You still don’t understand do you guest? Let me repeat, I KNOW IT IS NOT SOME SYSTEM, I KNOW IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK AND EFFORT TO SEPARATE THE GOOD FROM THE BAD. What I continually ask is, is it worth it? Take yesterday’s Derby for example. At 8am yesterday I picked up my copy of “The Times” around 8.30 I had a glance at the race and noted that Timekeeper had Kris Kin well clear, I remember thinking that was an interesting point before I dismissed the race. I am not suggesting that a lot of money can be made betting on Timekeeper’s ratings but what I am suggesting is that as much money can be made betting on these ratings as can be made spending hours poring over form books and finding class/form horses that fit VDW criteria. As a point of interest he also had Jazz Messenger well clear in the first.
I am not interest in some get rich quick system. I spend anything from six to eight hours every day analysing stats and trends on sports. I know the amount of work it takes to make money investing in sport results. What annoys me and many others is the claims made by the various people on this thread about how wonderful VDW is and then when push comes to shove not one of them can walk the talk. Then, when criticised for this the usual response is that only if you spend years on it can it be made to pay. Well I’ve got news for you guest, there are many systems out there that outperform VDW any day of the week. However if you had been a member of the old board you would have seen that way back then I was saying that systems will never take the place of hard work.

Fulham,

I may well do that.

Thats good of you guest i think it was Lee who said though that the average student had as much chance of rumbling the methods himself as finding the proverbial needle in a haystack, did anyone help you or are you self taught?.

Fulham,

Thanks for the information. I asked for it to try and show being THE c/form horse isn't a requirement for a Roushayd selection.

As you know all this started when Fayr Jag was challenged as a Roushayd selection. I was happy to fight my corner about the s/f (not sure if I have proven it to your satisfaction) It was the fact that some thought it had to also be the c/form horse I wasn't happy with. As I have explained, I can't quite see how Roushayd is a c/form horse in the usual way of judging form, beaten 9 lengths. That is too far for a form horse to be beaten on the flat. To make sense of that it can only be explain he was a form horse because he was improving. Must admit I was hoping Guest would give an opinion.

I was a little unhappy to have Guest say that because I made Anani and RTB bets I don't understand VDW. I made Jazz Messenger the BEST HORSE in the race but was worried about the validity of the s/f. However I had narrowed the race (16) runners down to the same two horses as him. With RTB I had him only just in front of Alamshar. The fact I also agreed with him on Yesterday and Bonus being the BEST HORSES in the race, plus agreeing on countless other previously, seems to count for nothing. Just lucky I suppose. He says I don't operate VDW correctly (even when I win). I operate VDW as I see it, and it isn't that far away from him.

Investor,

I'm afraid I still can't see your pattern, but you seem to be picking the same horses as me to evaluate. As I have said I'm just using the first picture, that is before I look at any form in detail. I'm a little surprised Guest thinks you are doing it right, but I'm still way off track. I haven't even been looking for the missing link.

I know I'm thick, but what the hell is ccar?

Be Lucky

I'm a latecomer to this thread, and it is a long time since Guest asked:"If you look at Refuse To Bend's form, especially his runs this year, what did he beat?" One answer is:"Norse Dancer, who was in Ashtead High Street when The Great Gatsby turned Tattenham Corner but finished a close-up fourth yesterday."

Mtoto

Just a thought re Roushayd. You say nine lengths is too far for a form horse to be beaten on the Flat. But come at it from a different way.

The 1988 Flat Form Book records that Roushayd was indeed beaten by nine lengths (indeed a touch more) in the 1988 Northern Dancer.

VDW told us many times that class (as he thought of it) and form (ditto) were the core of his approach. On VDW's his way of assessing class (the ability rating) Roushayd was the class horse in his next race after the Northern Dancer, well clear of the next highest in the ability rating rank order. We must, I suggest, assume that VDW regarded Roushayd as a form horse - for otherwise only one element of the class/form nexus was present.

On that line of thinking, what conclusions may we reasonably draw about Roushayd's performance when beaten nine lengths in the Northern Dancer that enables him to be viewed as a form horse in his very next race? It is the time-consuming task of testing the possibilities in such situations across the many other examples VDW gave us that hopefully enables us to discover the "missing link".

I say hopefully, because of course there is no unambiguous statement by VDW as to what the "missing link" is, against which we can check our conclusions. The only reasonably satisfactory test is the ability of the conclusions to explain (without the making of irrational exceptions) all similar VDW examples of which, in the case of handicaps, there are about sixty (excluding those selections thrown up by the two methods ("Handicap Hurdle" and "Best Bet/Next Best") that VDW said were different from anything else he had shown us).

In my view, it is because the key conclusions (including the "missing link") that VDW relied upon can only be found in this laborious way that (a) having access to the Form Books and the relevant Sporting Life/Racing Post material is essential and (b) however bright the individual is, it is a lengthy (and at times frustrating and boring) endeavour and reaching the desired conclusion is by no means guaranteed. (In that sense it has the same character as all genuine research - it's an investment of time and money on spec.)

On a separate matter, ccar is an abbreviation of the phrase "carefully considered assessment of risk", which in a post in response to Epiglotis I contrasted with gambling. The thinking that led one of our colleagues to back Aldora on Friday, which I've also referred to in a recent post, nicely illustrates a ccar.

[This message was edited by Fulham on June 09, 2003 at 06:49 AM.]

Hello all
horses for evaluation

7.30 win ADJAWAR/BARKING MAD/CLARISSE and MOST SAUCY.Interesting that these 4 are also the first 4 in the betting.

8.15 pont WELSH DIVA/LADY BEAR/BIBLE BOX and PIE HIGH

3.45 n/a KOMBINACJA/WAIT FOR THE WILL and MALDOUN.

The lesson that you should be taking from Nessie is his holistic approach, he deals with class and form as a single entity. Neither ability nor form has any meaning outside the terms of the task in hand. Your method of dealing with these concepts piece by piece is bound to fail. Most important though is that no matter how effective your system of analysis may be you first have to be able to recognise a suitable race.

Epiglotis

Class and form (as defined by VDW) are quite separate matters: a horse can, relative to the race under consideration, have one, neither or both. VDW's approach brings the two together (as with Roushayd, the 1988 form of whom is, I assume, available on the Post website). It is only when we have that combination of both class and form that we have the possibility of a decent bet.

If you doubt that class and form are separate entities, consider football. Players like Shearer and Owen have played regularly at the highest level, and would generally be regarded as high class forwards. But from time to time they are clearly below par form-wise, and have spells when they seem unable to put the ball on target, let alone score. Even Manchester United as a team have (short) spells of poor form: I suspect, despite winning the Premiership this season, MU fans still feel embarrassed when remembering their performance against neighbouring City.

ePIGLOTIS
once again you let your fingers talk before you understand what you are writing about,In Spells it all out vdw gave races that should be concentrated on,Do us a favour buy the frigging books instead of continually going round in circles,Eventually it will send you even more insane.

Try thinking.

Investor
Thanks, that made me smile.

My father was by profession a mathematician, my sister has an S level in maths, I missed a year of school when I was 15 and as a result had four terms worth of study to assimilate in the single term involving the exams, despite this handicap I got an A in maths O level, I think 87%. John In Brasil would probably admire my sire stats, the four in one aspect would probably give me an outrageous speed rating and the A rating at 87% would make me a "class" kid. In effect I was a class/form student when I undertook maths A level according to your understanding of VDW, yes or no? If I were to take a drop in class at additional O level, C for example, what would you think was a value price? Presumably I would also be in your notebook for A level, what prices would you find value for which grades?

epi.waht does holistic mean.

investor. thanks for saing dont give up. please can i vae another clue. because some of your
for consideration posts
dont fit with my of thinkng so i must be of track. am i on the wrong track with placings and lengths and lto forecast. Im not wanting it on a plate just a little help please. did i do wrong by putting up what i found re lengths. if so Im sorry. a little bit of help would be a good thing.

dutching using 10th of bank then 20th after a win like max did. is that right. please dont put me of help is needed.

Gest. bonus was the form horse against out of form horses. yes i see that. thanks.

typing in a hurry agian sorry.

hello all

Welsh diva = roushayd Or not,This is a tester.

What I meant was that you are not divorcing the class from the form but considering them within their interrelationship, which is an enormous leap forward from the normal ability rating nonsense.

Epiglotis

Your analogy cannot be pursued as you'd like, because in evaluating any race from a VDW perspective, class and form are relative.

My point exactly.

Epilglotis

Good that we agree. Have a nice day: I'm off to play tennis.

Have fun.