Go
![]() |
New
![]() |
Find
![]() |
Notify
![]() |
Tools
![]() |
Reply
![]() |
![]() |
Member |
Fulham,
Once again many thanks for your advice and encouragement.I will go through the race in detail over the next few days.As you know I have suspended betting but analyse the races in "real time" mode and in the case of yesterday's race stopped having isolated what I thought were the 2 class/form horses.I stopped because I couldn't strongly recommend either of them for the reasons given and don't feel I yet have the experience of VDW methodology to continue down the list to find one to recommend a selection against what I perceived to be the class/form horses.All part of the learning process though. Thanks again and do enjoy your break. All the best Graham P.S Talking football you think you've got problems I'm a Port Vale supporter! |
||
|
Member Member ![]() |
Sorry
Mtoto, Sorry about yesterday, but I rather jinxed it by arriving at the same selection myself. That's a couple of times I've done that of late, so if you have horses losing for strange reasons you'll know what it is - I've somehow had the same thoughts. Good luck, not that you need it. Oldtimer |
||
|
Member![]() |
Some thoughts about the RP chase
This is what the RP had to say about Fondmart quote: also regarding novices winning it mentions GLORIA VICTIS a recent winner and when GUNTHER McBRIDE won it last year wasn't he a novice or just out of novice company? cheers IMP PS quote: yesterdays thrashing of Stoke must have cheered you up a bit then! |
||
|
Member |
Barney,
I was thinking exactly the same myself.I fancy Mistletoe,do you? |
||
|
Vanman Member |
bream,
it looks the c/f against not much opposition to me |
||
|
The Hustler Member ![]() |
Fulham,
Thanks for your consideration towards York City. Appreciated. Good luck to your Fulham. Of course I study past results. One has to to have any clue what to do in future. I just try and inject a bit of humour into things, that's all. You are so damn serious all the time! Enjoy your break Cheers Swish |
||
|
Member |
Barney,
I don’t know if you were on mistletoe today but I’ll hold my hands up and say I was.Reviewing it this evening I wonder if I was bucking the odds.Allowing a fell or pulled up when a horse was out of it’s depth I could make the 3 cons horses to be To The Future, Yanns and Kerry Lads.To The Future and Kerry Lads had both won over the trip whereas Mistletoe hadn’t. I suppose if Mistletoe had won I’d be patting myself on the back and telling the wife how clever I was, but it put me in mind of what Statajack said about strike rates improving by sticking to the consistent horses. All the best. |
||
|
Vanman Member |
bream,
I lumped on alright. |
||
|
Member |
Oldtimer.
I don't for one moment think you jinxed me. I was beaten by the fast run race, over 4 seconds faster than standard. That makes the winner some sort of machine. and still a novice! I was happy until the sloppy jump at the third last, and I don't think the finishing position can be taken at face value. Imp. Gunther Mcbride may have been a novice (I don't think so) but his form going into the race was in handicaps. Fulham, Sorry to hear you are taking a break from the board. Hope you come back refreshed and rearing to go. We have come along way in the last couple of years, and thanks must go to members of this board. Thanks for posting your thoughts on the form horses on Saturday. I agree with the two mentioned as definite, I make the third also in form. As you know I also think Fondmort was in form, and I can't see any logical reason to think otherwise. I do think he was run at the wrong distance, to get a run into him (that he stood little chance of winning). If falling at the third last when closing, albeit under pressure, is out of form. It makes Strombolus a little hard to understand. Anyone else any views on this? If Fulham is the only one to answer the questions he will never get his break. Barney I noticed you put up Chicuelo for the race on Saturday, would you please explain your thinking for that. If it was based on VDW of course. Be Lucky |
||
|
Member |
FULHAM
While I have no wish to antagonise you further, I do feel the following point needs making, if only to further all our understanding of VDW. It remains a fact that one's level of confidence alters after the result is known, whether it pertains to the result, to the c/f horses, or to whether a horse is in form, or out of form. Given that fact, you still prevaricate, even after the result is known, about such as Copeland , Non So, Exit To Wave etc., which hardly sits well with the phrase "You will have the same horses as myself", and once again, brings into question your degree of certainty before the race. It serves no purpose for me to denigrate your contributions to this thread, and it is obvious that you have put a great deal of time and effort in, to get to where you are. There will, however, always be that doubt about after the race observations, that would be accepted without question had they been made beforehand. I am not suggesting that you post your selections before the race, but I really cannot see why c/f horses, and possibly form considerations, could not be posted before the event. Mtoto A few thoughts on yesterday's race, all with the benefit of hindsight, of course. Fondmort (IMO) didn't stay, though how we would have known before the race is beyond me. His Gold Cup entry suggests the stable didn't know either, until yesterday. La Landiere, who was already improving, showed (IMO) significant improvement for the step up in distance. There was nothing in her form to show that she wouldn't, but no stronger a case than Fondmort. ( Weight apart, but I doubt that 5lbs less made all that difference). Chicuelo was not good enough, as he has shown before at this level, likewise Montreal. Gunther McBride is a very consistent horse, given good ground, (Hindsight again), and to have him as out of form was wrong,as the race proved, whichever method was used to arrive at that decision. The going was wrong for Exit To Wave, the distance was too short for Maximise, and, for me, the surprise packet of the race was Ryalux, who showed by far his best form in this race, and is one to look out for. The above is a mixture of fact and opinion, but it remains my view that the only things that weren't entirely predictable beforehand, were how Fondmort and La Landiere would perform at this distance. It is possible that the weight was a consideration, but I would need a lot of convincing that this was the sole reason for their running yesterday. |
||
|
<Fulham>
|
Mtoto
A final post before I set off for a few weeks of uncongenial work. Strombolus (race 2543): "led 2nd to 7th, 2nd and every chance when fell 16th" (1978/9 Form Book) Fondmort (race 3179): "Fondmort was right there but under pressure and looked held when taking an awful fall three out" (2002/3 Form Book). I can't remember the Strombolus situation, but Fondmort was certainly "held" - having backed him in that race I was watching him closely. Guest wrote a few months back that, in handicaps, VDW was ruthless (or words to that effect). Like much that both VDW and Guest have written, that was (in my view) an important pointer, albeit one that needed serious pondering to work out what it means operationally. (It was that comment that has eventually led me to conclude that I was wrong in my argument in defence of Carved Opal all those months ago.) Johnd You'll recall that VDW wrote "to isolate the class/form horse can often prove a tricky problem", and of course it is the form side that is tricky. I believe, but I don't know for sure, that at the margin in-formness calls are judgements (subjective), not firmly rule-bound (objective), and I still find some of these judgements tricky. I'm simply not sure how VDW would have regarded Copeland and Exit to Wave and, in those circumstances, the best thing to do is err on the side of caution and treat them as in form. But surely you'd agree that, if considering a match between Copeland and Spirit Leader, the winner was almost certain. And Exit to Wave was behind La Landiere on the ability rating, as well as having form (in the conventional sense of the word) issues against it of the kind you've mentioned. There was no uncertainty over Non So and Fondmort. The former was clearly a form horse, but much lower on ability than Spirit Leader. Fondmort (in my view) was clearly not a form horse, having fallen when beaten in a race he should have won. (Had Fondmort fallen at the first, or when he did but genuinely still seriously challenging to win, things would, of course, have been different from the in-formness perspective. But even then, on the ground of weight, he couldn't, from a VDW perspective, have been a bet.) I hope to resume by Cheltenham, if not a few days before. [This message was edited by Fulham on February 24, 2003 at 07:50 AM.] |
||
|
Vanman Member |
Mtoto,
Let me tell you about my saturday morning, I got up at six as usual, no matter what time I go to bed,then went for the RP only to find that the newspaper delivery van had broken down on route and there would be delays. I went back home and got myself ready for golf, I had a twelve o'clock tee time. I went back to the paper shop at about seven thirty and they had still not arrived. I went back home and tried the online version but gave up I then traipsed all round town trying to find one that had been delivered on a different route, by another van. Anyway i sat down about 8.45 to look at the horses. MY starting point is always "boxing day" and I found relativly little, unlike last week. I dont know if its the rushing around that does it but my judgement is always affected when a lack of time forces one to get off half way through. Anyway there is the background to my poor selection. with chicuelo i took the view that he was consistent(3) and had a higher ability rating than la landier and gunther mcbride. I had discounted fondmort due to hendersons saturday morning view that he had too much weight, a point with which I agreed. When chicuelo ran so bad I considered it too bad to be a true reflection and viewed his placement since as half marked efforts. I also thought gunther mcbride had a beutifull preparation and was sure that from the numerical picture the winner would come from these two. The resultant cock up is there to be seen although in the end i didnt place a bet on any race. I went to golf and it was three club challenge, I got 41 pts I dont know if ive won that or not yet. |
||
|
Member |
Fulham,
Thanks again. Enjoy your break. Imp, Yes that particular result cheered me up no end! Cheers Graham |
||
|
Member |
Barney,
I'm sorry if you think I was taking a pop at you. Nothing was further from my mind, I was just interested in your thinking on the race. I wondered if I had missed something about the form of this horse. Johnd, While I'm not happy with the ability rating as it stands, I wonder how do you judge ability? I think the need to assess a horse's ability is of paramount importance. All, While Fulham and Guest are having a break from the board, we should do our best to keep the debate going. As I have said I don't think the c/form method is the simple answer to the problem. I agree that the method is based on class and form, just not always used in the c/form method. This in form is (as Fulham has said) the main stumbling block (for me). Fulham says Fondmort was in form the race before last, I have to agree with that. However I couldn't have backed him for that race, he may have been in form. He was held on his 2 mile form, and had just proven he was a better horse over the longer distance. So he is out of form because he couldn't reconcile the figures, or perform as others expected? Apart from the fall he ran as I expected, out paced early, and pushed to try to get into contention later in the race. I have to say I'm more than happy Spirit Leader was in form, but can't understand why Fondmort wasn't. Anyone any thoughts on this, or other ideas about how VDW read the form book? Also when going through the examples I came to the conclusion VDW wasn't that strong on novice form when used against experienced horses. Would he have selected the winner, or passed on the race? Be Lucky |
||
|
Member |
MTOTO
While I always have a glance at a horses ability rating, I see it as a far from perfect guide, and I am fairly sure that VDW would view things somewhat differently were he around today. With the number of sales races, sponsored races, quailifiers and finals, and other overfunded, mediocre races, around today, I am fairly sure that the picture is different now, (Speaking as one who was around then). I usually approach a race from ' The best form in the race' angle, and start from there. If, for instance, I were to look at La Landiere in future, then from the a/r approach I would see a horse rated 128, whereas the horse has just won a race of 580, which is surely a truer measure of its ability! I would, of course, check OR's, PM's, and SF's etc., to establish that the form was genuine. Your other point, the 'in form. out of form' conundrum, is to me, the nub of the whole thing. While 'best horse','best form', 'ability ratings', and other approaches will often all lead to the same principals, it is this one decision where we all seem to differ, and essentially,often the difference between backing the winner, or not. While I think I understand most of the 'Guest approach', I remain far from convinced that it is the definitive answer. As I have said many times, it is all too easy to explain why a horse did what it did after the race, and ergo, which horses were in and out of form, no one on this thread has ever given a substantive and convincing answer that one could use as a yardstick. I totally agree about Fondmort, Kempton's 2m was too sharp for him at that level, a view entirely supported by his trainer after the race, so how anyone can say that a horse is 'out of form' when he puts in a bad run in the wrong circumstances is beyond me. Similarly, I think I am right in assuming that Fulham had Gunther McBride as out of form in his last race; given the way that he ran on Saturday, that view is risible.He wasn't out of form, just faced with the wrong circumstances. I will concede that weight may have a bearing,VDW mentioned it too many times for it not to be a factor, but once again, to suggest that L.L. would win, up about 20lbs in class, and over 3f further, because he had 5lbs less on his back, does not hold water. The 'in form', 'out of form' question, is, (IMO), the one we all need to answer, and, at the moment, the answers we have are either too vague, or too convenient. |
||
|
Member![]() |
Fulham, why ain't you at white hart lane?
![]() |
||
|
Vanman Member |
Mtoto,
vdw would back a horse when a higher ability horse was out of form as he did with prominent king. In other illustrations he stated that horses should not be backed because there are higher ability horses in the field. If one looks at the notes on assatis he makes this very point. How far down the list of ability horses one is prepared to go is I suspect down to practical application of the method's as a whole and the experience. vdw had about 30 yrs of applying his ideas the correct way, from what I have seen stated on here, the best that people have been working it is five years and in some cases is only months. it takes ages to do a race properly and its better to do one right than three piecemeal. lets go back to the beginning and beacon light/ promiment king. If anyone cant get to grips with that, or accept what vdw is implying then there really is no use trying to work out the ins and outs and its better to stick to the numerical picture when everything else is in support. |
||
|
Jolly Swagman Member ![]() |
One of the most interesting replies for months -
real "food for thought" Thanks Tc |
||
|
Member |
JohnD,
You made a very interesting post there which I learnt from and was nodding along in agreement with until you said "totally agree about Fondmort, Kempton's 2m was too sharp for him at that level, a view entirely supported by his trainer after the race, so how anyone can say that a horse is 'out of form' when he puts in a bad run in the wrong circumstances is beyond me." Fulham has made the point about objectivity and subjectivity in the past and this point about course suitability,leaving aside your ideas about class, seems very subjective to me.It just doesn’t seem to tie in with the "same horses as myself" line of thinking. My view,in hindsight admittedly, is that Fondmort would have been eliminated early on by VDW. Dropped in class lto to a course distance and going it has previously won on and failing to do what was expected and now up in class with more weight over a distance its never won over. Once again ,in hindsight, there are too many questions to be answered. I agree with you that its easy to do after the race and it’s definately a lot more complicated beforehand. In case I'm accused of after timing,on the day I came up with 4 possibles non of which won. |
||
|
Previous Topic | Next Topic | powered by groupee community | Page 1 ... 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 ... 854 |
![]() | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
|