Hello invester
I`ve also aquired CD methods and i can tell you that he does evolve around the VDW methods, Quote me if i`m wrong???
TONY.

marchwood

thanks for that info on the books

would these be the same two little swish has found

i will buy them today anyway, hope they prove to be a raft, there are that many winners in the stream i'm going under.

hedghog

sorry i didnt see the post before now i would have loved to chat about it.

its all hind sight now

Marchwood

An interesting post, but when you say:

"What was important was that all of his selections were proven at or had shown they could win at the distance"

you are not strictly accurate - eg Rifle Brigade which, for VDW, was an "outstanding" bet when winning over 1.5m, having never previously raced above 1m.


Hedgehog

I regret I cannot help re your point on position in the market on previous runs, except to say that in some analyses, eg the 1978 Erin Hurdle where VDW selected Prominent King, a horse's position in the market seems to have reflected the trainer's expectations.


Investor

Yes, I have a copy of the Colin Davey system to which you refer, and various others which seem to draw on elements of VDW's ideas. While I cannot pretend to have checked it out long term, I think it unlikely to be of much value as the essence of VDW was enabling one to read the Form Book properly, not generating a system based on a few ratings.

An analysis of the early examples VDW gave us shows that, when appropriate, he selected horses outside the first five or six in the betting (eg Little Nugget); outside the three APPARENTLY most consistent (eg Prominent King); relatively low on the ability rating he showed us later (eg Battlement); and without proven form over the distance (eg Rifle Brigade). Not the kind of selections a simple system like Davey's will capture very often.

FULHAM

how old was rifle brigade when it won at 1 mile 4

First of all to Barney

The two I am aware of by Jock Bingham are
4 ways 2 win
Be a winner

Fulham

I understand exactly what you are saying and the statement was relative to the period in question. This is back to the old matter of personal opinion
and how you read a horses previous races. If you read staying on well or this type of remark surely
this was the sort of thing that you based your judgement on. It was not my wording as I said it was from another source, but I think I would go along with it! Do you have any opinions on the writings etc., of JB? I have read many times that an understanding of VDW was not that difficult so I try not to complicate matters too
much and offer those who are keen to progress as much help as possible in the way that it appears to me.

Marchwood

Those interested in CD, I must say I think he is no mug and some of the ideas I have seen make sense.

When you talk of his systems which ones do you mean as several have been posted up on the Internet. I have copied most of them and would be happy to pass them on privately but I do not feel inclined to post them on the board

Anyone who would like to continue this matter suggest you contact Gummy and ask him to pass your email address on to me and I will contact you.

regards
Marchwood

For those interested here is the data for
Rifle Brigade which was given to me; I have had second thoughts and will ask gummy to post it to his tables page!

Marchwood

Hello All,

Barney - Marchwood is correct about the two books he names by Jock Bingham. There are two further books available, Track Trainer Tips and The Key.

Guest - would you like to comment about the importance of previous race odds please.

All the best
hedgehog

Barney.

The last thing I wanted was to sound intimidating. The offer is open to any one who contributes and asks questions on this board. I don't profess to know it all and as you can see the experts don't agree with much of my thinking. I have however tried to answer the questions you have put, but as I said there are some things I don't want to put on an open board.

AJ

I am also waiting to hear the answer to your first question. SYS failed for me, but if he failed, C came out even worse. So how was he the most likely winner, anyone. The second question is easier if you take 10, 85 rated horses and race them for £50000 does that make a top class race, no. The real class of a race can ONLY be judged by the competitors. I agree in most cases the best (most valuable) race has the best horses, but you must always check to make sure.

Hedgehog.

Again I will be interested to hear the answer to your question re SP. I personally worry public (mug) money brings many horses in to a false price. Just because big bets go on does that mean it is clever money, or just another Terry Ramsden with more money than sense. The only way to know is like the bookies, look at the "faces". Then there is the bookies laying off the money again, who's money. We often read about false favourites in the forecast, how many false fav's on the track?

Investor.

I don't doubt Mr Davey's method is based on his understanding of vdw. In the end he, and Jock B had to change the method into a system to sell it. Systems don't work, you cannot apply a set of preconceived rules to vdw. You also can't package the knowledge and experience needed to win at backing horses. If you could the puzzle would have been solved years ago.

Regards

Hedgehog is right about the other two and their was another on the way when he died, according to a posting on another site. However, the two I mention appear to be those mostly read and I have seen some adverse reports about one of the other two you mention.

Marchwood

Barney

Rifle Brigade won over 1.5m first time out as a three year old.


Jock Bingham

Jock wrote five booklets, of which four were published and one remained unpublished at this death but has been made available in typescript copy by Raceform to those who ordered a copy in an advert. placed in the Raceform Update by Jock months before his death.

Personally, I have learnt quite a lot from Jock's booklets, especially "Trainers' Track Tips". And rather than follow Colin Davey's system, anyone without the time to study races in depth who wants to back enough winners to keep in the black could do worse than follow two of the methods in Jock's "Four Ways to Win". His "Method 2", focusing upon penalty carriers, throws up winners every year, while his "Method 3", focusing upon 3yo and above Group 1 and 2 races, has some particularly purple patches (for example, Royal Ascot 2001).

thankyou fulham

it looks simple now

i cant find 'the key'

but have found 4 others inc methodolgy not kidology

what is this

Hello marchwood
All i`ve got is THE INTRODUCTION TO COLIN DAVEYS METHOD. in perspective i will post it like this...

10 runners or less

Top trainers & jockey

First five in betting NON handicaps
First six in betting market handicaps

only consider ABC races

Ability must be 40 plus +20 clear of nearest rival,even higher in the case of the strongest bets

Must be biggest race winner- Most valuable value must be a minimum of £10,000

Last race must be first three in class last run.

Distance winners or same distance as last run.

Weight within 10lbs of last run IE no more

Should not of been beaten more than 5 lenths in last run.

running within 28 days of last run

I just that helps in someway
Cheers TONY,

MARCHWOOD

i would love to see form of rifle brigade race, however,

i think it would be worthless unless it included 2yr form inc value of races ran, distance ran and most important the SR and Course.

hope you have this then it may be clear for all of us.

your next post has just popped up so i may need to amend this

To me this example was not one of the best; on the information given it was a one horse race and here is why:

Although I have sent Rifle Brigade statistics to Gummy for posting on the tables board, I would like to make the following observations

But firstly for Barney Rifle Brigade won over 12f on the 16th April 1978 at Beverley having his first race of that his 5 year old season!

His two last races of his 4 year old season were over 7f and 8f where he finished
2nd and 1st (his last race of that season). His last race of the season (1977)
was at Lanark over 8f in a class 7 race with 8-11; the comment was Lw, prom 4th st. led
2f out, rdn ro. The previous race where he was second was over 7f in a class 7 race
with 9-0; the comment was Lw, ap, 5th st, ran on ins fnl f. His previous run was in
higher class (18) at York over 8f finishing 2nd carrying 8-5, 1/2 lgth behind the winner:
comment Lw, 6th st, chal 2f out, hrd drvn & nt qckn fnl f. In both these last two races
he was giving weight to the winners. In his Lanark race he was given a SF of 49.

Also of course, for the numerical picture fans, his figure was 5 against 15 and 18, enough in
my mind to beat the other runners. I think there is much to be said for putting a limit, say 9,
in the way that Jock Bingham does on consistency figures.

For me it was a race to put your house on; none of the others had won over the distance. none of them had a comparable SF and it could be argued that Rifle Brigade was an improving horse even better at age of 5.

The only other matter which, maybe, would be of concern to some folk was that it was being raised in class. But as I have said many times before improving horses raised in class win more often than those loss of form horses being dropped in class.

Hope you get a chance to look at the table and see what I am trying to say.

Marchwood

To me this example was not one of the best; on the information given it was a one horse race and here is why:

Although I have sent Rifle Brigade statistics to Gummy for posting on the tables board, I would like to make the following observations

But firstly for Barney Rifle Brigade won over 12f on the 16th April 1978 at Beverley having his first race of that his 5 year old season!

His two last races of his 4 year old season were over 7f and 8f where he finished
2nd and 1st (his last race of that season). His last race of the season (1977)
was at Lanark over 8f in a class 7 race with 8-11; the comment was Lw, prom 4th st. led
2f out, rdn ro. The previous race where he was second was over 7f in a class 7 race
with 9-0; the comment was Lw, ap, 5th st, ran on ins fnl f. His previous run was in
higher class (18) at York over 8f finishing 2nd carrying 8-5, 1/2 lgth behind the winner:
comment Lw, 6th st, chal 2f out, hrd drvn & nt qckn fnl f. In both these last two races
he was giving weight to the winners. In his Lanark race he was given a SF of 49.

Also of course, for the numerical picture fans, his figure was 5 against 15 and 18, enough in
my mind to beat the other runners. I think there is much to be said for putting a limit, say 9,
in the way that Jock Bingham does on consistency figures.

For me it was a race to put your house on; none of the others had won over the distance. none of them had a comparable SF and it could be argued that Rifle Brigade was an improving horse even better at age of 5.

The only other matter which, maybe, would be of concern to some folk was that it was being raised in class. But as I have said many times before improving horses raised in class win more often than those loss of form horses being dropped in class.

Hope you get a chance to look at the table and see what I am trying to say.

Marchwood

im confused now 1 says 3, 1 says 5

but most other questions answered apart from courses ran on and course race on

i will wait until table appears

PUZZLING!!! Thats the name of the game???
Tony.