Why change something that has worked for twenty years? PDC scraps familiar Grand Slam format

In less than a month, the World Darts Championship gets under way at Alexandra Palace. But before the biggest tournament of the year, two other major events remain on the calendar. The first is the Grand Slam of Darts, which starts in Wolverhampton this Saturday. This edition will be a special one, as the tournament celebrates its 20th anniversary. For the first time in its history, a field of 48 players will take to the oche.

The Grand Slam of Darts has carved out a special place on the darts calendar over the years. Since the inaugural edition in 2007, it has stood apart from the other major televised events on the PDC calendar. That is down not only to the presence of players from different darts organisations, but above all to its unique format. At most majors, a defeat meant immediate elimination. The Grand Slam group stage, however, gave players a chance to recover from a setback. That often led to memorable matches, surprising finishes and plenty of drama.

The PDC has now decided to abandon that familiar formula. The 2026 edition will feature 48 players, smaller groups and a much stricter qualification system for the knockout stage. It is a major change that could undoubtedly produce plenty of excitement, but it also raises questions. Will this revamped format really make the Grand Slam of Darts better?

To understand the scale of the change, it is worth looking back at how the tournament began. The PDC staged the first Grand Slam of Darts in 2007. It was an unusual initiative at the time, as the organisation did not invite players exclusively from its own circuit. Several leading BDO players were also invited to take on the PDC stars. That gave the event an extra dimension from the outset. It was not simply a new major, but also a chance to test the balance of power between different darts organisations.

At the time, the Grand Slam was not a ranking event. No world-ranking points were at stake. Instead, it was a prestigious invitational tournament that brought together the best players from different circuits. In that respect, it had something in common with the Premier League Darts, although the format was entirely different. It was a short, intense tournament in which players competed not only for the honour, but also for a highly prestigious title.

That original character made the Grand Slam unique from the start. The PDC already had several major tournaments, including the World Darts Championship, World Matchplay, World Grand Prix and UK Open. But the Grand Slam brought something new: a stage where the best players from different worlds could meet. That gave the event extra appeal, particularly in its early years.

The Grand Slam stood out for more than its line-up. Its match format was also a distinctive feature of the PDC calendar for many years. From the first edition in 2007, 32 players took part. They were split into eight groups of four. In the group stage, each player faced the other three players in their group, with the top two advancing to the last 16.

This formula set the tournament apart from most other major events. In a traditional knockout tournament, there is no room for a bad day. Lose in the first round, and you are out. The Grand Slam was different. A defeat did not have to be fatal, and in exceptional circumstances, even two losses could leave a theoretical route through to the next round.

That possibility sometimes made the group stage remarkably unpredictable. Players could not afford too many mistakes, but they did have a chance to make up for a poor opening match. A strong second or third performance could suddenly make the difference between elimination and a place in the knockout stage.

With four players in each group, there were also several possible scenarios. In some groups, the first two matches were enough to secure a place in the next round. In others, the contest remained open until the final match. It was even possible for several players to finish level on points, making leg difference decisive.

Then there were the notorious “one-leg shootouts”. If players could not be separated by the usual criteria after the group matches, a deciding leg could be needed to determine who advanced. One leg, one chance, and potentially the difference between a successful tournament and an early exit. Those moments perfectly captured the character of the Grand Slam.

That unpredictability gave the tournament its distinct identity. It was not only the form player who could progress. Players who made a slow start could fight their way back, while a favourite who felt comfortable after a strong opening match could suddenly find themselves in trouble.

The group stage also meant there were plenty of matches from the first day onwards with different stakes. Some players were fighting to keep their hopes alive, others were trying to secure top spot, while some depended on the result of a match in which they were not even at the oche. Few other tournaments offered the same dynamic.

The Grand Slam’s status did change over the years. In 2015, the PDC gave the tournament full ranking status. It was no longer just a prestigious invitational event, but also an important part of the world-ranking race. Performances in Wolverhampton now carried added sporting and financial significance for the players.

For the most part, the tournament retained its original purpose. Players from different circuits could still meet, and the group stage remained in place. That changed for good after the BDO ceased to exist in 2020. Invitations to players from other organisations ended, and the Grand Slam increasingly became a contest between the leading players on the PDC circuit.

Even so, the event kept its own identity. The group stage remained a striking difference from the other majors. As the PDC calendar grew busier over the years and most major tournaments retained a traditional knockout structure, the Grand Slam stuck with a format that had been in place since its first edition in 2007.

That was remarkable in itself. The PDC is known for its willingness to adjust tournaments and formats when it believes it can improve the product. For years, the Grand Slam was an exception. Its original concept worked well and had secured a clear place on the darts calendar. That continuity is now coming to an end.

For the 2026 edition, the PDC has decided to overhaul the Grand Slam of Darts. The field will expand from 32 to 48 players, adding 16 competitors and giving the group stage a completely new look.

Instead of eight groups of four, there will now be 16 groups of three. The group stage will be considerably shorter, with each player having just two matches to secure a place in the next round. Only the 16 group winners will advance to the knockout stage.

On paper, this may look like a relatively simple adjustment: more players, smaller groups and a knockout stage featuring 16 competitors. But the sporting consequences are significant. The difference between the old and new formats goes far beyond the number of matches.

Under the old format, a player could recover after a defeat. Even a second loss did not necessarily mean the end in certain circumstances. In the new format, the situation is much clearer: lose your opening match and you are immediately up against it. A second defeat guarantees elimination, while even winning the opening match offers no guarantee of qualification.

With only two matches per player, there is little room for an off day. A favourite who loses the first match must win the second and will also depend on the result of the other match in the group. The chance of a top player going home after just two matches is therefore considerably higher.

That could make for a spectacle. The pressure will be high from the first dart, and every leg could matter. At the same time, the format removes some of the charm that made the Grand Slam so recognisable for years. The chance to recover from a setback was precisely what set the tournament apart from other majors.

To see what the new format could mean, look no further than the group featuring Luke Littler, Beau Greaves and Niels Zonneveld. It is a perfect illustration of the consequences of the new system.

All three have been in excellent form in 2026 and have the ability to make a deep run at a major. Littler is, of course, among the world’s elite and one of the leading favourites at almost every event. Greaves has repeatedly shown in recent months that she can compete with the best male players. And Zonneveld has also shown enough quality and form to be taken seriously.

Under the old format, two of the three could in principle have advanced to the next round. Now, one defeat could quickly prove fatal. The risk of a big name suffering a surprise exit is greater, and every match takes on immediate sporting significance.

But the format also raises questions about fairness and the role of the draw. In a group of three, an unfavourable draw can have serious consequences. A player could perform brilliantly but still miss out on qualification because two other top players are in the same group. Elsewhere, a competitor with a much kinder draw could reach the next round relatively comfortably with two wins.

That is inherent in any group system, of course, but the effect is even stronger in groups of three. There are simply fewer matches in which to correct the balance of power. One standout performance, a missed double or an unexpected defeat can immediately make the difference.

The expansion to 48 players also has clear advantages. More players will get the chance to perform on the big stage, and for some, the Grand Slam could be a valuable opportunity to make an impression internationally. That could be a significant step, particularly for players who do not regularly appear at the biggest televised events.

A larger field also creates more scope for upsets. The PDC has a deep pool of players capable of beating the very best on their day. In many cases, the gap between the top 20 and those just outside it has become very small. Expanding the field could bring that development into sharper focus.

Still, it is fair to ask whether more players automatically make for a better tournament. For years, the Grand Slam was an event where all 32 selected players had earned their place through their performances and the qualification criteria. Increasing that number to 48 broadens the field, but it does not necessarily raise the average quality of the matches.

There is also a difference between giving more players the chance to compete and improving a tournament’s sporting concept. Those are separate issues. The PDC can reasonably argue that a larger field brings more excitement and greater commercial appeal. But the question remains: does it also enhance the Grand Slam as a sporting competition?

There is a risk that the tournament could lose some of its exclusivity. For years, players had to stand out at other major events and across different circuits to qualify for the Grand Slam. Simply taking part was an achievement. With 48 players, the bar is lower, although earning a place in the field remains a significant accomplishment.

The strongest argument for the new format may be the added drama. In a group of three, a great deal is at stake from the very first match. There is no longer time to ease into the tournament or make up for a poor opening performance with two strong displays.

That could appeal to television viewers. Every match counts, and it will be fascinating to see how players handle the pressure. A defeat leaves almost no margin for error. A win is not enough either: players must prove themselves again in a second match that could decide qualification.

But drama is not necessarily the same as sporting quality. A format can be highly exciting without being the best way to ensure the strongest player ultimately wins. That distinction matters.

The former group stage offered a better chance to assess the balance between players over a larger number of matches. A player who produced the best results across three games generally deserved a place in the next round. Under the new formula, the difference between advancing and going out could be much smaller.

With this decision, the PDC has clearly chosen change. It is understandable that an organisation wants to keep reviewing its tournaments and look for ways to improve them. Darts has grown enormously in recent years, standards are exceptionally high, and interest in major televised events continues to rise. Expanding the Grand Slam fits that trend.

The new formula will undoubtedly give us a different kind of Grand Slam. It may even prove to be a successful experiment. Upsets are more likely, pressure on the players will increase, and the group matches will carry enormous significance. The new format could certainly produce memorable moments.