Re: Another Darts Thread : Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:16 pm  

carl_spackler wrote:

How many darts at a double did Taylor have against Hankey's throw? Not as many as Hankey had on Taylor's I don't think.

Hankey outplayed Taylor on the night, simple as that.

So he won because of the throw then, thanks

Re: Another Darts Thread : Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:25 pm  

MrPhilb wrote:

He lost because of the throw, it's as clear as day.

If Phil had won the bull before the match he'd have won the match. Simples

You are a tit, he lost because Hankey was the better player, he had a better one and three dart average, he hit more 100's, 140's and 180's and outscored Taylor in most legs. Nothing to do with the throw the stats and facts tell the truth, you talk shit.

Re: Another Darts Thread : Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:26 pm  

MrPhilb wrote:

So he won because of the throw then, thanks

You've proved you are a complete tool, what I believe Carl is saying is Taylor had hardly any darts at a double on Hankey's throw and Hankey had plenty on Taylor's throw because he outscored him during the legs.

Re: Another Darts Thread : Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:32 pm  

MrPhilb wrote:

So he won because of the throw then, thanks

I never said he didn't, but that's not my point. He didn't 'only' win by having the good fortune of throwing first, he was the better player and got the result he deserved. Suggesting he only won because of the throw as if Taylor was unlucky or hard done to is codswallop, quite frankly.

Re: Another Darts Thread : Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:33 pm  

Dan_FC wrote:

You've proved you are a complete tool, what I believe Carl is saying is Taylor had hardly any darts at a double on Hankey's throw and Hankey had plenty on Taylor's throw because he outscored him during the legs.

He broke Phils throw once, dominance at it's finest that is then. Mind you Phil broke straight back and ended up losing the match because he was against the throw. Ted did well to take advantage of the short format and obviously winning the bull off was crucial

Re: Another Darts Thread : Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:35 pm  

MrPhilb wrote:

He broke Phils throw once, dominance at it's finest that is then. Mind you Phil broke straight back and ended up losing the match because he was against the throw. Ted did well to take advantage of the short format and obviously winning the bull off was crucial

He beat him because he outplayed, outscored and outdoubled him the same way everyone loses. Nothing to do with the throw, Taylor could've thrown first as he was nowhere near winning the game in the last leg. All the stats say you are wrong and the match said you are wrong.

Re: Another Darts Thread : Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:37 pm  

carl_spackler wrote:

I never said he didn't, but that's not my point. He didn't 'only' win by having the good fortune of throwing first, he was the better player and got the result he deserved. Suggesting he only won because of the throw as if Taylor was unlucky or hard done to is codswallop, quite frankly.

It's as bad as listening to ITV and SKY looking at his posts mate, all the stats tell you why he lost. If Taylor had an average of 103 everyone would be raving on it, ITV's post match didn't even mention it. All they spoke about was Taylor's glasses.

Re: Another Darts Thread : Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:38 pm  

Dan_FC wrote:

He beat him because he outplayed, outscored and outdoubled him the same way everyone loses. Nothing to do with the throw, Taylor could've thrown first as he was nowhere near winning the game in the last leg. All the stats say you are wrong and the match said you are wrong.

Ted did well to take advantage of throwing first, had it been the other way round it would have been 5-4 to the Power even though he was poor by his own standards

Re: Another Darts Thread : Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:41 pm  

MrPhilb wrote:

Ted did well to take advantage of throwing first, had it been the other way round it would have been 5-4 to the Power even though he was poor by his own standards

Why would it have been? Hankey outscored Taylor bigtime in that last leg, they're is nothing to suggest that Taylor would've won had it been the other way round. Hankey should've won it earlier when he missed two darts at double 19. Did you watch the match?

Re: Another Darts Thread : Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:42 pm  

Dan_FC wrote:

It's as bad as listening to ITV and SKY looking at his posts mate, all the stats tell you why he lost. If Taylor had an average of 103 everyone would be raving on it, ITV's post match didn't even mention it. All they spoke about was Taylor's glasses.

It's just a slight dip in Taylor's form in the last couple of tournaments IMO. I don't see why there has to be excuses found for it. The bloke's easily the best darts player of all time and has been dominant for 20 years. In that time there have to be blips, he's still human. He's good enough as he is, I really don't understand why it seems that some (including Waddell) want to build him up even more. When the truth's that impressive you have no need to embellish it. If anything it only cheapens the reality.