Mtoto - thanks for the constructive reply !

Re - ratings -

Shortly before his departure from this thread (and forum) - I asked Fulham which ratings he used in his class/form analysis - he replied that he had no need to use any - and that the class/form was good enough by itself !!

Not long ago when I propositioned - doing the current results testing - I suggested that I might run "Massey's" ratings alongside to see if there was any relationship !

I got a reply from Barny full of "CAPS LOCKS" suggesting that I was talking "B***cks !

Pleased to see that at least one VDW expert agrees with my view on the subject

jib
You have mis understood my post,Granted i would not have picked atlantic viking.But it was the only horse from the races that vdw would have applied the method too,That wasn't in the 3 lowest figures.before you start saying that others were outside the first 3 in the consistency rating,I am aware of that also.it needs thinking about but it is logical,And it DOES work.

Investor,

If it works put a few up.

If you are worried about dozens of Gummyites throwing £0000s on the horse and spoiling your coup, then put them up in the last minute before the off.

See if you can get Mtoto to join in with you.

TC,

I fear our esrtwhile colleagues are a bit like that oozlum bird you described the other day as they always swore that the CR was to be used with the AR, though that latter rating is now undergoing some form of maoist cultural revision and it may have now become dangerous to speak in praise of it.

Whatever, you are no more than one of the running dingos of Masseyism and urgently require re-education.

investor -

read further into VDW - regarding - Follow a trainer !!

I dont't as yet - fully understand - D.Nichols - and I would never
think of selecting - which of his horses is going to win -

What does emerge - however is that when he sends in his horses - "Mob Handed" on a "Long Distance Raid" - then - he "Intends to "Win"

on these occasions - I simply - "Back them all"

-

Like today - you get some high priced winners !

Nichols claims that he doesn't - "GAMBLE" -

But _ I rekon - that - His "Owners" DO !!!

Tc
The method isn't about ratings.
VDW said so, Lee said so, Fulham said so, ( Which means that Guest thought so), and I also think so.
He used speed figures to show young horses with promise, and in the Roushayd/Desert Orchid examples used them as one example of how to know when a horse is poised to win, which he also gave other ways of establishing.
That in no way implies that ratings are rubbish, just, as he indicated many times they are not the answer to his method.
If that were the case, the task which Mtoto tries to convince us is so laborious, would become well nigh impossible to apply to contemporary racing given that the ratings VDW used for illustration are no longer available.

JIB - Gizus a Clue !!

actualy "Massey" is - Bloody awful - at selecting - "Winners" - What he can do tho' - is find "Placed" Horses !!!

Use that "small gem" - how you want !

tc

johnd - thanx !

- when I posted - re ratings - I had just re-read "Roushard" - and mentaly included the "Speed Figures" as "Ratings" - however I suspect - that Massey - also uses "speed figures" in his "ratings" in which case they would still have value !

Jib
When i was posting on the other forum (morgue) which was solely vdw,i learnt one thing.Even on that forum there were very few that would put selections up.and that was a forum full of vdw enthusiasts.The other thing that became apparent was INTERPRETATION,And that's where people differ.i mentioned the 26 form books,They are needed to get to the depths of these methods i don't care what anybody says ( even though i thought i had cracked the method just by buying the vdw literature).Anyway i'm not going to babble on any more,If i see what i consider to be a vdw good thing then i will put it up.What i would also like to say is time has passed by since i posted on this thread,Constructive criticism isn't a problem but there is no need for abuse.remember this is MY interpretation and might not be that of vdw BUT the patterns are there and it works for me.

Re Massey -

Top 3 in betting forcast - combined with Massey -top rated top - use Max in handicaps !

Bet for a "Place" - and use a "Dawson" staking plan !!!


2.55 ch - W 4/6 torrens
3.30 ch - L
4.05 ch - W 11/4
4.40 ch - L
5.40 ch - W 3/1
2.20 ri - W 5/1 - 2nd 5/1
2.50 ri - W 12/1
3.25 ri - 3rd 13/2
4.00 ri - L
4.35 ri - L
5.05 ri - L
2.00 w - 3rd 7/1
2.30 w - W 8/11
3.00 w - W 7/2
3.35 w - 3rd 9/2
4.10 w - L
4.45 W - W 11/2
5.15 w - W 7/2
5.45 w - W 4/1
2.10 e - 3rd 11/4
2.40 e - W 4/5
3.15 e - L
3.50 e - W 4/1
4.25 e - 2nd 6/1
4.55 e - 2nd 10/3
5.30 e - L
2.15 n - L
2.45 n - L
3.20 n - L
3.55 n - W 11/10
4.30 n - W 1/2
5.00 n - L

when did you last bet at newcastle - "on the soft" ???

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

JIB _ Not "another" - "BLOODY YORKSHIRE-MAN" !!

tight fisted buggers - travel nowhere unless they are going to come back with some "cash" !!

jib
somnus true ability will never be known,its a group 1 winner,and will go very close in the group 1 sprint at hay this week

greg
That seems to be a bit of a contradiction in terms.Would you care to expand.

Investor,

If you genuinely wish an amnesty, then you will get no grief from me. Far be it from me to interfere with your contributions. If my last few posts were less than charming I was only continiuing our previous relationship as I assumed would have been your own intention. However if you now wish to bury that animosity in the past I am happy to attend the funeral.

However I think its fair to say that aftertiming and 'pinnochio' lists will still incur the wrath of current contributors.

Other than that welcome back! I look forward to your defense of the consistent horse!

investor -

believe it or not - this is still the old moribund forum that you were reading !

I too had written it off and had posted the odd "Gravestone" to mark its -departure !!

However - VDW is stronger than that - cos -

Love him - or - "Hate" him - VDW - posted a whole series of letters , which - provide a - "Focus" and "Fulcrum" - around which a Discussion of the issues involved in horse racing can be talked about .

The current revival of the Thread is - "The Proof of That " !!!

The whole series of booklets can be obtained - for " peanuts" from - http://www.browzers.co.uk/cat37_1.htm

so - "apart from the problems involved in "Posting "them to the depths of the Brazilian Jungles - or - the odd "Opium Den" in Japan ! - Everyone should have no problems - in joining in the discussion !!

if you havn't read VDW - then your "horse racing education " - Is not complete !!

I urge - "every member" - to do so !!

( Gummy - will forgive - the Commercial Plug ) !!!

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

Investor: did you look specifically at VDW selections in the aforementioned form books? If so, as VDW theory promotes consistency figures it would be very strange had the examples not conformed to the theory, in short, entirely unreliable research compared with Tuppenycat's present endeavour. While I'm here I must say Johnd's selection of his 3rd option was probably the most ridiculous thing I've read on this entire thread, if VDW theory is not simple as a starting point it is piss useless, consistency means the sum of recent placings and no mystification is possible. Not-G-Hall's reply to Greg was also enlightening, "not that I'd bet in a claimer", the allying of the ignorant snobbery of such a facile statement with horse racing theory, be it VDW or not, reminds me of the whole brainless Fulham troupe. I side with JiB in "welcome back Investor" but start by admitting you're here to learn not teach or if you insist otherwise get on with the teaching.

Oh !! - " Shit" -

has it - "Hit the Fan" ????

That's not my intention but let's stick with the reality side of things and steer clear of the devil worship delusions.

EpiG,

I believe Jds 3 options are only his musings as to the apparent discrepancy between the published historical vdw figures and TCs current research.

He is merely expressing his concern at the differences and is certainly not proposing some meretricious explanation.

I dont have this problem because I dont believe in the CR, but unfortunately for Jd and a few others,TCs revelations must be quite disturbing.