Who were the world No. 1s in the PDC Order of Merit, and how long did each reign last? Michael van Gerwen holds a remarkable PDC record
FAQ
The PDC Order of Merit is the ranking system for professional darts at the Professional Darts Corporation (PDC). Over the years, only thirteen players have led the world rankings in darts.
ADVERTISEMENT
These rankings are determined entirely by the prize money players earn at official PDC ranking tournaments. The current Order of Merit format has been used since the 2007 Darts World Cup and replaced the original PDC ranking system introduced in 1993. In that old system, players received points according to the status and prestige of a tournament.
Here is what the article contains:
1. How did the old PDC Order of Merit work?
2. How does the PDC Order of Merit work now?
3. Warriner-Little's first run as world number one
4. Taylor briefly in power in 1996 and 2000
5. New rivals for Taylor and 2032 day run
6. New king as Van Gerwen rules for over 2558 days, Humphries current leader
7. How long as World Number One
2. How does the PDC Order of Merit work now?
3. Warriner-Little's first run as world number one
4. Taylor briefly in power in 1996 and 2000
5. New rivals for Taylor and 2032 day run
6. New king as Van Gerwen rules for over 2558 days, Humphries current leader
7. How long as World Number One
1. How did the old PDC Order of Merit work?
Until 2007, the PDC worked with a classic points system. Players received ranking points according to the round they reached and the prestige of the tournament. There was no limit on the number of tournaments that counted for the total, so the highest ranked players were not necessarily also the strongest at the major majors.
A well-known example is Colin Lloyd, who was the PDC's number one player for most of 2005 and 2006, while the main titles during that period were mainly distributed among Phil Taylor, John Part and also Raymond van Barneveld.
At the time, winning the world title earned 50 points for the world rankings, and winning another PDC major earned 30 points. A Pro Tour title earned as many as 20 points. In other words, two Pro Tour titles and one quarterfinal earned as many points as winning the PDC World Championship.
While there were obviously far fewer Pro Tour tournaments played back then, it is unthinkable these days to grab the number-one position with merely good performances on the floor. The 2026 World Champion will receive one million pounds in prize money. A player must win 67 Players Championship tournaments to surpass that amount of prize money.
ADVERTISEMENT
Read also
2. How does the Order of Merit now work in the PDC?
The Professional Darts Corporation (PDC) switched to the current Order of Merit system in 2007. In this ranking system, the total prize money a player earns in PDC ranking tournaments within the applicable period counts. For players with a PDC Tour Card, that period is normally two years.
The World Darts Championship is considered the last tournament of the season. Immediately afterwards, the year-end rankings are drawn up and the top 64 players automatically receive a Tour Card for the following season. New Tour Card holders always start again at £0, even if they already had a Tour Card the previous year but finished outside the top 64. They must then regain their Tour Card through the Q-School qualifying tournament.
Even players without a Tour Card can earn prize money in PDC ranking tournaments during the season and thus gain a listing on the Order of Merit. The most famous example is Luke Littler during the 2024 World Darts Championship, who managed to enter the top-64 of the PDC Order of Merit in one fell swoop by reaching the World Cup final. However, if they do not reach the top-64 at the end of the year, their earned prize money is reset to £0.
ADVERTISEMENT
When two players finish tied and a decision is needed for placement or qualification, the total prize money in the four most recent ranking tournaments is looked at first. Then, if there is still no difference, they count backward from the most recent tournament until the difference becomes clear.
3. Warriner-Little first World Number One
When the World Darts Council (WDC) was founded in 1993, the forerunner of the PDC, Alan Warriner-Little became the world's first number one. He then managed to hold this position for 674 days.
Remarkable detail is that 'Wozza' did not manage to win a single PDC major during this period. On Nov. 6, 1994, World Championship winner Dennis Priestley took over the top spot following his participation in the 1994 Lada UK Masters. Rod Harrington took over the throne in April 1995 after his final appearance at the UK Matchplay, not to be confused with the World Matchplay in Blackpool.
ADVERTISEMENT

Alan Warriner was the first world number one at the WDC, the forerunner of the PDC
4. Taylor briefly in power in 1996 and 2000
In 1995, Phil Taylor took his first world title with the PDC, and on Jan. 1, 1996, "The Power" became world champion again. Yet it would not be until August 1996 that Taylor was allowed to top the PDC rankings for the first time.
However, Taylor could not enjoy this status for long, because after 31 days he had to cede the first spot to Warriner. Warriner's second period as world number one lasted 699 days, and from August 1, 1998, Harrington took over this role for 728 days. In 2000, Taylor returned to the number-one position, but this time it lasted only 57 days. Peter Manley relieved him on Sept. 24, 2000, and held the position for as many as 399 days.
Then the first spot returned to Warriner, who led the rankings from Oct. 28, 2001, to May 2002. During this period, he did have to share the first spot, as of Jan. 5, 2002, with Taylor for 28 days. In May 2002, Warriner lost the top spot for the last time, bringing his number of days as world number one to 1558 days. A number surpassed by only two players.
ADVERTISEMENT
Read also
| Rank | Name | How long spent as World Number One |
| 1 | Phil Taylor | 3343 |
| 2 | Michael van Gerwen | 2558 |
| 3 | Alan Warriner-Little | 1553 |
| 4 | Rod Harrington | 1205 |
| 5 | Luke Humphries | 683 |
| 6 | Colin Lloyd | 664 |
| 7 | Gerwyn Price | 562 |
| 8 | Peter Manley | 398 |
| 9 | Michael Smith | 364 |
| 10 | John Part | 202 |
| 11 | Peter Wright | 159 |
| 12 | Raymond van Barneveld | 158 |
| 13 | Dennis Priestley | 154 |
| 14 | Luke Littler |
5. New rivals for Taylor but 2032 day run begins
Taylor's fourth stint as best darter at the PDC was the first to last more than 100 days. He lost the number one spot after the legendary World Championship final against John Part in 2003, winning the world title and doubles to call himself number one in the world.
Later that year, Taylor reclaimed the first spot, then held it for 582 days until February 2005. Colin Lloyd then became the new world number one. Although Lloyd had won the World Grand Prix in 2004 and also took the title at the World Matchplay in 2005, he amassed his points mainly by playing significantly more Pro Tour tournaments than his major competitors.
ADVERTISEMENT
In June 2006, the first spot returned briefly to Taylor, who held first place again for a week. To date, that is still the shortest period that a player has held first place consecutively. Lloyd had retaken the top spot after one more and held it until the 2007 World Championship. Taylor lost to Raymond van Barneveld at this World Championship in a historic World Championship final, but did return to the head of the new PDC Order of Merit, which took effect as of the 2007 World Darts Championship.
This time, Taylor held the lead position for exactly one year. From Jan. 1, 2008, Raymond van Barneveld was allowed to lead the rankings. This lasted six months before Taylor began his longest period as number one. This run eventually lasted 2032 days.
Read also
6. New king as Van Gerwen rules for over 2558 days, Littler current king
January 1, 2014 marked the dawn of a new era. It was the day that Michael van Gerwen captured his first world title, also becoming the new world number one. It became a darter's longest period as a ranking leader. No less than seven consecutive years Van Gerwen was the leader of the PDC Order of Merit.
ADVERTISEMENT
After Van Gerwen's dominance, the number-one position changed hands more regularly. Gerwyn Price became the successor to 'Mighty Mike' after winning the world title in 2021. Then it was a change of fortunes with Peter Wright, who twice took the top spot from 'The Iceman'.
Price, however, was allowed to go to the 2023 World Darts Championship as the world number one and then lost the top spot for good. The first spot was taken over by Michael Smith, who had won over Van Gerwen in the 2023 World Darts Championship final on Jan. 3, 2023.
Smith held the top spot for exactly one year. Luke Humphries became the new leader after winning the world title in 2024. Cool Hand Luke lost this position to Luke Littler on 17 November 2025.
Read also
ADVERTISEMENT
7. Stints as World Number One
| Rank | Player | Date from | Datum till | Days as World Number One |
| 1 | Alan Warriner-Little | 1-1-1993 | 5-11-1994 | 673 |
| 2 | Dennis Priestley | 6-11-1994 | 9-4-1995 | 154 |
| 3 | Rod Harrington | 10-4-1995 | 31-7-1996 | 478 |
| 4 | Phil Taylor | 1-8-1996 | 31-8-1996 | 30 |
| 5 | Alan Warriner-Little | 1-9-1996 | 31-7-1998 | 698 |
| 6 | Rod Harrington | 1-8-1998 | 28-7-2000 | 727 |
| 7 | Phil Taylor | 29-7-2000 | 23-9-2000 | 56 |
| 8 | Peter Manley | 24-9-2000 | 27-10-2001 | 398 |
| 9 | Alan Warriner-Little | 28-10-2001 | 4-1-2002 | 68 |
| 10 | Alan Warriner-Little & Phil Taylor | 5-1-2002 | 1-2-2002 | 27 |
| 11 | Alan Warriner-Little | 2-2-2002 | 30-4-2002 | 87 |
| 12 | Phil Taylor | 1-5-2002 | 3-1-2003 | 247 |
| 13 | John Part | 4-1-2003 | 25-7-2003 | 202 |
| 14 | Phil Taylor | 26-7-2003 | 26-2-2005 | 581 |
| 15 | Colin Lloyd | 27-2-2005 | 10-6-2006 | 468 |
| 16 | Phil Taylor | 11-6-2006 | 17-6-2006 | 6 |
| 17 | Colin Lloyd | 18-6-2006 | 31-12-2006 | 196 |
| 18 | Phil Taylor | 1-1-2007 | 31-12-2007 | 364 |
| 19 | Raymond van Barneveld | 1-1-2008 | 7-6-2008 | 158 |
| 20 | Phil Taylor | 8-6-2008 | 31-12-2013 | 2032 |
| 21 | Michael van Gerwen | 1-1-2014 | 2-1-2021 | 2558 |
| 22 | Gerwyn Price | 3-1-2021 | 5-3-2022 | 422 |
| 23 | Peter Wright | 6-3-2022 | 23-7-2022 | 139 |
| 24 | Gerwyn Price | 24-7-2022 | 8-10-2022 | 76 |
| 25 | Peter Wright | 9-10-2022 | 29-10-2022 | 20 |
| 26 | Gerwyn Price | 30-10-2022 | 2-1-2023 | 64 |
| 27 | Michael Smith | 3-1-2023 | 2-1-2024 | 364 |
| 28 | Luke Humphries | 3-1-2024 | 16-11-2025 | 683 |
| 29 | Luke Littler | 17-11-2025 |

Samuel GillChief Content Officer
Samuel Gill is the Chief Content Officer (CCO) of DartsNews.com, a role he has held since 2020. He is responsible for editorial governance across the platform, including setting content standards, overseeing accuracy and consistency, and guiding long-term editorial strategy across professional darts coverage. Since joining, he has contributed more than 10,000 articles and editorial pieces, playing a central role in the development and daily operation of the site.
Based in Leicester, Samuel has extensive experience in darts media and has been closely involved in coverage of the professional darts circuit for several years. Within the UK darts community, he is a recognised figure known for his consistent editorial output and ongoing reporting on major tournaments and developments across the PDC calendar.
In his current role, Samuel works closely with editors and writers to ensure content meets clear journalistic standards, with a focus on source verification, editorial consistency, and timely updates when new, confirmed information becomes available.
claps 3visitors 3
Just in
Popular news
Latest comments
- I'm disappointed he was not able to secure a spot at the Grand Slam. With Carl Sneyd taking care of Daryl Gurney, he would have had to beat Andy Boulton before facing the winner of Sneyd vs Mensur Suljović for a Grand Slam spot. Unfortunately, after beating Filip Bereza comfortably, he succumbed to Boulton, and the board would ultimately be won by the highly inconsistent Carl Sneyd. Since he could instead have been drawn against the likes of Cristo Reyes, Dirk van Duijvenbode and Stephen Bunting, I think once Gurney was out of the picture he would have been favourite to win his board, and it seems like a massive missed opportunity to put 5 grand on his ranking and seal another major TV appearance ahead of the Worlds. The highs and lows of following Raymond van Barneveld!Deduce635806-11-2026
- Probably i will receive a lot of backlash and hate for this reaction, but well, so be it. I am more than sick and tired of those lies of you Barry Hearn. How dare you defend yourself over the back of Fallon’s son! He has a disability and not an illness, so let me correct that for you! I know because I have the exact same disability. I have tried to reach out to Fallon in the past, and offered her to help her and her son, because I was struggling with the same problems, and I understood the boy. I wanted him to have finally someone who understood him. However she told me that she did not want my help, and I have respected Fallon’s choice. I have never asked Fallon for money. They don’t need money in that case. I only ever wanted the best for Fallon and Rory, but I have to be honest about the situation. Fallon should tell the true story and not be forced to tell lies. I don’t hate Fallon, and I don’t begrudge or envy a single penny that she gets, but this situation/case is just not fair. I hate the lies and the dishonesty and injustice. I don’t want Fallon to be hated because there is an unfair disadvantage created. Don’t proclaim your false lies over the back of Rory! I only stand for integrity and justice. I am precisely the one who always sticks up for Fallon. And you don't, you don't give a damn about them. You were never there for them, and now you only want to save your own position! You are just trying to talk your way out of your own bad behavior at the expense of someone with a disability. And to Fallon, I don’t know if this may ever reach you, and you read it, but I want you to know I love you and I love your son Rory very much, I am sorry how things developed and went. I hope you and Harriet are still friends. I am sorry if I were too persistent to you, or you experienced it that way, but it was never my intention. Please understand I have autism as well. As Barry Hearn would say, I am only just a human being too, and I also make mistakes and misjudge things sometimes. I promise you I did everything out of the deepest love and care for you and Rory. If I were you, I should just keep all the money, only please never be dishonest or tell lies anymore for Barry Hearn, or anyone else. I hope you have the best life, and I wish nothing more than the best for you. I have always loved the two of you. Farewell.Hiddo05-11-2026
- She is a professional. If darts is her income, she is a professional. Same as Adrian Lewis, Martin Adams. A tour card just means someone can play on the PDC tour. You could even make a case that Clayton wasn't a professional (until recently I believe) because he had employment elsewhere.BandB04-11-2026
- She's technically not a professional though as she doesn't hold a pro tour card.mr-pablo04-11-2026
- Such a shame that lakeside has been reduced to this. Fantastic venue,and previously a great tournament. Not any morerick6703-11-2026
- Seems to me that the top 16 players pick and choose whatever they want to play. Good,all the money will get spread out more. They get more money from exhibitions than tournaments so let them all withdrawrick6703-11-2026
- Play all legs and the winners split the pot. Luke gets the lot of he wins them all. If your occupation is darts player you can't enter, regardless of ability.BandB01-11-2026
- I'm quite a jaded person all things considered, but to be honest I found Beat Luke Littler to be pretty entertaining. It certainly wasn't seamless, which is to be expected given the lack of precedence, but I actually think the pacing was pretty good, the production was impressive, and there was a good sense of humour and levity to it. I think it was a very ambitious undertaking but one that, for the most part, paid off. I liked the system with the four pots and I think it added to the drama and intrigue. I enjoyed seeing the diverse range of entrants and learning about their backstories. I think the interactivity was pretty clever and well-integrated. The panel was a little incoherent at times; Lee Mack shone however, and his improvisational skills were appreciated during some more awkward interstitial moments. As far as the darts is concerned, it was a shame that the format didn't allow Littler to get into full flow. You obviously don't want him to steamroll everyone but you want to feel like you're getting the full Littler package rather than seeing him struggling to get out of first gear. I will say that his leg against Jayden Walker was very impressive, but it was mostly downhill from there. The attraction revolves around Littler being this untouchable, indomitable force, yet the format doesn't really allow him to fulfil that characterisation. As for Fallon Sherrock, she was mightily impressive and deserved the victory. It is a testament to her unshakeable character that she was able to bang in a 14-darter under such mind-bending pressure. Everything that has been said about the misleading marketing is valid, though they were clear about their eligibility criteria and were able to offload the responsibility somewhat by bringing the viewers into the decision-making process in real time. What is clear though, is that Fallon played the game according to the rules, and she should not be criticised for that, much less abused. I will admit though that it is a kick in the teeth for those true amateurs who committed time and money to the course, and I would also question those who think pub players would have no chance, given that some of Littler's winning legs were dispatched in 7 visits to the board! The great thing about darts is that it isn't so much that amateurs cannot replicate the feats of brilliance pulled off by professionals of the sport, than it is that they simply cannot replicate the consistency of their output, something that this format almost entirely removes from the equation. It should also be noted that, financially, Fallon certainly stands to benefit much less in relative terms from the paycheque than would your average pub thrower, as I'm sure she nets a fair income from the lucrative exhibition circuit alone. What I do hope is that she might use this as an opportunity to really build up a head of steam heading into the new season, as it seems long overdue that she come through Q-School and really take it to the pros on a week-in week-out basis, but whatever she chooses to do, she has certainly achieved enough already for one if not several lifetimes, so who am I to dictate terms? To conclude though, I will state once again that I found Beat Luke Littler to be a pretty enjoyable evening of entertainment. I do feel for the contestants who never actually had the chance to try their luck against the world #1, although I suppose it comes with the format, but all which inevitably raises the question: will Netflix be tempted to do it all again next year? It's hard to say. Whether it would be financially viable, I can't weigh in there. One point I have been making though, and which I touched on earlier, is that the entire concept relies on a public perception that Littler is more or less unbeatable, and that certainly hasn't been the case of late. If the execs had been trying to pitch the show in recent months while Littler has seemed vulnerable, rather than when he was mopping up almost every major title on the calendar, it would certainly be a tougher sell. We will have to see in about 6 months' time whether Littler can still reliably command perception as a near-unstoppable force in darts, and then we'll have a clearer idea about whether we should expect a second helping. Even as a one-off experiment though, and with all the controversy taken into account, I still don't think they disgraced themselves by any means, and that will probably be my lingering assessment of the event when all is said and done.Deduce635801-11-2026
- Fair play to Fallon. But...shows the mockery when a professional players wins what was meant to be an amateur v Pro event, Littlers performance was poor, and what about the players who didn't get a game? Would have been better if the pot was split amoungst all the winners and they all got a leg.BandB31-10-2026
- Not even slightly interestedrick6730-10-2026









