Determined,

I was otherwise engaged on Saturday and consequently didn't look at the racing before the event and of course it's always much easier with hindsight.

The point that I was trying to convey was that I don't have a problem with Bangalore being a bet for some following the VDW methodology, only with it's classification as the C/F horse.

By my understanding of the methods the C/F horses were:
CF1. Archduke Ferdinand (with negatives - Handicap Race)
CF2. Fantasy Hill (with negatives - Trip & Course)
CF3. Bangalore

Maybe I'm just being a little too pedantic in the terminology

[This message was edited by Crock on July 01, 2002 at 07:11 PM.]

Off course Bangalore was the c/f horse. Barney says so and he should know, he's the expert. He's a genius, he first heard of VDW a couple of months ago and he's crammed 20 years study into the last few months. So, if Barney says it, it must be right.

The Northumberland Plate highlighted a classic case of certain horses appearing to be in form but actually not in the context of Saturdays valuable handicap.

Archduke Ferdinand had been showing little before his 2nd at Royal Ascot in a conditions event over 2m 6f getting weight from the 1st and 3rd in a tight finish at 9/1. Did that 2nd now imply he could win a big handicap with 9-10 on his back?

Fantasy Hill had obviously been mapped out for the Chester Cup on the back of a headgearless pipe opener at Newbury with 9-13. At 8/1 he won the Chester event with 8-9, and good whilst the form was, he was set to carry 9-8 (13lbs more) in a higher class event on Saturday. If he couldn't win a 25 grand handicap with 8-11, what chance a 98 grand one with 9-8 ?

Bangalore was also a class contender and there was no doubt he was in form consistently. Failing to give 10lb to Conquestadora first time up this year was fair form. He then won over further with 10-0 as 7/2 fav in similiar class (slightly higher hcap grade) before going to Newcastle with 9lb less weight to carry though up in race class. One of the 3 most consistent and in form he looked a big contender.

Mr Dinos was also showing good consistent form, though in conditions races finsihing 2nd at 4/1 in a gp3 at Ascot. Now into handicap company with less physical weight and trained by P Cole he also had an excellent chance.

After evaluation based on the facts in the form book, it can be seen there were only 2 real contenders and the prices allowed a book to be made.

The same process showed Esloob to be nailed on in her race.

That's it settled then, God has spoken.

Jimmy,that was a very funny reply,it made me laugh anyway.
Guest a very good post,informative as ever.
I love this forum I can learn and laugh at the same time.

jimmy

i will revert

bangalor was the c/f horse on course as well as off.

people have been telling me that all my life.


i crammed 20 yrs of vdw's examples into six months, surly, even you know you cant cram 20 yrs study into six months.

i am right.

What are you goint to revert to barney? The wild state?

look it up

determined

do you think its gatemans turn today?

that hill must have been tough for such a big horse.

Haven`t had the time to look at any races today and as I post I do not know any results.

Gateman - whatever todays result has a big race in it this season.

Cheers,

big weekend for vdw fans

the old newton cup and the lancashire oaks are run this weekend.

these two were often quoted as vdw's favourite races with the facts that there was always a cert in one or the other.

HAS anyone any thoughts yet?

Takamaka Bay is a horse I have had down as a probable winner of the Old Newton Cup for sometime. I noted him on this thread during my comments regarding his seasonal debut.
He will not figure on the consistency ratings but I suspect he`ll be well placed on `ability` as his Ascot win last season gives him the capability to win this race.
Hopefully the top wgt`s will stay in which will give him 9 lbs less to carry this weekend.
He clearly had a problem when beaten favourite in this eveant last season or he possibly bounced after having 3 hard races in quick succession.
He`s had 3 quick races this season but the trainer has clearly stated he`s taken some getting fit.
Saturday is the day but I`ll have to consider the opposition nearer the time.


A FAVOUR IF YOU OR ANYBODY ELSE DO NOT MIND

The first NH annual I have is for the season 1977-78. I have just gone through the form of STROMBOLUS for that year.
What I would like to do is rate all the field from the Whitbred for `ability` but of course I do not have previous season`s form to go on.
Could you or antbody else help me out ?

Cheers,

i personally thought gateman/mauri moon,had the credentials to win the race,having said that i think temperement was the order of the day,i believe the first part of the formula was "consistent form" i could,nt have confidently pinpointed an outright winner,maybe i misjudged the race,but the man did say if uncertain let it run

Determined,

Ability ratings going into the Whitbread were as follows:

ROYAL EPIC - 26
APRIL SEVENTH - 23
STROMBOLUS - 21
FORT DEVON - 18
PARKHOUSE - 17
MASTER H - 15
ANOTHER DOLLY - 14
SHIFTING GOLD - 14
FORT FOX - 13
CHURCHTOWN BOY - 12
SPARTAN MISSILE - 11
CURRENT GOLD - 10
WILLIAM PENN - 7
PRECIOUS GEM - 3

Hope this helps.

Cheers

I wonder if anybody can explain something I have great difficulty understanding everytime I read it. I'm sure it's just me being a little thick but I just can't get my head around it.

In letter 19 (Look before you leap in) VDW gives his ideas on compiling lists of horses to follow and says in para 5:
As a precaution readers may care to consider following selected animals in pairs, grouping them in such a way that the possibility of them both running in the same race is avoided.

Any ideas?

I also find it interesting that VDW says in the same letter:
I selected 6 for the National Hunt season which returned many times the national average wage. Needless to say when a win has resulted the horse is deleted.
To make 'many times the national average wage' from a maximum of 6 winning bets with any losers deducted, suggests to me that VDW was dealing in some pretty substantial staking, unless of course I'm missing the point

Cheers

Thank you for the ability ratings. You are a true gentleman.
I`ll now evaluate `S` against the rest of the field. One quick point, he`d been carrying 11-00 plus throughout the season, produces his best performance of his career when falling at Cheltenham and then turns up with 10-00 for the Whitbread with non other than T.Stack on board. A very clever placement or what. Trainers h`cap their own horses. Don`t they just.



Turning to the 2 points you raise, those more versed on the subject will hopefully express their thoughts.

My 2 penneth for what they are worth,

a) pairing the horses - I`m not clear either

b) I believe like you that VDW must have been playing with large sums. He`d clearly been successful for many years and if making at least a point per race 80% of the time over many years he must have been worth a few quid.

Cheers,

crock,

i dont get that bit either.With regard to staking, when the are certs i think there are a few from this thread who really are lumping on.

determined,

not that hard is it when you start to look?

all,

there is an interesting runner today at lingfield in the 130,not saying that it will win though just yet,cant find any others that have run against kaiteur in that race.It will however be a good guide to possible future
profit.

gulzar

[This message was edited by Barney on July 03, 2002 at 07:37 AM.]

Barney,

A race to watch with possible future profit in mind but certainly not a betting race for me.

Gulzar - in my opinion, her 2 runs last season didn`t set the world alight. Who knows, those 2 efforts maybe an illusion of her true ability but lets see her show it first.
The very fact that she is blinkered today suggests she may have her own ideas about the game. That said, it didn`t stop Esloob.

Plus factors are clearly the jockey and trainer who are both in excellent form. The trainer is one we should all be paying very close attention too.

Getting a filly to win its race is vital to future breeding operations and I`ve no doubt this excellent trainer will have her fit enough to win if good enough ?

Whilst the opposition maybe nothing special she is just one of several probable winners and the race has far too many ifs and buts for me.

***** always back winners is not a bad motto to have. Didn`t VDW suggest in one article that it was worth letting a horse show it can win before investing ? *****

Cheers,

If you have the ability ratings it becomes easier to see why strombolus was a good bet but at the time he gave the horse as a bet, he hadnt revealed them to the public. This is because he either hadnt discovered them in 1978 or because he wanted people to learn more about form before revealing them. I think the second answer is more likely as ability type ratings had been around in US racing for years even then. Try finding reasons why Strombolus could have been a good bet without the ability rating and they will stand you in good stead for other examples where the horses in question may not be in the top 4 for ability.
regards,

I`ve thought for along time that where h`caps are concerned the ability rating is not the be all end all.

I know this is a view shared by Mtoto judging by his numerous comments on this point.

What good is the ability rating if the horse is out of form ? The question I want to find out is what is considered `in form` and `not in form`.

The comments regarding Wayward Lad and Burrough Hill Lad when evaluating the King George would suggest BHL was not considered a form horse because of the sharp track ?

Any comments ?

Cheers,