180s5
140+21
100+50
Completed Match
Full breakdown modePlayers Championship 19 • T32 • 3 Sept 2023, 00:00 UTC • Best of 15 legs
WinnerRobert Owen
Score6–5
ModeFull breakdown
AI match summary
Awaiting recap signalThis match page now supports a dedicated completed-match recap path, but the post-match summary signal is not populated for this one yet.
Edge result
Prediction unavailableNo clean edge
There is not enough structured preview output here yet to judge whether the pre-match edge landed.
Player performance comparison
Final stat splitRobert Owen avg95.3
van Peer avg91.6
Robert Owen checkout43.0%
van Peer checkout50.0%
Core match stats
Better values highlightedRobert Owenvan Peer
95.3
3-dart averageRobert Owen edge
91.6
108.1
First 9 averageRobert Owen edge
96.4
43.0%
Checkout %van Peer edge
50.0%
50
100+Level
50
21
140+Level
21
5
180sLevel
5
125
Highest checkoutLevel
125
Key performance insights
Driven by the final stat split and leg availabilityRobert Owen created the cleaner scoring base with a 3.7 point edge in 3-dart average.
van Peer was the sharper finisher, clearing chances 7.0 percentage points better on doubles.
Robert Owen set the tone earlier in legs, opening with a 11.7 point First 9 advantage.
Scoring summary
Power scoring and volume180s5
140+21
100+50
Finishing summary
Checkout quality and conversionCheckout %43.0%
Highest checkout125
Checkouts6/14
Checkout %50.0%
Highest checkout125
Checkouts5/10
Momentum strip
Match flow by legL1van Peer
L2Owen
L3van Peer
L4van Peer
L5van Peer
L6Owen
L7Owen
L8Owen
L9van Peer
L10Owen
L11Owen
Leg-by-leg table
11 legs capturedLegWinnerDartsCheckout
Set 1 · Leg 1
van Peer
—
—
Set 1 · Leg 2
Owen
—
—
Set 1 · Leg 3
van Peer
—
—
Set 1 · Leg 4Streak of 2
van Peer
—
—
Set 1 · Leg 5Streak of 3
van Peer
—
—
Set 1 · Leg 6
Owen
—
—
Set 1 · Leg 7
Owen
—
—
Set 1 · Leg 8
Owen
—
—
Set 1 · Leg 9
van Peer
—
—
Set 1 · Leg 10
Owen
—
—
Set 1 · Leg 11
Owen
—
—
Match stats
2 player rowsAI edge post-mortem
Work in progressRobert Owen closed this out 6–5, and the completed-match recap now has the right scaffolding to explain the result with more than a shrug.