Getting back to a winner in a race i couldn`t help but notice that nearly all the horses mentioned by barney today had shown at one time or another in their past that they could win in a higher class with more weight in relation to an earlier victory, not always on the same run however everything is relative remember, dont know if this is significant or not but it`s an area worth investigation, if you take vdw`s comments on board re-how horses are placed after a win particularly in handicaps , many trainers push them up in distance, weight, class, to hide their true potential he refers to these as negative influences so if a horse was to win or run well when the odds were against them then surely they must have something about them, please forgive me only thinking out loud & thought this might have something to do with a horse being a winner in a race last 2 fulongs and all that & showing the right attitude & ability in a comparable class or better than todays, once again please feel free to put me right .

Sorry mate but Barney never names any winners before a race (well he did tip a loser on the Betting Challenge thread on Friday the day he got all those fantastic winners, including VDW 16-1 winners that have never ran before).
He now says he doesn't read form, cos it is rubbish and speed figs and OR's are useless.
Think about it Walter, has it never crossed your mind that he does all this for attention?
If you read all his posts you would see where I am coming from.
Trouble is people like me who are feeling bored can't resist joining in, which he no doubt thrives on.
I made 17 points in November for around 40 points lay out, and I don't make things up.
Swish

vdw uses two sets of ratings as aguide to find selections.
now surely ratings are made up from form,speed etc
so how can these be rubbish?

also another point i am wondering about is,with all these winners,how come you have never won the tipping comp on here,also when we done a horse a day for two weeks,how did you have so few winners,is it you did not want to give to much away?

re your post on the 29th nov,your bets for the day made roughly 40 pts profit,why are you still asking a lot of questions?
you have left your self wide open.
now as you have named all the prices,people can check the horses anyway,so to this question you cannot say,youll be giving the game away,post a days horses before racing?

As if.

i do hope the bets you posted you did get money on,but can you see my point of view,it just does not add up with the horses you post beforehand.

Many thanks for the reply,it looks much clearer now.Having watched the race myself,he always seemed to be pushing just to keep in touch.My mistake,if the race had been say 26F or on softer ground,or on more galloping trap,then things may have been different.
The informative nature of your reply is what I believe this thread,and site is supposed to be about.
Thanks for taking the trouble to clear this up,incidentally,Bow Strada,and No need for Alarm,were found in similar circumstances,or so I thought,but there was a difference,as I can now see.

Hello All
Iv'e been looking in on this thread everyday,And iv;e been thinking that during all these months certain points haven't been touched upon,Didn't v.d.w say there can only be 2,3 or 4 horses that can possibly win or more to the point have the class/form to win the race,Well why not look for them races,they are there everyday,I'm not being cryptic,But to get what you want out of these methods you have to be observant for example odds compilers get paid a great deal of money.let's go back to Little Owl/wayward lad,These two horses were i believe something like 12 points clear of the 3rd horse in the betting,So what i hear you say,I suggest you check out how mant times or what percentage,of these types win but of course to narrow it down to one goes back to class and of course form,This is just one example but they are there.I believe DETERMINED got it spot on yesterday With his selections there was no worry for INTERSKY FALCON in my opinion There were 2 others besides the ones mentioned by determined namely TEES COMPONENTS but not at the price,And SIR TOBY check em out you never know maybe something that has eluded you may suddenly be more visible.

Barney,
Your response to my last post indicates you dont know quite as much as you like to think, however many miles away I may or may not be its somewhat closer than you are. You want to know what ratings method vdw used but if you read letter 30 he explains that it is unimportant, its what they say or dont say that matters, not what is top rated or just how they are compiled. Look at the 1981 Guineas example in letters 46 and 47 if you want to know how ratings (any kind) should be used properly. It may explain to you why he used 2 sets of ratings in every single example he used in Golden Years. If its good enough for him its good enough for me, but its obviously not for you though eh Barney?
As for your "form" posting, I and a few others may know what you mean from your statement but the way youve said it was deliberately designed to irritate people while at the same time offering absolutely no encouragement to people who are genuinely trying to learn the methods. It seems rather childish and makes it look like you dont possess the temperament required to succeed in this game.
As someone else pointed out, the sheer amount of selections that you come up with is yet another indicator of your competency with vdw's methodology.
regards,

I wonder if others followed this method (the one spelt out in Chapter 6 of "Systematic Betting") over the last Flat season where, of course, we had to work with Raceform's new sfs?

My list conformed to all the VDW criteria except, of course, the sf of 40 and above one (for which I substituted a new style sf of 98 and above), and contained 26 horses, 22 of ran in the UK/Ireland.

Of the 22, only 14 (64%) won, which is down some way from 2001, and below the 70-75% figure to which I'm accustomed. Some won fto this year when, in my view, impossible to back, and overall the list presented few good betting opportunities.

This may, of course, just turn out to have been a poor year for this particular method; the change in sfs may be a factor; or I perhaps didn't choose the best cut off point with a sf of 98.

If others followed lists compiled on the lines of that suggested in Chapter 6 of "Systematic Betting", I'd be interested to learn how theirs fared, and any thoughts on the potential impact of the new sfs.

a lot of people think i only come on here to critisize people,but i dont,well done on an informative post,quoting letter numbers etc.
more open posts like this are what the doctor ordered

your not going all guest on us are you,there are questions for you on here,and you have been here reading them a few times today but with no reply?

It's that time again on the forum I see.

Well, I'm not going to get involved in the tit for tat because it's boring and totally unproductive.

However, just to highlight several good things over the weekend, I can point members to Jair Du Cochet, Got One Too, Turtleback and Young American who were all the class/form horses in their respective races and good wagers to boot.

i do agree with you,but barney is telling people the are miles off,yet he has never proved to be anywhere near himself.
it is unproductive but inevitable after his posts.

Fulham,
I use the method and this year used a figure of 97,as cut off point,like you have been most dissapointed with results.It was mostly the placing of the selected horses that caused most dissapointment.

Guest,would you not have considered Baachanal as a good thing.

Everyone,I think Barney is being a bit tongue in cheek,and if you reverse his comments,then I think you will see what he is saying,well that's my thinking on it anyway.

Good evening
I think that if guest didn't play on Bacchanal,He would have been very very tempted,if you just look at his last 3 runs alone,Wasn't you?

Pipedreamer

Thanks. Let's hope it was a one-off disappointing year.

As regards Bacchanal, I obviously don't know whether Guest backed it. I didn't, because despite the case that could be made, backing chasers reverting to hurdles (in this case after really quite a long time away) is always a bit of a gamble, and we know it was something that VDW was inclined to leave. This time it paid off, but was not in my view a percentage bet.

Investor thanks for the reply,I most surely was,from your post,Tees Components,I couldn't know would he stay the three miles,which of course he did.If I thought he would I would have been on,4/7 or not.

Fulham thanks for reply,hopefully it is just one of those things,funnily enough it started off ok,earlier in the season,but then it just never took off.

Limstone lad today 2:10 F surely this was a certainty and the 8/13 opening pricee was value?

Please forgive my ignorance of VDW but isn't it all about finding easy winners, if it takes time to come to a descission once all the facts are Known then the race must surely be left alone.

Investor

Good post

Titus