Thought I'd better get back to a bit of number crunching - its by no means complete yet- but here are some starting figures.

I've stripped out all the NH races since there is no point in putting apples and pears into the same barrel and counting them all together !

that takes out 76 races - and I don't think that they would be representative of the "real" NH season so I am going to forget about them !

anyone object ?

Next Amateur and Ladies races races - not one has been won by a VDW selection - there were only 4 of them - but 3 of the 4 were outside the 1st 5 in the betting !

that leaves 328 races - getting to be dangerously low numbers in certain catagorys - and certainly a case for taking a second sample ! - However it is a nice sample size to handle, and it ought still be large enough to show trends.

So - for the first significant results - lets look at "Maiden" races - a bit of a "curates egg" ! so I have split the results !

Firstly - Maidens with more than 12 runners or where more than 50% of the field is unraced.

28 races

total of 15 VDW winners from 28 races = 54% wins

11 of the loosers outside the 1st 5 in the betting

meaning that only 61% of the winners came from the first 5 in the betting !

now the good news !

Maiden races with less than 12 runners.

51 races

36 VDW winners from 51 races =71% wins

only 7 of the loosers came fom outside the 1st 5 in the betting

This means that 87% of the winners came from the 1st 5 in the betting !

Thats enough to absorb for now I think !

tc

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Tuppenycat,

I think you had better seperate maidens into 2yos and the rest. You might further like to divive them into: before and after 1st of June.

Greg in what way do you think it is important if there are any other suitable races in & around the days prior to or just after a race chosen by the trainer?.
I seem to remember vdw making a similar point in relation to Little Owl & Wayward Lad i.e. 2nd prizemoney in the race Little Owl won was superior to the win prize in an alternative race Wayward Lad could have gone for & it was a better race for bringing on a novice.

Thank you very much, Tuppenycat, for your continued good work!

I feel JIB's point about age group separation is good.
Also, I'm a bit worried about the "less than 12 runners". I hope that most of these races had more than 6 runners.

Do any of the VDW specialists feel that the Robin Lloyd Betbetter selections (see elsewhere) are basically VDW-like selections?

Rico has put up lists with ratings.

Can you compare and comment, please?

Seanrua.
Had a brief look at RL's selections, and can't see much common grond.
Maybe if you could say why you think they are similar, your question would be easier to answer?

re - Maidens -

Yeah ! - I think that it was greg who suggested looking at "younger" horses - I think I can see his logik - the "sample" is going to get "awfull" small tho' !! - certainly I will look at it - and I hope folk will keep reminding me - as I think there is - "some milage" there !!

tc

Seanrua

In races of 6 runners or less - I "Cook the Books" - clearly in a 5 runner race - the winner - will come from the 1st 5 in the betting !!!



it was the number of 6 runner "Chases" - that caused me to "chuck out" the N.Hunt !

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Tuppenycat,

JIB - 2 Yos-

we have so far - only looked at a "Sorry" - 2 - weeks in Aug - plenty of room for extending the samples !!

I think I understand tho' - what you are getting at - would you like to "Expand" ???

Only that I imagine that in 2yo maidens the number of winners coming from the first 5/6 in the betting must be gigantic.

But as the majority of the first 5/6 will only have had one or two runs at most I dont see how consistency will come into it unless it is accompanied by some type of rating.

In a fair proportion of maidens the first 5/6 of the SP betting will already have you in the 'over-round'! So hypothetical profit taking is going to be a head scratcher.

johnd,

Thank you for your reply re VDW and R.L.s betbetter.

Way back when Robin had only just stopped writing in "Odds on" mag, I spoke to him several times on the phone and we also exchanged a couple of letters.

He told me that betbetter was based roughly on VDW's ideas. When I bought the floppy disc, I had to buy a computer and then get my kids or anybody to get the thing going!

You tapped in last three form figures, win prize money, etc etc.

Personally, I didn't get very far with the program, but at least nowadays I can just about tap out an odd message (with one finger).

On a more serious note, I understood Mr Lloyd to be terminally ill at the time.
Never heard much more about him till last week when I saw Rico's post.

That's all. I won't be arguing about it!

Tuppenycat,

The thing about young horses - 2yo - is that their maiden and nursery races have the best of favourites.

Even a cynic like myself is convinced by their stats.
Thus, this is an area where top few in the betting do well. The market is pretty accurate here.


Any selection method that says concentrate on the top third of the betting will do well in these races, and perhaps VDW would not disagree.

Now try looking at the top of the market in handicaps on the AW (esp Wolver and Lingers) and you may find that this is an area for lay bets!

I don't suppose VDW applies to the AW, though.

JIB -

wot's this ???

you want to apply "Ratings" ???

to the "Consistancy" - "Method" !!!

"Fulham" - will - "Have a Fit" !!!!

TC,

For someone whose uxorious devotion has kept him teatotal for the last 25 years I doubt he would allow himself the luxury of a fit.

TC,

Applying ratings seems like a good idea to me. VDW himself said he did. The first time he said it was with the Erin. Then in letter 13 he says...........

[Using Methodmaker's figures, which I accept, the first five produce 83% winners. My own combined figures from the three most consistent produce - 3-3-3 99%, 3-3-4 98%, 3-4-5 96%, 4-4-4 95%, 4-5-6 90%, 5-6-12 73%, 16-18-30 17%. I also stated in my contribution that all relevant horses were rated by two different methods.]

As you are working based on what VDW said up to and including letter 13 I except he hadn't said not to include races for maidens. However I don't think you will find any of these races included in his examples for the first/basic method.

It is interesting to see you are at least trying and putting in some of the work needed to understand what was said. As you can see it is hard laborious work. It will also be interesting to see if/when you come up with something of real interest (to do this the old examples MUST be studied) you will be happy to shout it from the roof tops.

After the expense of buying the old form books, and more importantly the many hours of analysing the races. Checking your ideas, and those of others, against all the examples. You will find folk who have done very little asking for proof, and then selections. Finding the answer to this problem isn't as simple as a bit of number crunching. I think the biggest problem is this 80% + strike rate. Some seem to think it is possible, others jump up and down saying it doesn't work if it can't be achieved.

I'm a 100% sure I will never get that sort of strike rate, but do you really need it? VDW backed many horses I would never have backed. Everyone says his maths are wrong about the %, they maybe. It can't really be argued that inconsistent horses win more often than consistent ones, and there are far more of them. So stick with them and don't let anyone put you off. Consistency is only part of the equation, important, but it isn't any more important than the rest. You still need the class and form.

Be Lucky

I believe it was Lee who once said that anyone trying to work out vdw for themselves had about as much chance of finding the proverbial needle in the haystack.He went on to say that he was drip fed the filters, one by one, through time by someone who knew better but that it did not come free of charge.I reckon Lee gets 80%+ winners &
Bensam claimed a similar s/r betting in win singles only & at all sorts of odds.It was Bensams opinion that purchasing all the form books was not necessary although as i understand it Lee takes a different view.
The point i am trying to make here is that you could buy all the relevant form books stack them up in a nice tidy pile but unless you know where to start & what sorts to look for all you really have is a load of old books.( 1/6 someone will say start at the beginning lol)
Personally i believe the answer to be a simple one (that would suit my lazy attitude) Bensam said as much as well & i respected him as much as Lee. "Once you`ve found `it` you will have the same horses as myself".He did`nt say once youv`e spent hundreds buying form books & done yer head in for years only then shall ye enter the hallowed halls of the vdw disciple.You get the impression with vdw that some suffering is essential before enlightenment is reached, it`s unhealthy i tell you .

mtoto,
stepping aside from consistency,what are your views on horses with optimum conditions even if they have a 0000 by the side of them,does this mean they are not consistent.
take geronimo for example if it had been unplaced in its last 5 runs on std fibresand would you back it at 6f slow fibresand next time out?
i know i would have a closer look
1win-41runs std/fast
4wins-6runs slow
form figures for slow 1141121
i think ideal conditions are far more important

Jib
Going back to the consistency part of the equation that you mentioned.In the golden years of van de wheil(narrow the field to gain a winning strip) he gives theonsistency ratings for the field.But above it he says "A high percentage of winners come from the 3 lowest figures". In my view it is those words that need to thought about,During my time on the vdw forum ( the morgue as it was called) i invested in 26 form books and have looked at a lot of horses and they are all consistent,And a vast (i'll say that twice) vast majority of them were in the first 3 in the betting in the live market.

Infestor,

Yesterday, (for todays racing), I named two bets only from my Donkey Register list, (from which unfortunately I believe you do not have access).

Both of these selections had been wonderfully inconsistant; Battle Chant 2nd @ 11/2 and Atlantic Viking w 10/1.

So far I ve only invested in one form book: Chaseform 2003-2004 which I hope will help me find some more of these inconsistent horses for next years list.

Perhaps you could borrow a wheelbarrow and take your own colection round (careful in case you slip a disc) for Mtoto to study as he seems to be offering considerable benefits for those prepared to believe in the consistent horse!