Hi Investor,
Just read your post, I do not have access to the form books today but will post the meetings and dates of the races for BHL & WL for you as soon as I can, no problem.
Cheers Mimas

i know you mentioned WHERE OR WHEN i hope you saw fit to back it,that was roushard,just got back from a wedding reception to see that one,never a doubt

No I didn`t.

Hope you were on.

Cheers,

barney
still waiting for an explanation of frankie in thee give notice race????????

greg,

not explaining nothing on here any more if you want to know why mail me.

whether you think will be any use or not will be another thing.

Stick your bottom lip back in and stop sulking............you sound rediculous!

as myself and mtoto said dettori has to ride godolphin horses.
surely this can be discussed on an open forum?

SALIM TOTO and SMOKIN BEAU both look very good today.any comments

thanks very much,i,ll look forward to seeing the info

m.johnston is very clever trainer,i very nearly got caught out with that one,btn 17 lgs by s.t lto on good/soft two of her three wins on g/f whereas s.t one from six plus l.e won the race last year,you,ve certainly got to keep your wits about you with vdw

Hi Investor,
Here's Wayward lads meetings and dates last 3 runs before the King George VI Chase.

11-Dec-85 Haydock tommy whittle £5987
30-Nov-85 Chepstow Rehersal chase £4408 20-Nov-85 Haydock Edward Hanmer Memorial chase £8908

and heres BHL's

14-Dec-85 Ascot SGB Hcap Chase £12505
30-Nov-85 Chepstow Rehearsal chase £4409
02-Mar-84 Haydock Greenall whitley breweries Hcap Chase £11440

Hope this helps
cheers Mimas

thanks again for your time and effort

Barney.

I have just read your posting on another thread. Why do you think it was easier to understand vdw back then? Yes, the races were recent, but the information was a lot less, and harder to get hold of. It makes me cringe to think about how little information we had. Also if it was easier, why do you think so many have not found the answer? A lot can be laid at the at the temperament door, not being prepared to wait for the right selection. I think we are all guilty of that, that one nearly fits, lets have a few quid on it.

Guest has helped me a lot, to understand how other people look at vdw. I don't know him, but feel he has fallen into the trap of making the examples work after the event. I do agree studying the old examples is the only way. The recent races can only be how we THINK vdw would have worked. I have tried to explain to you and others how I work. Guest and yourself don't agree, that's your privilege. I do wonder why I keep getting the same c/form horses as Guest. When we disagree, it is not by much. I always check his, does he check mine? When I tried to help you, you decided it was rubbish and said so very clearly. You have never said why The only reason I can think of, is vdw said speed by it's self is not enough. I have NEVER said it IS.

You have said you are going to stop explaining things on this thread, why? You made a statement Greg, and myself don't understand. I think anyone that makes statements should be prepared to explain them. This thread is starting to grow, people like Chaz, Bream, and Determined can only be an asset. Add them into the likes of Guest, Fulham, Crock, Statajack and others, it could take off.

Jimmy.

I agree with your posting, but I also think Barney hit the nail on the head. You can't understand vdw, so it's there to be rubbished. I would add to your list of valuable contributors Old-timer. I think his contributions are brilliant. There are people who operate in ways I wouldn't ever consider. Apart from one tongue in cheek remark, I would never consider belittling them. You say the vdw thread is a closed shop, I can't agree, if you have any SENSIBLE question i'm sure someone would at least try to answer it. I can only speak for myself, but I am not interested in posting 'so and so will win the 2:00.' I want to know why they think that, and I would NEVER back a horse just because someone thinks that it can win. That applies to any tips, even Gummy's selections.

Be Lucky

Mtoto,

Many thanks for your kind words, as I always read your posts with interest, they being less cryptic than some others on this thread.

Having never had the opportunity to read any of VDW’s books, all that I have picked up has been off this thread and thus cannot try to follow his lines of thinking. It has however, made me have another look at the way I was examining things. For a long time I tried to put things in a numerical manner, but I do not such skills as BB in that respect and thus that went out the window. Now I have got it down to two simple questions:
(a) Does this horse have what it takes to win this race?
(b) Are conditions right for it to win this race today?

Though I do note Ability figures, I am far from sold on the idea of dividing lifetime winnings by number of races won. As I deal almost entirely with handicaps, I feel a better measure of class is the average of the highest OR of the races the horse has been running in, plus of course the highest OR of the races it’s won. ORs might only be someone’s opinion, but highly informed and experienced opinion in the main, far more so than your average punter.

Having had my doubts as to the last Topspeed, I now note the Raceform raw speed figures to see how the horse is improving. I don’t use SFs per se as a basis for selection, just as a guide to what it can achieve and how far off that it is.

I take a good deal of notice of ‘shifts’, distance, age (all-aged back to 3yo), sex (open back to fillies) etc, plus I also try and check going, track and field size to see they fit into the picture.

What I do lack though is your temperament to wait for the right horses, usually trying to force a selection out of every race I look at. I also delve down to Class E on occasions, which I don’t think you do. You are very right though, horses do run to more consistent form in the higher class races. Maybe one day I'll get there.

Thanks for you valued input in the VDW forum though, which along with a few others I weigh carefully, learning new ideas all the time.

Best regards

Oldtimer

About sensible questions, will someone answer mine as to the ratio of jumps to flat in the VDW examples? Or will they give me a hint as to why it wasn't a sensible question?

Epiglotis

Its a perfectly sensible question which I saw when you originally posted it, but did not offer an answer as I don't have the exact figures and thought someone else might be able to give a more precise reply. However, as no one else has ...

VDW gave well over 100 examples, though the large majority were simply mentions on the lines of "W was an outstanding bet/good thing/good proposition on X".

He gave numerous examples on both Flat and NH. I would estimate probably 4O% Flat, 60% NH, plus or minus. If, overall, that is about right, among those where he went into some detail, the NH proportion is rather higher, and includes the 1978 Erin (Prominent King and Beacon Light) and the four set out in the "Spells it all out" article (that title, presumably furnished by Mr Peach, was a misnomer if ever there was one). Off hand, I can only think of four Flat examples (including the oft-referred to Roushayd) where VDW went into significant detail.

I hope this helps.

The class/form horse is the one with the highest ability rating considered in form ?

BHL was top on ability with 92 followed by WL on 70.

BHL was the short priced favourite this day but was discounted on the grounds of not being in form.

His run prior to the KG, race no` 1243 saw him carry a massive 12-07 into to 3rd place at Ascot over 3 miles, race value £12505. A slow run race where he received the Raceform comment `one paced`.

I intially considered this a good run and thus BHL was in form but clearly not according to VDW.

WHY ?

I offer the following; carrying 12-07 approx` 12-14 days before a Championship race is hardly a clever piece of training is it ?

I take the view that VDW considered his run in race 1243 as a very hard race. Added to that, BHL was far better suited to distances in excess of 3 miles on stiffer tracks than Kempton a combination of these 2 factors plus knowing what WL was capable of in comparison led VDW to his conclusion BHL was out of form.

Any comments ?

I fully agree with Mtotos reply to Jimmy. I cannot understand this clamouring on web based racing forums for tips and selections. I notice on other threads within the Gummy board that some members are blinding backing some contributors tips or selections. This seems totally crazy to me. Surely the clamouring should be for reasons as to why horses were selected backed up by proven evaluation processes?

I have only posted about VDWs methods because I know them to be an excellent source of profitable winners when fully understood. I would hope anyone interested was trying to solve the issues for themselves rather than just backing any selections given.

Determined - BHL had failed when in lower class twice from his last 3 runs. Wayward Lad had the best performance of all the runners in his recent history and been very consistent. Just failed to give weight to Earls Brig, caught close home and was only just behind BHL who was running best fresh after his mishap at Haydock against good class. It is simplifying things to say WL can't beat BHL because of their last meeting in a low class race. Where was that race run for starters. Think Florida Pearl/Best Mate.

barney
this has got crazy,waiting for a reply,i honestly think this comment you made about frankie made no sense at all,and you know absolutely nothing about racing.but are too ashamed to admit it?????????????????

I was hoping to keep this discussion on another thread but, as you have both commented on this one, I hope you will allow me to respond likewise.

Mtoto,

You say that as I can’t understand VDW I rubbish it. Does anyone understand it? If it was fully understood there would be less disagreement. Over the last twenty odd years someone like Guest who says he understands it would have published the results and everything would be in the public domain. VDW wrote a series of articles and this was taken up by Tony Peach. How much is the original VDW we will probably never know.

This is the only thing I do not understand. How anyone can continually keep on about VDW and not take responsibility for themselves. For Guest to say that his methods give the same outcomes as VDW therefore he must be doing the same thing means nothing. In the 1920’s Neils Bohr received a Nobel Prize for his model of the atom, within the next fifty years numerous breakthroughs and inventions were made possible because of his work. Then physicists found out his model was wrong. Did all those inventions based on his model cease to exist? Both you and Guest have devised a method whereby you successful pick winners based on a foundation of VDW the reason for the disagreement is probably because both of you would be wrong according to VDW.

Guest,

I have never clamoured for tips and selections, in the post that started this, with which I fully agree, It states quiet clearly.
“This is the stuff I think is important. Everyone has an opinion. Everyone likes a team or teams. Some guys may follow certain people. But that stuff is available all over the Internet. So to me posted plays are of no importance.”.
I have never placed bet based on anyone selections on this forum or any other. What I have said is that if someone posts a selection and someone else comes along after the event and tells him that it was obvious, to him, that his selection was wrong. Why not point this out before the race? And why all the cloak and dagger stuff from Barney, “good thing in the 2.30”, then after the race “it was obvious”. What use is that to anyone? This is why I say, if you really want to help people then post the selection beforehand and why you think it will win. This gives anyone who is interested the opportunity to follow your reasoning then, win or lose, analyse the hell out of it to see what went right/wrong.

This is what I like about Covers. Before a game someone will post a selection and their reasons, lots of others join in and agree or disagree but giving reasons why, then the game starts, and the posts continue throughout with comments and analysis, then at the end everyone congratulates the ones who bet the winner then start talking about the next game. This way everyone who wants to learn does so. I am not saying this can be done with horse racing but “good thing in the 2.30” and “it was obvious” is as sure as hell not the answer.