it's accuracy only why not just have the Bull, treble and double ring and forget the numbers? That would encourage total accuracy but would ir eally be as engaging a game?
Very true. I have seen a treble 12 many times when someone aim at 20. That would give you 48 instead of 36 on this board.
I used to play against a bloke who’s darts were all over the place but the amount of times he dropped one in treble 12, when aiming at the 20 segment, happened so frequently you’d think he was aiming for it🤣
It's good to hear about the history of how the board we all love has came to be, but I don't think the number placement has to be changed.
I’m from Dewsbury, not that many of us admit it 😂 cool to hear the guy who made the dartboard as it is today was from my hometown!
All that is needed for a new layout is a different number ring!! What's the difficulty in that? Lots of people could do that with coat hangers and a small welder!. Winmau or others don't need to release new boards, just the rings!!
Don’t really buy into this whole poor player getting results because of the board argument, thought experience that rarely happens & they might have a lucky leg but cream rises to the top over the course of the match
i think we must all have wondered at some point why the numbers are where they are.
Dart board makers could just sell a seperate optimal number ring.
But i’m pretty sure i would accidentally throw to wrong the wrong large single/triple/double because its so auto in the beginning
Might benefit bad players with certain clusters but still gotta hit that double ring to win baby!!
Trebles for show, Doubles for doe😂
The poorer players in my club get very lucky a lot of the time - they spray the darts randomly around the board and get triples almost every time - and never the triple 1 or 20 - always the 13, 19, 17. Their only problem is hitting a double......
Just realized my comment on this never actually posted (possibly because links were included?) so reposting now. Your subsequent video just reinforced my feeling on this!
Thanks for this vid! Can't wait to read that research paper and the proposed changed layout is awesome (I'm definitely going to model and 3D print that!)
I'm a relatively new player and not that good yet (only low 30s 3DA), but am a huge nerd so was already thinking about how aiming for 16 instead of 20 in '01 could net me a higher average at the same accuracy level (figuring accuracy would improve over time).
Just last Friday night while sitting out by the fire I sketched out a mapping of the trebles, singles, and sum of adjacent segments to try and visualize where greater average scores could lie.
The biggest thing seems to be that 3 near misses on a 16 would have a minimum of 21 instead of 3 from a 20, which seems significant. Also a 31 instead of the common 26 "breakfast" is an improvement as well.
In my initial research on the topic I also found a Statistical Computing course at Carnegie Mellon that provides all kinds of useful R sample code, though some assumptions about the accuracy of throws that I don't agree with, so I was going to try and run my own simulations based off it to get more accurate estimations.
Ultimately I'd like to integrate it as an extension to Autodarts so that it could provide suggestions for the highest probability targets automatically.
the consensus is that it wasn’t until the year 1896 that a carpenter from Lancashire named Brian Gamlin invented the number system we now know so well.
The Gamlin Cup is played in the czech republic as a rememberance to the person who made the beautiful game of darts
I do love your videos but the titles are very clickbaity.
This explains how the mrs sometimes beats me ... the boards clearly in her favour as im of course a darting god .
Surely just get hold of a spare number ring and with a bit of soldering or glue make your own.
No mention off the rare Wensleydale board? This comprises 6 segments scoring 1, 2, 3, 10, 20 and 35, a three ring bull (100, 50, 25), a lucky dip area where hitting a point on the board causes a flap to spin. Can settle on 2x, 3x, 50 or LOSE. Tests the good players
After my comment over at your 'The Day BDO Darts Died' video this looks as if it could develop into another schism in the sport. Could we see a separate traditional board and optimal board circuit evolving?
Thank you for this information, much appreciated👍
Glad it was helpful!
But if the whole point of playing and practicing is to get better and sharper at accuracy.. then what point is there in having a board where the average score is just all over the board lol
In the realm of darts, precision sought,
Where players aim, with every thought,
A debate ensues, a fiery song,
"Why the PDC dartboard is wrong."
On boards of red and green so bright,
Where targets gleam in evening light,
The PDC board, with its numbered array,
Invites contention, in the darting fray.
For traditionalists, it's a matter of lore,
The standard board they adore,
With its numbering, time-honored, true,
A legacy cherished, tried and true.
Yet the PDC board, with its subtle shift,
In numbering, brings a different gift,
To the darting world, a new frontier,
Where strategy and skill intertwine, clear.
But why is it wrong, some may ask,
In the game of darts, this curious task?
It's not the board, but the challenge it brings,
That ignites the debate, where passion sings.
For in the heart of darting lore,
Tradition and innovation war,
But in the end, let skill decide,
As players take aim, with passion, wide.
So whether PDC or traditional fare,
In the game of darts, let us share,
The joy of competition, the thrill of flight,
As arrows soar through the darting night.
It’s only considered optimal if you want to make the game harder. It’s meant to be fun and if you want new players to start and stick with it, you need to maintain an element of luck/fun.
Yeah never use that dart spiral gig again...
It would be far too big a change. Most people know where to aim without even looking at the numbers
So why not just produce a replacement spider so you have the best of both worlds and can play both versions.
But in Cricket, luck is part of the game. At least if you're playing it correctly. There's luck, strategy and skill and you can will using either of them.
So really the pdc board is not wrong .. or in other words the current dart board layout is not wrong ..
I agree with others, the 16 is at the wrong place, also the 18 is wrong. The 16 should swap with the 12 and the 18 with the 14 on the alternative board. Then for me, it would be fair and in a way logic. The original board is as it is, but the allocation of the numbers is not plausible and in my opinion not beautiful, aright, proportionate or simply perfect. It seems always a little bit wrong and not clever. But it is a it is.
Really only need to make the numbers ring if people wanted it
Not like you'd need to make a whole ass board.... just make the number rings... someone with a 3d printer could sort this.
Oh hell no, it’s already annoying getting hit T12’s on you the whole time by bad players, i don’t wanna see that become T16’s
A 'bad' player is just as likely to hit T18s as T12s, which would suggest *supporting* a new layout.
I wouldnt worry about the position of the numbers , unless its the biggest insider joke ever pro darts players have said the trebles are slightly bigger on the tv competition boards . 😮
Fuck the small numbers and small trebles. Double and big trebles make the money
very nice video
Thanks
5:10 if you can’t aim, get better. That’s what I’ve been doing lolll
Pointless really. Luck will only get you so far....
Just a history lesson. Nothing at all to do with boards being wrong. Title ya vids properly dude, you would get more views.
Hmmm
New board is much better