@@djstevieoI think Smith broke that with something like 70 180s in 2022. But I agree what separates Anderson from the rest is his consistency to do it over 3 different decades.
Yes, he was obviously a legend but we do stress this list was more about peak player performance rather than just the amount of titles they won. So Paul would say that if every major winner were all at their peak levels, John wouldn't have been in the worlds top 10. No doubt he'd have still won titles and done well, however.
Michael smith has to atleast get an honorable mention. Would bully boy beat Eric bristow in his prime? It’s an impossible conversation to have but I think so.
Yes he probably should have but the video was edited to include just those who got in the 10 and just outside - otherwise we'd have been talking about every world champion ever. That said, next time we will look to make it shorter and get more names mentioned.
No Dennis Priestley in the top10 is completely wrong. I also agree with those that mentioned John Part. At his peak he was a great player. To not even be considered is a major oversight
This list is almost spot on apart from Anderson is definitely third over Wright. I agree with the points on Wright his astronomical averages get overlooked all too often. I think what separates Anderson is this: Mvgs “peak” when he was pretty much unbeatable was probably 2015-2017 you could probably extend that a few years as well. However, during that three year period Anderson won two out of the three world titles and reached the final of the other. Anderson was literally the only guy on the planet who could put it up to Mvg in big tv Majors and if it wasn’t for Anderson Mvg would have alot more world titles and premier leagues.
I get that you need to throw in some e of the older guys but the idea that Warriner-Little is higher than Smith or Humphries is ridiculous - if they were all at their peak, AWH little would be 3/1 or bigger with the bookies to beat MS or LH
Don’t know how Warriner is on this list. Durrant,Adams,Lloyd,Part and even more modern players like Smith and Aspinall are better imo. A very random inclusion especially with only 1 major. Don’t know what splits Alan and Colin Lloyd, both number 1 as Taylor didn’t play in much. Lloyd has 2 majors though. Great video guys
For what it's worth I'd reverse Anderson and Wright, and if you're agreeing that Bristow would be far better if he played as much as today's players, then you'd have to do the same for the great John Lowe, he had the best throw of any darts player I've ever seen. I wouldn't have Alan Warriner in the top 10, and as someone else has said, John Part can't be too far outside the top ten either.
it’s pointless to compare the highest averages of players before the dartconnect era, because they do not appear on mastercaller. Lewis hit a 120 average in the gdc in 2009 but it does not appear on mastercaller.
The decision for Paul to put Alan Warriner in the top 10 won't be backed by many but he was world number one for over 50 months of his career (only Taylor and MVG have enjoyed longer streaks) and he still has the World Grand Prix record average that nobody has got close to. Paul's argument is that at his peak - on modern boards and with better equipment - he'd have made the top 10. Not everyone will agree for sure, but that was his rationale.
Yes, but we were focusing on players who produced a high level of performance on a regular basis to cope with the highest talent in all eras. There's no doubt John Part is a legend for what he won - but how would he cope in this 'perfect era' when all legends were operating at the top of their game. Paul didn't think his A game was strong enough to get in this top 10 but we all have our own opinions.
@@SportingLifeVideo so little, who has one big pike in his career would be a greater danger then John part? If that was the case why didn’t he win as much majors as Part? Why didn’t he never beat Taylor in a big final? Same goes for Priestley: he was the first to trow a 100+ average in a final. And has won more majors then little. It’s simply put very strange to put little above part and priestly. I would rather win 3 world titles, in the prime Taylor era, with a 97 average then be like little and have one good tournament. Being a matchplay players means something also.
@@SportingLifeVideoremind us of how many world title finals priestly was in? PDC world finals may I add. Also who won PDC/WDF first world? I’d say era bias this list
I think Paul being a homer for his fellow broadcaster is a bit too obvious here. No way Alan beats a prime Rob Cross. What were the other names just outside of the top 10?
Whatever way you look around this there is no way Alan Warriner can be in the list above John Part. Infact it's a total disrespect that Warriner is in over Part and John Lowe. Even Colin Lloyd deserves to be in over Warriner.
This wasn't a list of who has won the most - but ranking them if they were all playing at their performance peak. It'll all very subjective but John Part didn't make the 10 because his A game is arguably not as strong as what other players managed to attain. That's not to say he wouldn't have won matches or titles in this 'perfect' era when everyone is at their peak, but the cases for others were stronger.
The list doesn’t follow its objective. It is supposed to be about people at their peak, and yet there is constant mention of longevity. So really, MVG should probably be number 1, Anderson 2 and Luke Humphries 3.
@@mccann82 look, of course Phil Taylor should be number one on the list. He is and I’m certain will always be, the greatest darts player who has ever lived. He held the world record for highest average in a match five times, only losing the record to MVG in 2016. I was making a flippant comment about the futility of these lists. He will always be number one on any list about darting achievements. To me he is probably the most dominant SPORTSMAN ever, with the possible exception of Don Bradman with his freakish test average.
This wasn't a list of who has won the most - but ranking them if they were all playing at their performance peak. It'll all very subjective but John Part didn't make the 10 because his A game is arguably not as strong as what other players managed to attain. That's not to say he wouldn't have won matches or titles in this 'perfect' era when everyone is at their peak, but the cases for others were stronger.
@LIAMGUNNER89 It's literally a list of the best players AT THEIR PEAK 😂 You're just ignoring the criteria, as well as the response from the actual channel, and sticking with your god awful list that makes 0 sense.
Yikes. You keep replying to comment saying "The list is if they were at their peaks". Gary Anderson at his peak was far better than Wright, as was Lewis. You cant genuinely believe Bristow at any stage of his career can compete with someone like Humphries who regularly averages 110+ or peak Lewis who did similar?
Paul Nicholson did explain why he thought Wright at his peak would edge Anderson. And the rationale for Eric Bristow was that his peak in today's world where the boards are more favourable, would see him be a real force to be reckoned with. For what it's worth, Chris Hammer wanted Luke Humphries in the top 10 but Paul had the final say.
@SportingLifeVideo Paul has had an absolute mare here then. Some people just can't get their head around the fact that sports move on with time. Nicholson is clearly one of those people. Players of today ARE better than the players of decades ago, as they SHOULD be. If this wasn't the case, the game wouldn't be advancing.
@@BertSmithLondon Not for me he wasn't. At his peak MVG's numbers were higher than Taylor's. MVG also dominated for a number of years against lots of players who were also posting 100+ averages. During Taylor's era only he was regularly posting 100+ averages.
@@jaysmith2858Taylor was up against prime Barney , ando, Lewis , Wade and even mvg yet beat them all even when they averaged 100 plus against him, your take on Taylor is rubbish saying his opponents didn’t av 100 against him
This absolute nonsense. They bang on about averages, (which is obviously important) but the fact is the trebles and doubles are thirty percent bigger than they were in the 80's, 70's etc. Not having John Lowe in the top 10 is a joke and Peter Wright 3 is hilarious.. I have seen Wright cry playing Taylor, he would have been crying before the game against Eric. John Lowe would and DID thrash Warriner, honestly this list is comical! should be 1. Taylor 2. MVG 3. Bristow 4. Gary A 5. RVB 6. Lowe 7. Wright 8. Lewis 9. Dennis Priestley 10. Part.
MVG AT HIS PEAK BLOWS TAYLOR AT HIS PEAK OUT THE WATER, MVG HAS DONE STUFF TAYLOR COULDNT EVEN DREAM OF, AND DONT TELL ME HE WON 16, I DGAF, SORRY TO ALL THE BALL GAGGERS BUT ITS DA TRUTH.
An old, washed and not as motivated Phil Taylor took one look at prime MVG, chewed him up and spit him out like nothing. Hang your head in shame for comparing the Dutch gummy bear with the greatest darts player who has ever lived.
@@BertSmithLondonAlthough statistics do not provide a comprehensive understanding, it is possible that Bristow would have achieved greater success in the modern era due to advancements in equipment and overall improvements.
what a pointless list and excersize this is. seriously... everyone has opinions and this list is based on 'Major winners' not players at their peak... so this is a load of bollox
Gary Anderson, during 1 of this years PDC floor events, hit 46 180’s, smashing the record of 35 and also missed double 12 3 times for 9 darters.
I think Gary Anderson has the most 180’s in a tournament at 64. Definitly the best 180 hitter in history.
@@djstevieoI think Smith broke that with something like 70 180s in 2022. But I agree what separates Anderson from the rest is his consistency to do it over 3 different decades.
2016 MVG vs 2009 Phil Taylor would be the pinnacle of darts
Phil Taylor (prime) would annihilate mvg best of 11 sets 6-2 easy
List is decent but John part needed a mention
Yes, he was obviously a legend but we do stress this list was more about peak player performance rather than just the amount of titles they won. So Paul would say that if every major winner were all at their peak levels, John wouldn't have been in the worlds top 10. No doubt he'd have still won titles and done well, however.
Seconded
@@SportingLifeVideo Parts peak was beating Phil taylor in a world final, that's a big peak
No respect from the wall either 😊
It's not a debate. Taylor is orders of magnitude better than even MVG.
Michael smith has to atleast get an honorable mention. Would bully boy beat Eric bristow in his prime? It’s an impossible conversation to have but I think so.
Yes he probably should have but the video was edited to include just those who got in the 10 and just outside - otherwise we'd have been talking about every world champion ever. That said, next time we will look to make it shorter and get more names mentioned.
I would switch Anderson and Wright but other than that, spot on imho.
No Dennis Priestley in the top10 is completely wrong. I also agree with those that mentioned John Part. At his peak he was a great player. To not even be considered is a major oversight
Adrian, mvg and Gary are my 3 favourite dart players of all time just beautiful to watch
Still Phil is the GOAT
@@thomasroedgaard117 Agreed!
This list is almost spot on apart from Anderson is definitely third over Wright. I agree with the points on Wright his astronomical averages get overlooked all too often. I think what separates Anderson is this: Mvgs “peak” when he was pretty much unbeatable was probably 2015-2017 you could probably extend that a few years as well. However, during that three year period Anderson won two out of the three world titles and reached the final of the other. Anderson was literally the only guy on the planet who could put it up to Mvg in big tv Majors and if it wasn’t for Anderson Mvg would have alot more world titles and premier leagues.
spot on with this list agree 100 percent thank you
Part, Humphries, Smith and even Aspinall and Clayton are miles better than what Alan Warriner was.
Great discussion
Cool Hand is comfortably better than a number of people who were listed here
It's too early to call that, let's see in a couple of years...
John Lowe, bob Anderson, jockey Wilson not to get a mention due to era bias makes this list nonsense
I get that you need to throw in some e of the older guys but the idea that Warriner-Little is higher than Smith or Humphries is ridiculous - if they were all at their peak, AWH little would be 3/1 or bigger with the bookies to beat MS or LH
Clowns list, no Dennis Priestley or John Lowe.
Hardly a clowns list
Warriner in there ahead of Lowe I'm not sure about that one.
Part higher than warriner little
Don’t know how Warriner is on this list. Durrant,Adams,Lloyd,Part and even more modern players like Smith and Aspinall are better imo. A very random inclusion especially with only 1 major. Don’t know what splits Alan and Colin Lloyd, both number 1 as Taylor didn’t play in much. Lloyd has 2 majors though. Great video guys
Dart pundits always seem to be the best to comment on their. Miles ahead of any other sport commentators.
All at their best Adrian Lewis is a lot higher up the list people forget how good he was!
#1 TAYLOR
#2 BRISTOW
#3 BARNY
#4 MVG
#5 ANDERSON
#6 PART
#7 LEWIS
#8 WILSON
#9 WRIGHT
$10 PRIESTLEY
MY TOP TEN SOME IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER
Where is John Lowe.
I agree that wright has not had the peak longevity, but his peak was almost unplayable
Wright should be in 6 or 7 at max
Bristow was good but so was Lowe and remember Lowe was the first player to do a 9 darts leg on tv.
Priestly and Part should definitely be on this list, and no way is Peter Wright third. Jocky Wilson?
Taylor and MVG absolutely miles clear
For what it's worth I'd reverse Anderson and Wright, and if you're agreeing that Bristow would be far better if he played as much as today's players, then you'd have to do the same for the great John Lowe, he had the best throw of any darts player I've ever seen. I wouldn't have Alan Warriner in the top 10, and as someone else has said, John Part can't be too far outside the top ten either.
it’s pointless to compare the highest averages of players before the dartconnect era, because they do not appear on mastercaller. Lewis hit a 120 average in the gdc in 2009 but it does not appear on mastercaller.
Alan in the top 10 lmao, Adrian in the top 10 lmao, and Peter in the top 3, dillusional
The decision for Paul to put Alan Warriner in the top 10 won't be backed by many but he was world number one for over 50 months of his career (only Taylor and MVG have enjoyed longer streaks) and he still has the World Grand Prix record average that nobody has got close to. Paul's argument is that at his peak - on modern boards and with better equipment - he'd have made the top 10. Not everyone will agree for sure, but that was his rationale.
I think you are right about Peter Wright, I've got him at number 4. At his best he is a brilliant player, don't judge him on his recent form.
I totally agree with you Mathew, Paul Nicholson talks out of his backside.
@@BertSmithLondonwill see what littler is like at 53 🤣
What a strange list. Little is in it: no Priestley or part. Or does a world championship not count as a major?
Yes, but we were focusing on players who produced a high level of performance on a regular basis to cope with the highest talent in all eras. There's no doubt John Part is a legend for what he won - but how would he cope in this 'perfect era' when all legends were operating at the top of their game. Paul didn't think his A game was strong enough to get in this top 10 but we all have our own opinions.
@@SportingLifeVideo so little, who has one big pike in his career would be a greater danger then John part? If that was the case why didn’t he win as much majors as Part? Why didn’t he never beat Taylor in a big final? Same goes for Priestley: he was the first to trow a 100+ average in a final. And has won more majors then little.
It’s simply put very strange to put little above part and priestly. I would rather win 3 world titles, in the prime Taylor era, with a 97 average then be like little and have one good tournament. Being a matchplay players means something also.
@@user-rf8mc8rg9v Do you know what PEAK means?
@@SportingLifeVideoremind us of how many world title finals priestly was in? PDC world finals may I add. Also who won PDC/WDF first world? I’d say era bias this list
WHAT YEAR IS THIS? 1965, THE BEATLES, FLOWER CHILD!!!
Sack the sound manager.
Swap Wright & Bristow around and replace Warriner-Little with Humphries.
I think Paul being a homer for his fellow broadcaster is a bit too obvious here. No way Alan beats a prime Rob Cross. What were the other names just outside of the top 10?
Need to amend title to say nicholsons top 10 dart players of all time.
Whatever way you look around this there is no way Alan Warriner can be in the list above John Part. Infact it's a total disrespect that Warriner is in over Part and John Lowe. Even Colin Lloyd deserves to be in over Warriner.
Are they moving Part out of Sky?
Sort of slimy rationale for not getting at least a mention.
This wasn't a list of who has won the most - but ranking them if they were all playing at their performance peak. It'll all very subjective but John Part didn't make the 10 because his A game is arguably not as strong as what other players managed to attain. That's not to say he wouldn't have won matches or titles in this 'perfect' era when everyone is at their peak, but the cases for others were stronger.
Only Taylor and MVG would have any chance against peak Bristow. Most of the others would be beaten before Eric took his first swig.
Alan Warriner Little shouldn't be anywhere near that list
The list doesn’t follow its objective. It is supposed to be about people at their peak, and yet there is constant mention of longevity. So really, MVG should probably be number 1, Anderson 2 and Luke Humphries 3.
What? 😂 Did you miss Taylor’s career? Particularly the 08-13 period?
@@mccann82 does Taylor Swift play darts too? Extraordinary talent.
@@jimbrimble3131 Better joke than that list you put up tbf
@@mccann82 look, of course Phil Taylor should be number one on the list. He is and I’m certain will always be, the greatest darts player who has ever lived. He held the world record for highest average in a match five times, only losing the record to MVG in 2016. I was making a flippant comment about the futility of these lists. He will always be number one on any list about darting achievements.
To me he is probably the most dominant SPORTSMAN ever, with the possible exception of Don Bradman with his freakish test average.
Snake over bristow no way
No John Part 🧐 utter nonsense.
Taylor
MVG
Barney
Anderson
Bristow
Part
Wade
Priestley
Lowe
Lewis
This wasn't a list of who has won the most - but ranking them if they were all playing at their performance peak. It'll all very subjective but John Part didn't make the 10 because his A game is arguably not as strong as what other players managed to attain. That's not to say he wouldn't have won matches or titles in this 'perfect' era when everyone is at their peak, but the cases for others were stronger.
The original list was bad. This one is somehow even worse.
@@eoinj16 every player on my list except Wade is a multiple world champion….your judged on what you win not your average
@LIAMGUNNER89 It's literally a list of the best players AT THEIR PEAK 😂
You're just ignoring the criteria, as well as the response from the actual channel, and sticking with your god awful list that makes 0 sense.
No John Lowe...
Yikes. You keep replying to comment saying "The list is if they were at their peaks". Gary Anderson at his peak was far better than Wright, as was Lewis.
You cant genuinely believe Bristow at any stage of his career can compete with someone like Humphries who regularly averages 110+ or peak Lewis who did similar?
Not sure Lewis was as good as wright
When does humphries regularly average 110 ?
@@TimComley That question doesn't even make sense. As I said... regularly.
Paul Nicholson did explain why he thought Wright at his peak would edge Anderson. And the rationale for Eric Bristow was that his peak in today's world where the boards are more favourable, would see him be a real force to be reckoned with. For what it's worth, Chris Hammer wanted Luke Humphries in the top 10 but Paul had the final say.
@SportingLifeVideo Paul has had an absolute mare here then.
Some people just can't get their head around the fact that sports move on with time. Nicholson is clearly one of those people. Players of today ARE better than the players of decades ago, as they SHOULD be. If this wasn't the case, the game wouldn't be advancing.
MVG's peak has been higher than Taylor's.
It's a tough one, MVG was at his peak when Taylor stuffed him in the world final.
@@BertSmithLondon Not for me he wasn't. At his peak MVG's numbers were higher than Taylor's. MVG also dominated for a number of years against lots of players who were also posting 100+ averages. During Taylor's era only he was regularly posting 100+ averages.
Imagine taylors averages if people were pushing him
@@BertSmithLondonread the world matchplays averages mate, that will tell you who had the best stats out of prime mvg v taylor
@@jaysmith2858Taylor was up against prime Barney , ando, Lewis , Wade and even mvg yet beat them all even when they averaged 100 plus against him, your take on Taylor is rubbish saying his opponents didn’t av 100 against him
This absolute nonsense. They bang on about averages, (which is obviously important) but the fact is the trebles and doubles are thirty percent bigger than they were in the 80's, 70's etc. Not having John Lowe in the top 10 is a joke and Peter Wright 3 is hilarious.. I have seen Wright cry playing Taylor, he would have been crying before the game against Eric. John Lowe would and DID thrash Warriner, honestly this list is comical!
should be
1. Taylor
2. MVG
3. Bristow
4. Gary A
5. RVB
6. Lowe
7. Wright
8. Lewis
9. Dennis Priestley
10. Part.
MVG AT HIS PEAK BLOWS TAYLOR AT HIS PEAK OUT THE WATER, MVG HAS DONE STUFF TAYLOR COULDNT EVEN DREAM OF, AND DONT TELL ME HE WON 16, I DGAF, SORRY TO ALL THE BALL GAGGERS BUT ITS DA TRUTH.
He was at his peak when Taylor destroyed him in the world final.
You left your caps on 👍
Look at mvgs peak at the matchplays compared to Taylor’s , over the long format Taylor was superior to mvg, by the way knock your caps off 😮
An old, washed and not as motivated Phil Taylor took one look at prime MVG, chewed him up and spit him out like nothing.
Hang your head in shame for comparing the Dutch gummy bear with the greatest darts player who has ever lived.
Wright above Eric Bristow your having a laugh Eric would have eaten Peter Wright Gary Anderson for breakfast and then said whom is next.
Be realistic, Gary Anderson and Peter Wright would destroy Eric Bristow. Every stat you can ever read backs up that argument.
@@BertSmithLondonAlthough statistics do not provide a comprehensive understanding, it is possible that Bristow would have achieved greater success in the modern era due to advancements in equipment and overall improvements.
Peter Wright at number three and no Dennis Priestly, Gerwyn Price at number seven and no John Part !!! garbage
If you rank players peaks, for me it is
1. Taylor
2. MvG
3. Anderson
4. Humphries
5. Lewis
6. Barney
7. Wade
8. Wright
9. Bristow
10. Burnett
No john Lowe?
Humphries too high at the moment for me!
Taylor then MVG then Anderson
@TimComley Would you stop. You want John Lowe but no to Humphries? 😂😂😂
You seriously think peak John Lowe is better than peak Humphries?
Sorry mate but Eric Bristow at number 9 he would have eaten Wright Wade Humphries Lewis for breakfast
Anyone want to tell them Littler won the premier league, A MAJOR
Yes, the Premier League is a unranked major but this was really looking at the ranked majors which aren't just for eight players to compete in.
Toosoon
what a pointless list and excersize this is. seriously... everyone has opinions and this list is based on 'Major winners' not players at their peak... so this is a load of bollox