Reaching a round pays the same, whoever you beat
The reward attaches to the round reached and to the event's tier. Whether the world number one fell on the way or nobody of note did, the same round is worth the same.
Elo ratings · head-to-head disciplines
Winning most is not playing best.
For head-to-head disciplines, the engine rebuilds the ranking from the matches themselves. Every rating traces back to the results that produced it, and can be replayed one match at a time.
The blind spot
What an accumulated total cannot tell you
The official ranking of a head-to-head discipline adds up what a career has collected over a rolling window: prize money on some circuits, ranking points on others. It is an honest measure of accumulation. It is not a measure of who beats whom, and three ordinary situations in any competition show why.
A thin draw pays like a hard one
A final reached through a weak half collects more than a semi-final lost after beating three of the top ten.
Last season still counts as this one
Results stay on the sheet for a fixed window, then drop off on a date. A ranking that moves by the calendar is not moving by the play.
An Elo rating measures one thing only: who beat whom, and how unlikely that was. Not the total, not the tier, not the seeding.
Right now
The top 5, today
Recomputed as the sources publish.
#playerRated matchesElo
1Luke Littlerlast on 29/09/26211 matches2Luke Humphrieslast on 04/10/26276 matches3Gerwyn Pricelast on 04/10/26448 matches4Jonny Claytonlast on 02/10/26313 matches5James Wadelast on 03/10/26634 matches91 ranked · at least 20 matches · active within 24 months · Elo v1
Over time
Level moves. A total only ever grows.
Four careers at the top of the ranking, and the ratings they have actually held. They rise, they fall, and they cross. Every crossing is a change in who beats whom that an accumulated total cannot show.
Verifiable
Every rating explains itself, line by line
Click a rating and the ledger behind it opens: the value before, the match, the change it caused, the value after. No hand adjustment, no private formula, no editorial call.
Who it is for
A number, not an opinion
Followers of the circuit
The question a table of totals never answers: on current form, who actually beats whom.
Media and commentary
A figure you can quote and a page you can link, instead of a feeling about who is in form.
Competitors and coaches
A read on level that does not depend on a draw, a schedule, or one lucky run in one tournament.
Builders
The same numbers through an API, with the history behind each one. Tell us what you are building.
The engine
Recomputed, never patched
- Deterministic
- The same matches always produce the same ratings.
- Extended, never mutated
- Each cycle writes new states and new moves. Published values stay as they were published.
- Tested twice
- The equivalence is checked in memory, and again through the database between two cycles.
Coverage
What we count, and what we do not
- Darts
- Singles matches from the nine majors of the PDC circuit, bar the World Cup, which is played in teams. See the coverage →
- Table tennis
- The singles matches of the world championships, the Olympic tournament, the World Cup, the season-ending finals and the biggest stops of the WTT tour (Grand Smash and Champions). See the coverage →
- Tennis
- The singles matches of the four majors, the 1000, the 500 and the 250. See the coverage →
- MMA
- Every bout of the UFC, Bellator and the PFL, from UFC 1 in 1993. See the coverage →
Matches a source does not publish are named, never interpolated.
Questions
Does this replace the official ranking?
No. The official ranking decides seedings and qualification, and nothing here changes that. This is a second reading, answering a different question: level rather than accumulation.
Where do the results come from?
Public sources, cited on every page and read again on a schedule. The method page names them and shows what the last read found.
How often does it move?
Whenever the sources publish new matches. The cut-off date of the current ranking is shown above every table.
Why Elo?
Because it answers the only question we ask of it: given who has beaten whom, how likely was each result. It is old, public and checkable, three things a private score is not.
Can I see how a rating was built?
Entirely. Every rating opens onto the full list of changes that produced it, each with its cause and its before-and-after values.
Is it free?
The rankings, the profiles and the ledgers are open, and will stay open. Programmatic access is what we charge for.
See who actually beats whom.
No account, no sign-up. The whole ranking is one click away.