
The World Grand Prix double-start format makes the checkout percentage the single most decisive metric of any PDC major. Needing a double to open every leg before scoring begins and another to close it, winners of this tournament are dependent on their doubling across the week, as missing doubles can limit not just the end of legs but also their scoring power.
ADVERTISEMENT
In the 27-year history of this tournament, the five best checkout performances by winners have all ended with a checkout percentage of 50%, from the lowest of 50.11% to the highest of 55.70% across the winning week. Players can score brilliantly, but without a double it's talent wasted, and they need a double to open every leg before scoring begins and another to close it; players show that in the World Grand Prix: doubles win titles. With no player averaging above 97.81 in adjusted metrics, these five represent the clearest example of that principle producing a World Grand Prix Champion.
Number Five - Robert Thornton 2015: 50.11%
Robert Thornton claimed the World Grand Prix title in 2015 in one of, if not the best, double-start finals ever. Beating the previous year's champion, Michael Van Gerwen, in the final, the Scotsman picked up his last of three PDC major titles in impressive form. From 123 attempts, the Thorn pinned 58 doubles, giving him a marginally above-half checkout percentage that brought success. But this high percentage doesn’t mean it was a solid 50% in the semi-final or final: Thornton missed 20 doubles of 34 attempts against Suljovic in the semi-final and 19 against MVG, with the first rounds producing the goods.
In the first round and quarter-finals against Gurney and White, he posted a 66.7% and 54.17% checkout rate; purely lethal on the outer ring. Yet, doubles wasn’t the only thing going right for Thornton. A striking 90.79 average in a double-start tournament and a first nine of 107.24 allowed the 2012 UK Open champion to get to the clinical finishing quicker than his opponent. This is the best illustration of what the World Grand Prix rewards and punishes. Strong scoring and world-class finishing secure titles.
Robert Thornton - an iconic World Grand Prix figure.
In the semi-final, Thornton had a lower checkout percentage against Suljovic, with the Austrian producing a 46.15% checkout percentage, but the first 9 were 13 points higher, showing the versatility of Thornton’s winning campaign. When doubles were below par, his scoring helped, and vice versa. The final outlines the same method: although MVG hit double Thornton’s 180s with 18, Thornton missed 19 doubles compared to MVG's 42. A 13-percentage-point gap that secured the title.
Stronger competition means mounting pressure, which many contribute to a falling checkout percentage. Thornton defied this: a run of Gurney, Pipe, Ian White, Suljovic, and Van Gerwen in the final, his work was cut out. In the first round, Thornton’s functional doubles (a statistical metric that tracks a player's checkout attempts at a double, discarding any missed darts that do not actually risk losing the leg or letting the opponent back to the board) against Gurney were perfect, meaning the other three missed doubles by no means impacted the scoreline. It was just a bruising due to his doubles.
ADVERTISEMENT
Similar in the quarter-finals, where a 54.17% checkout percentage was the difference. In the tightest match of the run, the checkout percentage forced a last-leg decider where, despite “missing” the bullseye after setting up for Double 20 on a 161 outshot, Thornton’s doubling, mixed with strong scoring, didn’t just beat White; it was the embodiment of Thornton’s run. Thornton's 2015 run was not the most statistically dominant in this list. It sits fifth. But it might be the most complete illustration of what the World Grand Prix actually rewards. Strong scoring when the doubles dried up. Clinical finishing when the scoring was modest. Never needing both simultaneously. That is why he is on it.
Number Four - Michael Van Gerwen 2018: 52.73%
The 6-time winner of the World Grand Prix produced his most complete finishing performance in 2018, posting up a 52.73% checkout percentage in his 5 games. Hitting 53 doubles from 115 attempts, 2018 was arguably the last time we saw complete Dutch domination of the PDC. Winning not just the World Grand Prix but also the World Masters and Premier League and the World Championship at the turn of 2019 demonstrated that the doubling performance didn’t just come from his familiarity in the World Grand Prix but from his overall performance in the year. In the tournament, the average does not show Van Gerwen in the best light: 88.85. But the first nine is what demonstrates the brilliance of this run: 114.27.
A player finishing over half of his doubles whilst hitting on average more than 1 treble per scoring visit will win titles. Unlike many players on this list, Van Gerwen’s fantastic double percentage is carried by his first-round game. Hitting 6/7 doubles, this 85.71% brings the overall average up, with the best doubles percentage in this run being 50% against Chisnall in the quarter-finals. Identical to Thornton, Mighty Mike hit a perfect functional double in his first round against Irishman Steven Lennon and won all six legs in a complete domination. Is this any surprise, however, as if a player is going to hit an 114 first nine and hit all his doubles, Lennon’s best choice was to be a bystander of brilliance. In his whole run, though, his doubles, explicitly demonstrating why he won the title, were in his quarter-finals against Chisnall. With Chizzy’s first nine at 119.94 against the Dutchman’s 117.29, Van Gerwen won this game by converting 50% of his doubles against the Englishman’s 30%. What sticks out about Michael Van Gerwen in this list is his first nine of 114.27.
This scoring power creates pressure on the opponents, meaning that no matter his double percentage, although the impressive 52.73%, it gave him chances to miss and not be punished. This is seen in the semi-final and final, where despite a 48% and 39.02% checkout percentage in the semi-final and final, Van Gerwen won both games with a 3-set margin due to his scoring power. The final against Wright tells the story most clearly. Wright averaged 91.61 to Van Gerwen's 88.85 and finished at 48.15% to Van Gerwen's 39.02% in the decider, outscored him, outfinished him and still lost 5-2. The first nine of 114.27 had already done the damage. By the time Wright was at a double, Van Gerwen had reduced the leg to a formality often enough that the missed doubles in the final simply did not matter. 2018 was not won at the double. It was won three darts before it. The 52.73% was the cherry on top, making the 2018 win his most complete World Grand Prix title to date.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Finals: Where the Double Decided It
| Winner | Winner Avg | Winner Checkout % | Loser | Loser Avg | Loser Checkout % | Checkout Gap | Score |
| Jonny Clayton | 94.44 | 44.74% | Gerwyn Price | 92.47 | 40.00% | +4.74% | 5-1 |
| James Wade | 88.81 | 51.22% | Adrian Lewis | 89.33 | 37.50% | +13.72% | 6-3 |
| Phil Taylor | 97.81 | 53.85% | Raymond van Barneveld | 90.42 | 50.00% | +3.85% | 6-2 |
| Michael van Gerwen | 88.85 | 39.02% | Peter Wright | 91.61 | 48.15% | -9.13% | 5-2 |
| Robert Thornton | 90.79 | 45.71% | Michael van Gerwen | 96.79 | 32.26% | +13.45% | 5-4 |
Number Three - Phil Taylor 2008 - 53.04%
The 11-time winner of this tournament was bound to be on this list somewhere, and his 2008 campaign secured his position in a competitive list. Hitting 64 doubles from 120 attempts and a tournament average of 97.81, prime Phil Taylor was no man to mess with in a doubles format. To put into perspective the scale of that average, the double-in format means the top score in the first 3 darts is 161, 19 points lower than the maximum score of 180, and not just this, missed doubles to start the leg count from 0 to the average.
The mean winning average at the World Grand Prix sits between the high eighties and low nineties. A seven- to eight-point improvement shows that Taylor's record of eleven titles makes him the most decorated player in the tournament's history, and this 2008 campaign was the finest week of that record. Specifically, Taylor’s first nine of 113.87 cruised him to the title, dropping just three sets over his run. Most striking is his quarter-final checkout percentage; in a 4-1 battering of Andy Hamilton, Taylor hit 13/19 doubles, making a checkout percentage of 68.42%.
ADVERTISEMENT
In five sets, this level of consistency is almost everything you would need to know about his run. In the first two rounds, he won five sets and didn’t drop one, and in the semi-final, he beat Terry Jenkins, himself a very proven World Grand Prix player, reaching two finals in 2006 and 2007. In that semi-final, Phil Taylor produced a mind-blowing 122.21 first nine and a first three of 136.22. This was the most dominant performance ever in the World Grand Prix; the 122.21 first nine overshadowed an already impressive 50% checkout in the same match.
In the final, the Power converted 21 doubles from 39, almost matching his event checkout percentage of 53.85%. Van Barneveld matched this with a 50% checkout hit rate but lost by 4 sets and was subject to Taylor in his prime. Winning the Premier League this year, the European Championships, the World Matchplay and the Champions League of Darts, and the World Grand Prix was one of many in this era. 2008’s run is the most complete performance potentially any major has seen.
The highest tournament average, 180 count, dominant semi-final and still a 53.04% win rate. Taylor scored better than his finishing, and this speaks volumes, as he arrived at these doubles from aggressive scoring positions, and although two players are above him on this list, neither produced the same overall level of darts as the 16-time World Champion.
Number Two - James Wade 2010: 53.85%
James Wade's 2010 World Grand Prix title is the most extreme case study of what this format produces. Averaging just 88.81 across the week, the lowest of any player on this list, and hitting only three 180s across five matches, Wade won the World Grand Prix on the back of his doubling alone. From 131 attempts, the machine converted 67, giving him a 53.85% checkout rate that places him second on this list. The contrast between his scoring and his finishing is the defining statistical story of this run. His first nine of 97.79 is the lowest in this top five, meaning his scoring visits were the most modest of any winner here, yet he converted more doubles per attempt than Taylor, MVG and Thornton.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Last 16 against Colin Osborne is where the run truly announced itself. Converting 11 from 14 attempts for a 78.57% checkout rate, the highest single-round checkout percentage of any player across all five entries in this list, Wade produced a perfect functional doubles percentage of 100%, converting every double he reached. In the quarter-final against Hamilton, he hit 63.16%, and in the final against Adrian Lewis, he posted 51.22% from 41 attempts, winning 6-3 despite Lewis averaging 89.33 to his 88.81. Lewis outscored him and lost by three sets.

James Wade claimed another European Tour title ten years after his last triumph
The first round against Mick McGowan told a different story. A 31.58% checkout rate from 19 attempts is the lowest opening-round checkout of any player on this list, yet Wade won 2-0 because McGowan converted just 25% himself. The format punishes missed doubles, but it punishes both players equally, and McGowan's 25% made Wade's 31.58% look clinical by comparison.
This is the pattern that defines Wade's entire run: his doubling was not always elite, but it was consistently better than the player standing opposite him. In the semi-final against Van Barneveld, across 27 legs and 38 double attempts, Wade converted 44.74%. RvB hit 50% in the same match and still lost 5-1. The scoring difference was marginal, but the set count was not. Wade's 2010 title is the purest proof that in this format, being better at the double than your opponent across a week is enough to win the World Grand Prix, regardless of what the average says.
Number One - Jonny Clayton 2021: 55.70%
ADVERTISEMENT
Jonny Clayton's 2021 World Grand Prix title produced the highest checkout rate of any winner in the tournament's 27-year history. From 116 attempts across five matches, the Ferret converted 60 doubles for a 55.70% checkout rate that sits 1.85 percentage points above Wade in second place. With just four 180s across the week, the second lowest on this list alongside Wade's three, Clayton won the World Grand Prix without ever being the dominant scorer in any of his five matches.
What he was, consistently and almost without exception, was the better finisher. His checkout rate improved in each of his first three rounds: 60% in the first round against Rydz, 64.71% in the Last 16 against De Sousa and 68.42% in the quarter-final against Ratajski, matching Taylor's quarter-final percentage from 2008. Three consecutive rounds of improving precision at the double is the clearest statistical progression of any player in this list. In the quarter-final against Ratajski, his functional doubles percentage of 86.67% from 15 attempts produced a 3-2 win in the tightest match of his run, with the checkout being the deciding factor across the final set.
The semi-final against Noppert is the one blemish. Across 32 double attempts, Clayton hit only 40.63%, his lowest checkout round of the week by a significant margin. He still won 4-1 because Noppert converted just 26.92% of his own attempts. In the final against Price, both players finished below their weekly average checkout percentage, Clayton at 44.74% and Price at 40%, yet Clayton won 5-1.
Read also
The scoreline is the most dominant final result in this top five, alongside Taylor's 6-2 in 2008. Four 180s across five matches. Never the highest scorer in any of his matches. Never needing to be. The World Grand Prix in 2021 was won by the player who wasted the fewest doubles across an entire week. That is what this format demands above everything else. Clayton answered it more completely than anyone in the tournament's 27-year history, and that is why he sits at the top of this list.
ADVERTISEMENT
Round by Round Checkout Breakdown
| Player | First Round | Last 16 / R2 | Quarter Final | Semi-Final | Final |
| Clayton 2021 | 60.00% | 64.71% | 68.42% | 40.63% | 44.74% |
| Wade 2010 | 31.58% | 78.57% | 63.16% | 44.74% | 51.22% |
| Taylor 2008 | 40.00% | 52.94% | 68.42% | 50.00% | 53.85% |
| MVG 2018 | 85.71% | 40.91% | 50.00% | 48.00% | 39.02% |
| Thornton 2015 | 66.67% | 42.86% | 54.17% | 41.18% | 45.71% |
Ben James is a darts writer at DartsNews.com, covering professional darts with a focus on analysis, player storylines, and match context. He contributes articles on tournaments, player performances, and developments across the PDC calendar.
Ben is currently completing his A Levels in History, Sociology, and Business, with predicted grades of A, A, and A. He also completed an Extended Project Qualification (EPQ), awarded an A grade, titled “To what extent do psychological factors and equipment specifications determine performance in competitive darts?”, reflecting a strong interest in the analytical and psychological aspects of the sport.
He has published early work on platforms such as Medium, including articles on Joe Cullen and Niels Zonneveld, and is developing his experience in sports journalism. Ben is also set to attend a PDC event, building first-hand insight into the professional darts environment.
His interest in darts spans player narratives, match dynamics, scoring strategy, and the mathematical and psychological elements of performance. In his writing, he focuses on clear structure, contextual analysis, and accurate reporting.
claps 0visitors 0
Just in
Popular news
Latest comments
- 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
- And yet the PDC has decided to aggravate this problem by doubling the Players Championship Finals field from 2027. I can't imagine there will be fewer withdrawals next year with even less reason to turn up. I can only hope that a whole slew of Challenge Tour top-up players receive enough prize money in the absence of much of the elite, that some of the more complacent among them struggle to scrape into even a heavily diluted field! More semi-pro players will get to test their mettle, but the standard of competition will be much inferior. It could hardly be said that the Players Championship series will provide an opportunity for darts' second string to test their Tour Card credentials anymore, but at least it will underscore the achievements of those Challenge Tour players of current and previous years, who were able to prove themselves as more than capable of competing with, and beating, the elite of the sport on a consistent basis, and reaping the due rewards.Deduce635828-10-2026








