Gilly

You wrote: "with VDW it is necessary to take account of the horses that were in the race not just the prize money that was on offer". Quite right. Guest, I and others must have posted that twenty or more times over the last year. But it is HOW you take account of "the horses that were in the race", and marry that information to all the other relevant factors, that is the VDW approach.

When I commented on your page 556 comment earlier I chose my words carefully in order (as far as I possibly could) exactly to capture the situation.

I may be naive
But I arent Gullible

Boozer

Believe it or not as you choose, but I honestly know no better way for you to proceed. At least with the five examples you would be working with five of the nineteen where VDW explicitly gave us the result, in terms of the c/fs, and thus a degree of certainty around which to base our researches. If one starts outside those nineteen, one has a much less certain point of departure.

Take the Love from Verona example as an instance. VDW did not say that Love from Verona was the class/form horse, and I wouldn't mind betting that even among those who have a good grip on VDW's approach, there would be differences of opinion as to what was the c/f in this tricky race. No such difficulties with the likes of Stray Shot, Zamandra, Castle Warden, River Rhein and Kevinsfort (and the other fourteen explicitly and, unlike Bonny Gold, correctly named c/fs).

you are patronising
Who says that I dont know/understand more than you do
Where do you get this assumption?

I would also suggest you are trying to cloud the issue

[This message was edited by boozer on June 10, 2003 at 09:54 PM.]

Guest,
Crow Wood last week was mentioned on the thread,did you see it as a vdw good thing,it ran at Haydock 4.15,on Thursday 5th June.

As regards Stray Shot and Zamandra,would it be possible for someone to point out which form books would be needed,ie how many?

Investor,well done today,was it something in it's last three runs that made it class/form,or was it from it's two year old form?

Good to see the thread back to life again,

Chaseform 1984-85

Come on Fulham stop mumbling!

You confirmed to me that my, very basic, appraisal of Wild Spice was incorrect. However, Guest confirmed my thoughts “had some bearing on the form”. Just like the horses that were THERE in the Folkestone race. Take in to account how far they were beaten/won by, how much weight they were conceding/receiving etc, what support they received, conditions that they are facing, hey presto!

You must surely agree now that I can read?!!

Re: stray Shot/Zamadra

Is my reasoning correct or is it wrong

Come on now Yes or no
No trips round the houses

Boozer

I was pondering how best to reply to your question to me as to how I form the view that I know more about VDW than you. But thanks to your response to Pipedreamer re the Form Books needed to explore the Stray Shot etc examples, I can say simply say "by that post alone".


Gilly

I must admit that I've revised my view. I don't think you have a reading problem so much as an understanding problem.

I will take that as a yes then

Hi Mtoto,

Try page 553 9.07am.I’m not suggesting its an answer just that it is a refreshingly different way of looking at things than the way I’ve been approaching it and from someone who hasn’t read the books.

I certainly agree that there are plenty of varying opinions on here of the finer matters and I think it could be the finer matters that make the difference in the strike rates we can achieve.

I hope you’re enjoying continuing good health.

very Novel
But Rubbish

Even your answers take some working out
Mind it would do for a minion Like I

Black sabbath,Who are they.Night Night.

Nessie,

The strangest thing......That's my favourite film.I've always related it to this thread stangely enough.

Fulham,

Maybe, but you must feel miffed that Guest didn't concur with your thoughts about my evaluation of Wild Spice

Pipedreamer,

You will need the 84/85 and the 83/84 if you wish to study the form in any depth. I can see the reason one would want to study these races as VDW said these 5 horses were the c/form horses. Would also like to see how many different reasons are put up for the 2 selected horses being the only 2 worthy of a bet. I can only see one reason, but I seem to think differently to the main stream.

I still doubt finding the c/form horse is as important as made out, but there you go another alliterative opinion. I think it is x check to confirm the initial picture, and nothing more.

Be Lucky

Boozer/Mtoto,
Thanks for the response,much appreciated.
Mtoto,
It would be interesting to hear the views from others who have studied these examples,as well,well I had better try and get the form books then

They dont seem to want to talk about it for some reason

Cant figure out why

very strange

Gilly

I see no inconsistency between Guest's comment on the matter and mine.


Pipedreamer

I'm afraid that, in principle, you'd need to go further back than 1983/4, otherwise you wouldn't be able to calculate the ability ratings and sort out which horses VDW regarded as form horses and which he didn't. But in practice, if you decide to pursue these examples, I'd be glad to email the ARs to you.

Whats wrong with putting the Ability ratings on here for gods sake