Online ranker evaluation is one of the key challenges in information retrieval. While the preferences of rankers can be inferred by interleaving methods, the problem of how to effectively choose the ranker pair that generates the interleaved list without degrading the user experience too much is still challenging. On the one hand, if two rankers have not been compared enough, the inferred preference can be noisy and inaccurate. On the other, if two rankers are compared too many times, the interleaving process inevitably hurts the user experience too much. This dilemma is known as the exploration versus exploitation tradeoff. It is captured by the $K$-armed dueling bandit problem, which is a variant of the $K$-armed bandit problem, where the feedback comes in the form of pairwise preferences. Today's deployed search systems can evaluate a large number of rankers concurrently, and scaling effectively in the presence of numerous rankers is a critical aspect of $K$-armed dueling bandit problems. In this paper, we focus on solving the large-scale online ranker evaluation problem under the so-called Condorcet assumption, where there exists an optimal ranker that is preferred to all other rankers. We propose Merge Double Thompson Sampling (MergeDTS), which first utilizes a divide-and-conquer strategy that localizes the comparisons carried out by the algorithm to small batches of rankers, and then employs Thompson Sampling (TS) to reduce the comparisons between suboptimal rankers inside these small batches. The effectiveness (regret) and efficiency (time complexity) of MergeDTS are extensively evaluated using examples from the domain of online evaluation for web search. Our main finding is that for large-scale Condorcet ranker evaluation problems, MergeDTS outperforms the state-of-the-art dueling bandit algorithms.