Forgot to mention in my last post. You hinted to JIB the other day that you found Tramantano @ 16/1 from the 2YO-3YO method (in a hurdle race), Tramantano never ran as a 2YO, he made his racecourse debut winning a 3YO maiden at Windsor!

methinks you're on a wind up

Cheers

'Simple' and 'Blindingly obvious' have two different meanings, and it is misleading to argue otherwise, particularly in the case of VDW's methods. As one who can now see both points of view,( Chaz, despite what you may believe, I am not selling anything) I would suggest that, if you ever do find 'it', then you will appreciate the difference in those two terms.

Barney
Nice to see you back, mate. Sorry to hear about the nipper. Keep us posted.

Johnd

I agree that there is a distinction. It was a failed attempt on my part to be ironic - might have worked better with "s round "blindingly obvious", but there again it might not.


Mister Ed

You are spot on.


Barney

I hadn't noticed your family news when I posted last. Like others, I hope all is well, or at least on the way to being well.

Thank you for kind words and thought, the baby is on I V antibiotics and seems to be making progress.

Crock,

The horse was far better at the same age than the others,

ask yourself this,

Why would VDW look for derby winners in a two yr old race over 7 or 8 furlongs?

If the horses are bred for mile an half they will grow at 2 to 3 to reach their potential.

Thats why he said stick to lightly raced horses, the trainer knows that its a good one but will never be any good at a mile so whats the use thrashing it?

They will record good figures because this is there inherant ability not because the horse is trained to win a mile race at two.

Also relevant in that horse, is this, if you have two horses that both run in class c races.

Which will be the better as it develops, the one who runs at seven furlongs or the one that runs mile and half?

Its obvious that its not the 2-3yr old method or the hurdle to chase method but the principal is the same.

A good young un, will be a good old un but distance requirements will change with age dependant "generally" on the breeding.

This is what VDW was telling us us to look for.

Titus,

I would definitely get the Jock Bingham books as well as the VDW compilations.Read the VDW ones first and then read Jock's.Keep an open mind about J.B's books as VDW said he hadn't gone the whole way.They could save you a lot of time in getting a grasp of what VDW was putting across.

Barney,

Sorry to read about the baby. My little lad's only a year old so I know how I would be feeling in your situation.Hope everything turns out well for you.

On the subject of Barney and if he knows what he is talking about,I would have to say that I have absolutely no idea.One thing that does strike me however is that Guest gave him some credence by saying that he saw Barney had benefitted from a conversation they had in the chat room.I think some people on the thread were a little concerned when Barney said he was going full time,yet I can't recall Guest expressing any concern.So I assume that that Guest,at least, does think Barney has some credibility.

Cheers everyone.

JohnD,

I never for one moment thought that you would ‘sell’ what you had. Only a fool would do that having found a genuine method of selecting winners. My questioning of your posts was a genuine one. Surely, your intention for posting is to help others understand what VDW was writing? If this is the case and your intention is to help others, unlike many that have come and gone, then why not do just that? Unsubstantiated claims are worthless, aren’t they?

Correct me if I’m wrong but you must have made your discovery by looking at past examples that VDW gave? Therefore I cannot see why your selections will hold any more clues than those already in the pubic domain. Surely the only way to help people is to either put up selections for others to look at, as Guest has done. Or give opinion about the examples that VDW gave, like myself and many others have also done. To say you found 4 winners this week is not helpful in the slightest, don't you agree? That was my reason for questioning your posts.

[This message was edited by Chaz on December 03, 2002 at 08:26 PM.]

Bream,

I'm sure also from past discussions in the Chat Room with both Barney and Guest that he knows what it is that makes the method tick, as I see it.

However, unless he knows something that I don't (which is of course very possible) then I hope he doesn't back up and down the card like his recent posts suggest!

John D,

If I may I’d like to get your opinion on a point that has been given plenty of airing on the board. How much, if any, importance do you give to the Ability Rating as VDW suggested it should be used?

Barney,
Sorry to hear your news,hope everything is ok.

Investor,
Surprising,wasn't done any favours by the horse that fell,and would have been closer.I still thought his overall credentials were the best,but it wasn't clear cut,and obviously in hindsight should have been left.

Intersky Falcon,was the most likely winner,but there was conflict with Marble Arch,although Intersky Falcon,did appear to be the more progressive,and had the benefit of a relative recent run.The overall picture showed conflict though.

I see the ability rating as a very useful guide,. though not the overall imperative that some see it.
In his Roushayd example, as I am sure you are aware, VDW made no mention of ability ratings as such, although he did give the horses previous history, from which one could have drawn similar conclusions without any knowledge of abililty ratings per se.
Similarly, if a horse wins 3 small races on the way to a big one, does it not devalue the big one to divide the sum total by 4.
Regarding the posting of selections, I feel I made it clear in one of my earlier postings, that although I now consider to have a much better understanding of VDW than previously, I still have much to learn in the application of it. Whether this will lead to me eventually posting these selections only time will tell, although I have seen nothing yet to alter my recently expressed point of view. It would seem, from recent postings, that I am far from alone in feeling that the basic method is both simple and logical.

[This message was edited by johnd on December 03, 2002 at 09:51 PM.]

Johnd

You seem to have calmed down a bit from your previous posts regarding the vital factor
Why?

I see from your profile you are a mature person
Mind you so are a lot of people on here but you couldnt tell from their posts

I detect you are not as convinced as you were
Regarding the final solution/breakthrough

Hmmmm

They dont have to win


why are they there in the first place?

some trainers after all, as VDW told us "listen to the owners" if they want a day out? or if not there are many other trainers who will listen.

some but not all are there for the "day out".

look at V. williams treble yesterday, They had all been there, but why?

Sorry if my above post has given the wrong impression. Iwill re-iterate.....I have seen nothing yet to change my recently expressed point of view....and I mean it.

thank you

Bream, walter and Barney.

There is so much interesting and conflicting opinions on this thread can anybody guide me to a posting in their opinion has spelt it out.

Barney
Hope the young one gets better soon.

Titus

Johnd

Give us a update re
selections won/lost last week etc

Barney

I will meet you some time at Haydock
Hope your family problems work out

Last week
1 won
1 lost (Operator error)

This week 1 won
1 lost ( Beaten by a rejuvenated veteran)

this is the point i was making,a winning horse will be penalised.
lets say rivage run in a 0-140 hcap,top horse was rated 140,rivage rated 103,top horse would carry 12-0 rivage would carry 10-0 from out of the hcap,9lb out of the hcap.
i have no old form books so this was the type of scenario.
if he won this race and was penalised 7lb,if exactly the same race was run a few weeks later,yes he would still carry only 10-0.
this is quite awkward to explain,
but lets just say he was to contest a 0-130 hcap before the win he would carry 10-1,after the win he would carry 10-8,assuming in the 0-130 races there was a horse rated 130 in the line up.
dont think i have explained it very well,but a hcap horse will always be penalised after a win.unless it has been off the track for a long time after the win,or it is only a few days after the win,or in some cases the weights have allready been decided for a race

Johnd

Glad to see its still working
And not a flash in the pan
And I aint creeping either if its works
Keep it to yourself

hope all is well