a couple of runners to practice form reading on which i thought were certs

tribal dancer
ocean song

Hi A J

There is no need to apologise, but I would like to ask you a question. Who is more likely to find the correct answer. Someone who goes into a problem believing they know the answer, or someone who starts by thinking they are right, but willing to be proved wrong? I am sorry but I believe Guest started by believing he had the answers and manipulated the facts to prove himself right. He stated vdw bypassed Beacon Light because he had "gone over," and then assessed the remaining consistent horses. Why was this procedure not followed when other class/form horses didn't come up to scratch, i. e Majed and Waheba Sands? Could the answer be Prominent King was always the class/form horse? If so it makes a nonsense of the ability rating, and that was not how vdw arrived at the solution. There is a way of making PK the c/f horse and for that matter Kates Charm (using the same method) and a lot of the other examples that failed the ability rating.

I am not saying I have the answer, only that two people using their idea of the method can come up with different horses. Using my idea I would never have selected Classified, but to be fair Guest did say he was the likely winner not the bet. I have just read someone thinks Classified was a classic vdw bet. I can't see it, but who am I to say they are wrong?

I must admit I though going through the old examples would be a waste of time, and said so on many occasions. If it is done with an open mind, and no preconceived ideas. It is well worth the effort. As far as I can see the only constant is, the consistency of the horses (but not always in the first three) in the ratings. All the other guide lines are just that. He used some other method to gauge class/ability, although the ability rating is better than nothing. The examples I can't wait to get at, are the ones where none of the horses have proven form in that class.

The guy that asked about Blue Gold, I think you are on the right track! I also back Sheer Danzig.

Regards

I have been looking through Guests postings to this board and have no doubts whatsoever that Guest is genuine. There is a key to understanding the methodology and guests posts show that he knows what it is. He also gives a big clue in his post of Dec 11th as to where to look. All aspects of VDWs formula need to be considered equally when looking at his examples and people having trouble with Rifle Brigade might want to consider the probability aspect a bit more. This aspect also goes some way to explaining guests views on wahiba sands.
Each aspect of vdws methods were given for a precise reason. Each covers a different part of form study and it all interlocks together. The reason it is there is to avoid analysing unsolveable races where wagers are based on guesswork, not certainties.
There were no VDW certainties today.
Regards.

the class form horse is the one MOST LIKELY TO WIN

Not surprisingly, the most popular thread on the board! It’s interesting that there seems to be a lack of ‘posters’ who were actually around when the man from Market Harborough came on to the scene; or perhaps they just don’t wish to show their age!!

Those that were will certainly recall how a lifeline was thrown to those of us who were treading water with our betting activities back then, and I had personally already been in to racing for about 8 years and had really got nowhere fast; but it was so different, in comparison to the information that is available today, back then it wasn’t anywhere near as detailed or free flowing, and with only manual records being kept dedication was the name of the game.

I was very fortunate to have met someone that was far more dedicated than I and who over a number of years drip-fed me the factors and information required to implement VDWs method, not for nothing I might add. Now before I here you scream that there was more than one method, yes you’d be right, but I personally never felt the need to delve any further than the main one given, so unfortunately I can’t help anyone beyond that. I certainly know the background and have been told the reasoning behind selections such as Rivage Bleu and Travado, but like I say have not had the desire to wade in further.

A couple of things, and firstly one point that seems to be obvious is that the old formbooks are required. Well they most certainly are. Anyone wishing to take up the quest may as well put the letters and articles to rest until the necessary formbooks have been obtained. I am fortunate to have collected from the start all formbooks going back to 1971 for both rules, which is in my mind where the collection should start. The reason for this should be obvious.

Secondly, the examples that VDW gave? Where should you start? I here a lot that say start at the beginning, well I’m afraid I have to disagree. This was fine back in the late 70’s when you had no choice, but not now. Anyone that knows something about VDW will tell you that the Prominent King letter holds many, many answers. But they will also tell you that these answers only became apparent when some of the more obvious examples, such as those that were forecast favourites, or indeed sent off as favourites, were looked at in detail. The ones that I refer to are those such as Little Owl, Wing and A Prayer, Cool Gin etc. etc.

Believe me when I say that a killing can be made just by understanding why these types were ‘good things’, and whilst I realise that many wish to go further, leave the other methods until an 80% strike rate has been achieved backing favourites. Like the man said, the further you stray from the top end of the market the more difficult it becomes.

I’ll add more in time, but not everything – because I don’t know it all!

Statajack

I entirely agree with you re Guest. Its a great pity that Gummy's policy now precludes from posting someone not prepared to register as a member.

Lee

We must be of a certain age. I can remember the seemingly interminable waits between VDW's letters, and the relief when Tony Peach brought out the compilation so that one could jettison the by then very dog-eared cuttings from the SCHB.

Hello,
Lee you seem an interesting and knowledgable chap. I picked COPELAND when it placed at 16-1, then won at 7-2, but then decided it would not win when it did win at 13-2 last saturday. Would you kindly give me your opinion on what you thought its chances were in those three races,
Yours
Swish

it only got its act together when they cut its knackers off,that soon makes 'em consistent.

Fulham,

Nice to know that there’s someone from the same era, and more importantly still hard at it. I’ve mentioned it elsewhere but for me it is the horses involved that have come and gone that really do keep me interested, and take that element away and it would be a boring way of life, for me anyway.

Swish,

Copeland, for me, wasn’t a bet in either of the 2 races that it won. Well done to you for picking it out though. The race at Cheltenham threw up some negatives and although the champion jockey was booked to take the plate again, whom at that point had failed to ride him to victory, the odds were in my opinion, against him. One particular factor that is generally not taken in to account and stands out as a negative, for me in any case has been discussed within the forum previously. Amongst a few other things I felt he was reaching a bit high class wise when winning at Newbury.

Class is most important. Comparisons with what a horse has competed against is something that VDW harped on about time and time again, and he mentioned many horses in his examples in order to clarify this.

One thing that I must make clear is that I do not profess to know it all. What I’ve done is use what I’ve been told and what I’ve learnt in order to specialise and in the end, capitalise.

Dear Lee,
Thank you for replying but I do not think you have answered the question.
The question was:
Did you think it was a bet when it placed at 16-1?
Did you think it was a bet when it won at 7-2 (fair enough you have answered that one)
I mentioned I DID NOT back it when it won at 13-2.
I had hoped you may go into a little detail about the races,
Yours
Swish

hello Lee,
It would be interesting to know why copeland was not a vdw selection at Newbury. It may have been raised in class for the tote gold trophy but still compared favourably with most of its rivals who had been raised more on ORs by the handicapper and/or had more physical weight to carry. Apart from the class raise it was the only fancied horse without any negative factors.
Regards,

Well Statajack,
I second that. if you are still up fancy a chat in chat room?
Yours
swish

Barney didn`t it bother you that Tribal Dancer
had only shown form on good or better ground?
How can it be a cert if you don`t know whether
it might not like the ground?

Maggsy

Maggsy,
Lets have chat in chat room see you there in a few mins
Swish

maggsy

both horses were placed to win,i trust the trainer to know what he/she is at in those cicumstances.

Morning all,

The thoughts of a novice.

FJ - well out of it on the bare `ability` ratings (32).
*** to quote VDW the ratings shld only be used as a guide & todays race must be a good eg` of why FJ rating has little relevance ( doesn`t show true ability ).

What is the FJ ability ? Last 4 Postmark & Topspeed ratings give us an idea;

P = 84 105 135 132
T = 76 89 112 132

FJ has improved every race & last run in Grade A, value £29K was a significant rise in class.

Today, dropped in class; 4 ilbs less to carry; jockey will know how to ride this time.

Also, well plcd in betting & consistency. Course = OK. Distance = OK. Going = OK.

At 2/1 a strong value bet ?

OPPOSITION ( by ability )

142 Lord Brex wait for Chel` or Aintree ( my opinion )
122 Gallant Moss cannot reverse form with FJ.
108 Teetral possible; however massive wgt concession to FJ too much.
76 A Dancer consistent but not in this class.
65 O Cromwell as AD.
65 IDB Beury possible improver & likely danger.
53 Mr Markham my opinion cannot reverse form with FJ.
53 Idiome not in this class

SUMMARY - I BELIEVE WE HAVE A GENUINE FAV` & LIKELY WINNER IN THE RACE HOWEVER MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS WILL THERE BE A TRUE PACE TO THE RACE; IE - IF A FALSE RUN RACE WHICH IS POSSIBLE WILL FJ BE TOO KEEN AGAIN & LOSE HIS RACE BY PULLING TOO HARD ?

******* I`d be very interested in the comments of the more advanced/experienced posters as believe me I have a lot to learn.

Regards & good luck to you all today.

most of the bases are covered BUT aspirant dancer is fast enough to win(questions about the jocky??)

ideal du bois berry has a massive 2 stone less.

idiome is being given an oportunity to improve

Dear Determined,
Excellent to see someone on here who talks properly about a race.
I like all you have to say, although, like Barney Aspirant Dancer has a chance too. In truth I think there are 5 possibles and it is very difficult to choose between them:
FJ
AD
MM
GM
TEAATRAL
I certainly think you are looking at the race from right approach though.
As for only learning. We are all only learning,
Yours
Swish

Swish
I didn`t see your message about the chat room
till today.I`m always up late at weekends so
what about tonight.

Maggsy

Dear Maggsy,
What time?
Swish