How is dartboard numbering decided?

May 6, 202311 min read

Dartboard numbering decided featured image with analytical number ring layout

Dartboard numbering is designed to reward accuracy and punish near misses. High-value numbers are placed next to low-value numbers, so a player aiming at 20 can easily fall into 1 or 5, while a player aiming at 19 can miss into 3 or 7. The exact inventor story is disputed, but the fairness logic is clear.

Last reviewed: 24 August 2026. This guide explains why dartboard numbers look random, what the sequence achieves, and why the common Brian Gamlin story should be treated carefully.

Infographic explaining how dartboard numbering rewards accuracy and penalises near misses — The numbering makes a near miss expensive. That is why the board feels fair even when it feels cruel.

The direct answer

The numbering is not random. It is arranged so that high numbers are separated by low numbers. This means accuracy matters. If the best targets were grouped together, a poor throw could still score well. The modern sequence makes sloppy grouping less rewarding.

The standard order, starting at 20 and moving clockwise, is 20, 1, 18, 4, 13, 6, 10, 15, 2, 17, 3, 19, 7, 16, 8, 11, 14, 9, 12, 5. It looks strange until you see what it does to near misses.

Why high numbers sit beside low numbers

The clearest example is the 20 segment. The 20 is surrounded by 1 and 5. If you aim at treble 20 and drift left or right, you may hit a very low score. That is deliberate. The board rewards the player who hits the target, not the player who merely lands nearby.

The same idea appears around 19, which sits between 3 and 7. The 18 is beside 1 and 4. The 17 is beside 2 and 3. The board repeatedly guards attractive numbers with punishing neighbours.

The fairness logic

A fair dartboard should make skill visible. Good grouping should help, but only when it is grouped around the correct target. If high numbers were clustered together, a player with poor directional control could still score heavily by throwing into a “good area”.

The standard numbering reduces that luck. It spreads value around the board so precision, route choice and target discipline matter. This is why the sequence has survived: it makes darts harder in the right way.

Is it mathematically perfect?

No. The traditional sequence is effective, but it is not the only possible arrangement and not necessarily the mathematically perfect one under every definition of fairness. Different researchers and enthusiasts have proposed alternative sequences depending on what they are trying to optimise.

For example, one arrangement might maximise the difference between neighbouring numbers. Another might minimise the value of common near-miss clusters. Another might consider finishing routes and doubles. The current board is best understood as a strong traditional design, not a proven mathematical endpoint.

The Brian Gamlin story

The numbering sequence is often credited to Brian Gamlin, commonly described as a carpenter from Bury who devised the layout in 1896. That story appears widely in darts writing, but serious darts historians have questioned it because clear evidence for Gamlin is difficult to find.

The responsible version is this: Brian Gamlin is the traditional attribution, but the evidence is disputed. The design itself is real and influential; the named inventor is less secure. This distinction matters because repeating a neat origin story as fact weakens the article.

Why the board feels unforgiving

The board feels unforgiving because it is designed to be. A near miss on treble 20 can become 1 or 5. A near miss on treble 19 can become 3 or 7. A player who cannot control direction is punished quickly.

This is also why players develop backup targets. If treble 20 is not flowing, they may switch to 19s or 18s. Good darts is not only hitting one segment; it is choosing targets that match your throw, rhythm and match situation.

Why 20 is at the top

The 20 is the highest single number, so placing it at the top gives the board a clear reference point. The number ring is set so 20 sits at top centre. When the board is rotated to spread wear, the number ring should be moved so 20 returns to the top.

That top position has become part of how players see the game. Double top means double 20. Treble 20 is the most famous scoring target. The entire visual language of modern darts is built around that orientation.

What would happen if the numbers were in order?

If the board ran 1 to 20 around the outside, high numbers would be grouped together. A player aiming around 19 or 20 could miss slightly and still hit another high number. That would make scoring less demanding and reduce the penalty for poor control.

It would also make the board less tactically interesting. The current sequence creates risk around every valuable target. That risk is one of the reasons darts remains watchable: every visit can swing if a player drifts into the wrong neighbour.

Neighbour examples that prove the idea

The strongest targets are rarely protected by friendly neighbours. The 20 has 1 and 5. The 19 has 3 and 7. The 18 has 1 and 4. The 17 has 2 and 3. Even the useful 16, important for doubles practice and checkout routes, sits between 7 and 8.

This pattern means the board constantly asks the same question: can you hit the segment you chose? If the answer is no, the neighbouring score often exposes the miss. That is why players can throw three darts in roughly the right area and still come away with a poor score.

Why the layout is good for spectators

The numbering also makes matches more dramatic. A player on a big score can lose control with one loose dart. A visit aimed at 180 can become 66, 45 or worse if the darts leak into 1s and 5s. Spectators understand that swing instantly because the board punishes visible mistakes.

This is different from a game where near misses still score nearly as well as hits. Darts is compelling because the margin between dominance and damage is narrow. The number ring is part of that tension.

How the numbering affects practice

The numbering teaches accuracy. Practising treble 20 is not only about hitting 60; it is about avoiding the 1 and 5. Practising 19s is not only about scoring 57; it is about controlling the dart well enough not to leak into 3 or 7.

Beginners should use this as feedback. If your misses keep landing in the same neighbouring number, your throw is telling you something. The number pattern helps diagnose direction, release and alignment.

Beginner practice using the number ring

A useful beginner drill is to aim at a high number and record the neighbouring misses. If you aim at 20 and hit too many 1s, your dart is leaking one direction. If you hit too many 5s, it is leaking the other. That is more useful feedback than only counting total score.

Another useful drill is to practise around the board in risk groups: 20 with 1 and 5, 19 with 3 and 7, 18 with 1 and 4. This teaches the player that every target has a penalty zone. It also builds respect for board geography, which matters later in match play.

How the numbering affects checkout routes

The numbering also affects checkout decisions. Some doubles have friendlier neighbours than others. Missing double 16 inside leaves 16, then double 8. Missing double 20 inside leaves 20, then double 10. Players learn these routes because the number layout and double ring shape the finish.

This is why darts maths and board geography matter together. A checkout is not just arithmetic. It is a physical route across a deliberately awkward board.

Does it affect cricket and other games?

Yes, indirectly. In cricket, the main targets are usually 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15 and bull. The standard number order means those targets are not simply grouped in a neat cluster. Players must move around the board and control different angles.

In Around the Clock, the awkward order is part of the challenge because the player moves through numbers in sequence while the targets jump around the board. The same number ring therefore supports different types of games, not only 501.

Why alternative boards have not replaced it

Alternative layouts can be mathematically interesting, and some may optimise specific fairness criteria better than the traditional board. The problem is standardisation. Darts depends on shared expectations: players know the board, practise the routes and compare performance across venues.

Changing the number order would rewrite years of muscle memory, checkout knowledge and broadcast understanding. A new layout might be clever, but it would need a very strong reason to replace a standard that works and is recognised everywhere.

Consistency is part of the sport.

Equipment and setup

To practise properly, use a clear dartboard with a movable number ring and sharp segment definition. If wall mounting is not practical, use dartboard stands, and protect the area with dartboard surrounds.

Use consistent darts or complete dart sets so your miss patterns are meaningful. Keep spare flights, stems and points available because damaged equipment can make grouping feedback unreliable.

Common mistakes

Calling the order random: it is awkward by design.
Repeating the Gamlin story as settled fact: the attribution is disputed.
Ignoring neighbours: every target has a risk profile.
Practising only treble 20: the board rewards flexible target choice.
Forgetting rotation: rotate the board body but keep 20 at the top.

Visual guide: how to apply this at the board

A practical decision map for applying the how is dartboard numbering decided answer at a real board.

Use this matrix to turn the how is dartboard numbering decided question into the right practice, scoring or setup decision.

Sources used

The numbering plan punishes loose accuracy

The dartboard number order is clever because high numbers often sit near punishing low numbers. The 20 is next to 1 and 5, so a small horizontal error can turn a strong target into a poor score. That arrangement rewards precision more than simply aiming near the top of the board.

Bottom line

Dartboard numbering is decided around difficulty and fairness. The layout separates high-value numbers with low-value neighbours, so accuracy is rewarded and near misses are punished. The traditional inventor story is uncertain, but the design logic is obvious every time a missed treble 20 lands in 1 or 5.