HOME »
|
Go
 |
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
|
Member |
How do you get Seel Of A in front of Fayr Jag
I have the latter coming from a far superior race |
||
|
|
Member |
Interesting,
Could I ask a couple of questions? First if weight isn't included in the formulation of a s/f how can it be adjusted using weight? It makes a nonsense of the figure. Fayr Jag's last 3 s/f were 112 at York adjusted to 107? 107 at Bev adjusted to 112? 108 Newm To adjust them using weight, means they now show the first race was run 25 seconds slower than it was. 1 second = 5 lengths, 5 lengths = 1 point. The race before has speeded up by the same amount?? These figures are completely different to the figures VDW used. That is why I spent many hours/days adjusting the old figures when I knew they were going to change. The other thing is VDW quite clearly shows when he talked about class in Systematic Betting he was taking the class based on the last race. Many have added elements to the logic behind his thinking on the Roushayd method. He never mentioned ability ratings, or c/form. As I have said before I think the c/form was a x check and it is evident with many of his selections. Finally, how can a horse be the c/form horse and then people say the form isn't good/strong enough? Surely that is a contradiction of terms. Be Lucky |
||
|
|
The Vital Spark Member  |
|
||
|
| <Fulham>
|
Boozer
The term "class/form" horse had, in VDW's hands, a specific meaning - the highest ability rated horse in a race that is assessed as a form horse. The 2nd c/f, 3rd c/f etc are the form horses 2nd, 3rd etc in the ability rating rankings. In yesterday's 4.20 Pontefract, Chaz and I agree that, by our respective understandings of how VDW assessed in-formness, both Seel of Approval and Fayr Jag were form horses. SoA had an ability rating of 75, FJ of 61. It thus follows that SoA was above FJ in the ability ranking of form horses. But as VDW emphasised, class/form horses are not always bets (indeed only a small minority are), and sometimes lower ability rated in form horses are backed to beat the class/form horse. Mtoto If you check the Roushayd example as set out in "Systematic Betting" with the relevant Form Book you will see that VDW quoted the sfs given under the respective races, which the preface (in the case of the 1988 Flat Form Book, page xiv) makes clear are adjusted to 9 stone. The figures I quoted were exactly comparable, but to get them it is necessary to adjust those given in the current Form Book, as the editor has, for a reason best known to himself, recently stopped adjusting them to 9 stone. You ask whether the fact that the form of a class/form horse is sometimes said not to be strong enough for a bet is a contradiction in terms. The answer is a clear, no it isn't. Isolating the class/form horse is the first stage in the process of evaluating a race, to be followed by exploring the form in depth, particularly from the perspective of what VDW referred to as capability. (See, for example, the paragraph beginning "In this race ..." two paras. down from the table for the Haydock 1.45 race (Little Owl) in the "Spells it all out" article. Some class/form horses stand up to scrutiny sufficiently to become bets, others not. Some are even opposed (eg Cistus by Swiss Maid in an early VDW example, Edredon Bleu by Flagship Uberalles in a Guest example from the 2002 Cheltenham Festival). Just off to watch a c/f win, I expect. |
||
|
|
Member |
Sorry
I had forgotten about the abilty rating I was looking at it from How should I put it A more informness angle relative to the race Or in my words had far superiour form based on current runs |
||
|
|
Member |
Fulham
R.e torasay springs,Quite dissapointing really,Runs well fresh you can't do a great deal about 16/1 shots but the horse wouldn't have won anyway,I don't know if you backed it but as they say there's always tomorrow.  |
||
|
|
Forum Manager Member  |
Investor.as requested my tables for your selections.
LEICESTER, 02 Jun 2003, 2:30, Eamonn O'Connor 50th Birthday Celebration Fillies' Conditions Stakes (Class C) (3yo),Winner £8,663.20,(7f9y)7f GD-FM, 5 Runners Air Adair,,.......................................................Form 1-7-Pl (18) sp lto 0ln 14 Av = 42.7k** , Ab = 7k Score=3+2 0% 01x 8f Pl/8 9rs Gd Com 5K (7 days) (Chk Dist lengths) UP in class from 5K to 8.7k, BUT chk figures 1118% 94A 8f 7/7 10rs GF Asc 116K (247 days)(g) (Chk Dist lengths) 61% 86D 6f 1/1 16rs GF Sal 7K (270 days)(g) (Chk Dist + WIN **) .................................. (100%) Elidore,,.......................................................Form 5-4-7 (16) sp lto 14/1 ln 19 Av = 18k** , Ab = 5.5k Score=4+1 100% 75A 7f 7/11 11rs Sft Nby 13K (219 days) (** DIST Unpl) ***DOWN in class from 13K to 8.7k, No improv 144% 94A 6f 4/1 7rs Gd Rip 15K (280 days) (Chk Dist Unpl) 231% 87A 6f 5/7 6rs** GF Asc 26K (310 days)(g) (Chk Dist Unpl) .................................. (40%) Zither,,.......................................................Form 1-13-13 (21) sp lto 10/1 ln 20 Av = 11.3k** , Ab = 5k Score=4+1 52% 73D 8f 13/10 16rs Gd Lei 7K (7 days)(c) (Chk Dist Unpl) UP in class from 7K to 8.7k, BUT chk figures 133% 59B 6f 13/14 18rs Gd Don 22K (264 days) (Chk Dist Unpl) 44% 86D 6f 1/4 8rs GF Thi 5K (311 days)(g) (Chk Dist + WIN **) .................................. (19%) THIRSK, 02 Jun 2003, 7:10, Herriot Happening Handicap (Class C) (3yo+,0-100),Winner £9,646.00,1m4f GD-FM, 8 Runners Handicap Royal Cavalier,,.......................................................Form 18-5-12 (25) sp lto 33/1 ln 101 Av = 37.3k** , Ab = 19k** Score=7+1 100% 72B 18f 12/27 16rs GF Chs 69K (26 days)(g) (Down in dist Unpl) ***DOWN in class from 69K to 9.6k IMPROVING *** 27% 97C 14f 5/1 9rs** GF Hay 14K (44 days)(g) (Down in dist Unpl) 1% 2B 12f 18/73 23rs Hy Don 29K (205 days) (** DIST Unpl) .................................. (100%) Petrula,,.......................................................Form 1-4-12 (15**) sp lto 50/1 ln 14 Av = 19.7k** , Ab = 11k** Score=6+2 55% 75B 10f 12/10 17rs GF Red 37K (7 days)(g) (UP in dist, lengths) ***DOWN in class from 37K to 9.6k, CHK for improv 18% 83C 11f 4/5 15rs GF Yor 11K (20 days)(g) (Chk Dist lengths) 19% 86C 10f 1/1 16rs Gd Chs 11K (27 days) (UP in dist, + WIN **) .................................. (71%) Hambleden,,.......................................................Form 2-15-2 (14**) sp lto 14/1 ln 43* Av = 9.7k** Ab = 0k Score=6+2 19% 99C 13f 2/½L 12rs GF Yor 10K (19 days)(g) (Chk Dist PLACED **) ***DOWN in class from 10K to 9.6k, CHK for improv 10% 58C 14f 15/34 17rs GS Sal 9K (29 days) (Down in dist lengths) 19% 97B 16f 2/9 9rs** GS Nmk 10K (213 days) (Down in dist PLACED **) .................................. (38%) WINDSOR, 02 Jun 2003, 7:55, Gala Casinos Classified Stakes (Class C) (3yo+,0-90),Winner £9,886.50,6f GD-FM, 11 Runners Budelli,,.......................................................Form 12-4-3 (17) sp lto 7/2F ln 5 Av = 17k** Ab = 0k Score=4+4 32% 98C 6f 3/1 18rs GF Kem 12K (9 days)(g) (** DIST PLACED **) ***DOWN in class from 12K to 9.9k, No improv 26% 98C 6f 4/¾L 18rs GF Goo 10K (12 days)(g) (** DIST lengths) 73% 92C 6f 12/4 30rs Gd Nmk 29K (30 days) (** DIST lengths) .................................. (100%) Jonny Ebeneezer,,.......................................................Form 12-1-10 (21) sp lto 9/1 ln 14 Av = 18.7k** , Ab = 20.3k** Score=4+5 40% 87B 6f 10/6 19rs GF Asc 17K (248 days)(g) (** DIST Unpl) ***DOWN in class from 17K to 9.9k, No improv 35% 99C 6f 1/¾L 18rs Gd Goo 13K (261 days) ** DIST + WIN ** 52% 74C 7f 12/8 18rs GF Goo 26K (305 days)(g) (Chk Dist Unpl) .................................. (97%) Aversham,,.......................................................Form 3-4-7 (14**) sp lto 9/1 ln 21 Av = 17.7k** , Ab = 5k Score=6+3 34% 70A 6f 7/13 10rs** Hy Hay 18K (9 days) (** DIST lengths) ***DOWN in class from 18K to 9.9k, BUT chk figures 59% 98B 6f 4/6 15rs GF Yor 22K (20 days)(g) (** DIST lengths) 33% 93B 7f 3/2 7rs GF Nmk 13K (29 days)(g) (Chk Dist PLACED **) .................................. (97%) Marsad,,.......................................................Form 4-5-11 (19) sp lto 9/1 ln 7 Av = 16k** Ab = 0k Score=4+3 23% 87C 6f 11/3 18rs GF Goo 10K (12 days)(g) (** DIST lengths) ***DOWN in class from 10K to 9.9k, BUT chk figures 75% 95C 6f 5/3 30rs Gd Nmk 29K (30 days) (** DIST lengths) 23% 96C 6f 4/1 19rs GF Asc 9K (65 days)(g) (** DIST lengths) .................................. (93%) Coquetry,,.......................................................Form 4-1-12 (15**) sp lto 10/1 ln 3 Av = 18.3k** , Ab = 5k Score=5+2 100% 81A 5f 12/6 14rs GF Don 45K (261 days)(g) (Chk Dist Unpl) ***DOWN in class from 45K to 9.9k IMPROVING *** 11% 84D 5f 1/5 13rs GF Hay 5K (269 days)(g) (Chk Dist + WIN **) 10% 80D 6f 4/2 13rs GF Nby 5K (290 days)(g) (** DIST Unpl) .................................. (93%) |
||
|
| <Fulham>
|
Investor
Not that race. I was interested in the 7.40 Thirsk, where I expected what I saw as the c/f, Freya's Dream, to win. Still, at least the 2nd c/f won. |
||
|
|
Member |
John,
You could look at it being risky if your view is that weight doesn’t have any bearing on the outcome of a race. However, if you view things in contrast then it doesn’t seem quite so dangerous to do. Some have said that if 2 horses dead heat then surely they should be awarded the same speed figure. Is this not nonsense if one is carrying a stone extra in weight, IF we want a figure that can be looked at in isolation of any other factors. It has also been said that if the figure has been adjusted in the formbook then why don’t we adjust it again to take in to account the weight being carried in the race being evaluated? The simple answer to that is that VDW looked at weight separately, in isolation of other factors. It is also my view that his form ratings took weight into consideration and gave him a numerical rating of what each horses likely chances were at the weights, but not so for the speed ratings that he used. Fulham, No, it doesn’t matter what we adjust them too so long as we are consistent. On a Roushayd basis Fayr Jag couldn’t be classed as putting in an improved performance (split second as used by VDW), however, just because fayr jag recorded a slower figure doesn’t mean it wasn’t an improvement in form, as I’m sure you’ll agree it was. By the way this is the explanation as to why the figures are no longer adjusted. “The speed ratings do not take into account the effect of weight, either historically or on the cards. That component is left completely at the user’s discretion. What is shown is a speed rating represented in its purest form, rather than one that has been altered for weight using a mathematical formula that treats all types of horses as if they were the same.” Investor, I know a bit about how Mtoto goes about selecting his winners, as he does mine, and I 100% respect his ways. By understanding how others work can only bring on improvement in ourselves, don’t you think? |
||
|
|
Member |
Fulham
Sorry,i jumped the gun again r.e Freya's dream there's one thing i take into consideration and that is the price lto,I had QUITO ,ILE MICHEL and SEA STORM pencilled in,i wouldn't have played in the race but i wouldn't have considered F.D, class form or not. |
||
|
|
Member |
chaz
I totally agree with you,But would you put how you work on this thread,In detail for all to see.or do you feel it is worth finding the answers for ones self. |
||
|
|
Member |
Nessie
Bad day at black rock for the ratings then. |
||
|
| <Fulham>
|
Chaz
I agree with you re Fayr Jag's improved form, and thanks for the explanation of the sf change. Investor I had Quito and Ile Michel as form horses, but not Sea Storm. |
||
|
|
Member |
Was it a good day for the Dutching? Again I cant help wondering why you're so secretive about a 'factor' that misses the winner in a 5 horse race from the 40% of the field that it highlighted and generally showed one winner, a favourite @9-4 from 6 selections. Can you explain why you are being secretive about this? I understand that you put a lot of work into it but it really seems to have been wasted effort.
|
||
|
|
Member |
Epiglotis
These things happen,As for wasted effort,how do you consider 15 points profit in a week suits me fine. |
||
|
|
Member |
These things happen with Nessie's ratings as well, the difference is that those may well not have been the races in which he invested.
|
||
|
|
Member |
Fulham,
The point I am trying to make is weight isn't included in the s/f formula any more. Until 2001 when the figures were formulated the basis of the formula was a horse carrying 9st was awarded 100 if it ran the standard time. If it carried 8st 4lbs it was awarded 90. The whole thing was based on weight, even distances beaten. That no longer applies. A horse is now awarded 100 for the standard time WHAT EVER WEIGHT IT CARRIES, distances beaten are also worked out by time. I have reworked both the last two races Fayr Jag ran in. I can't make the s/f in the last race lower than the Bev. race, even when weight is taken into account. To do this I used the formula used by K HUSSEY the old Split Second man. Topspeed also agrees. The other thing I can't quite get to grips with is VDW and Guest both on occasions ignored the c/form horse. If it's ok for them, why am I wrong? I still have trouble making Roushayd in form the way you advocate. I make him the c/form horse because he came from the highest class last time out. He is in form because he is improving. What is form if not one performance better than another? Fayr Jag has both those qualities. Hope you had a good break.  |
||
|
|
Member |
Epi,
Your remarks are 100% justified. I’m not going to go over again the shortcomings of Investor’s character and attitude, as he reminds everyone of them every time he posts. Investor, Perhaps you can explain what exactly was the point of your last two posts? |
||
|
|
Member |
Ah but Fulham bases class on Ability ratings
Even so How can a horse be number one class form when the form part is inferiour to another with less class based on ability Ratings  |
||
|
|
Member |
Boozer,
I'm well aware that Fulham and others are using the ability rating. The point is were does VDW mention it? When I first read the book I didn't know about ability ratings. If they are an intricate part of the method, and VDW didn't mention them I would feel cheated. I have reread the book since learning about them and still can't see how they are important. Can someone show me an example of the horse only being selected because it had the highest ability rating? It's a bit like the people that say a horse has to be raised 3 times in class and then dropped. It does happen with Roushayd, but not all the examples. Sorry I put a  , I meant to put a when I asked about day/night out with Johnd. I had a good look on the TV, I couldn't see any drunken louts. Or any Gummy tee shirts. I will e-mail you when I get it sorted out!!! Be Lucky |
||
|
| Previous Topic | Next Topic | powered by groupee community | Page 1 ... 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 ... 854 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
|||
| Site | Gummy Racing Forum | ||
| Servlet | eve2da005 | ||
| Version | 1.2.11 build 8443 | ||
| Module | Forums 4.0.3 | ||
| Stylesheet | "MyPop Style" | ||
| Wordlet Set | "Default Wordlet Set" | ||
|
|
|
| View $GS_USERNAME's Public Profile |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Buddies |
| Invite $GS_USERNAME to a Private Topic |
| View Recent Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
| Notify me of New Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
