Nessie -

possibly does - but it also occurs in dozens of others that "Didn't" win !!

Colin Davey - has made a fortune by selectivly - illustrating - Similar results - in order to "Prove" that his "Colin Davey Method" - which is a straight VDW "Ripoff" - can make you a "Fortune" - allowing you to sit sipping "Pina Coladas" on a "West Indian Beach" - All just for a contribution of £1,000 pa - to his "Private Syndicate" !!

Actually, £1,152 - plus whatever else he can skin you for. (Cost of the calls probably doubles that figure in itself).

I've cracked it

COLIN DAVEY wrote the VDW articles and posts on here incognito to keep pushing their worth.

Not sure why, but I couldn't get on here this morning.

Anyway, the selections were

High Accolade

Persian Majesty.

I did back these today for a change.
A winner and a nearly last!

High A : 2nd over C&D, June, £81.2K
Ascot winner twice (now thrice).
Top Best RPR 135.

Bandari 132, never won at Ascot

Persian M, course winner, silly selection!


These facts are meant to be helpful to any and all. In no way are they intended to prove or disprove anything about VD W methodology.

They are here for comparison with proper VDW selections (if only I could see and recognise them).
My conclusions would be based on "bottom-line" results and fk all else!

Btw, what goes on here?

Yesterday I could only find stuff about QE2 and not the latest thread posts. Today I can't see the QE2 shit.

What's the score? Not that it really matters. Just curious.

thanks chaps - but seriously

What is 'the common denominator' ?

Lee
While I have the greatest of respect for your research and knowledge of VDW, and the fact that you are able to apply it and demonstrate it better than the legions of others, (myself included), who have tried on this thread, I will continue to pursue my own understanding of the method on the grounds that it meets better the statement, "Once you have found it, you will wonder how on earth you could miss it, and you will have the same horses as myself"
That one sentence is my guiding light; it states, categorically, in my view, that the answer is relatively simple, can be found with little or no research, and will lead unquestionably to the same selection process and the same results.
I can see the sense in checking against some of his results, but I fail to see, simply on the strength of the above statement, why anyone would need to check every single one. You, youself, have indicated that the factors are common to every one of his selections, so why the insistence that the only answer is to check them all?
Either it is simple, and we will have the same horses as he, or that statement is wrong.

Actualy I think that it was Colins "Mate" - Tony Evans - from "Perpetual Publications" -

The Writing "Style" - is identical - he is a Damm sight better "writer" than "CD" - and he admits to haveing contributed a series of "award winning articles" during that period ! - He is very intelligent and - well educated , and - I think he was well in advance of his time.

He was in his 20s - and I think that he adopted the VDW "persona" - to give himself "Gravitas" !

JIB,

If your opinions have been formed on second hand knowledge then it must follow that this knowledge is only as informed as those from whom it was gained? Given that you are at odds with the majority from whom the knowledge was gained from leaves you exposed in your argument.

Again, racing hasn’t changed. Is the punter really far more informed than they ever have been? There is a minefield of information available now, however, just how useful and effective is the majority of it? The bookmaker’s book is still made along the same lines; short priced favourites are still losing, and long priced horses are still winning to pretty much exactly the same ratio (The Art of Legging is worth a read). The average punter is still arriving at the same dismal destination; it’s just that nowadays it takes them longer to arrive at a selection because of all the crap they feel they need to analyse. When one avenue closes on them they will chop and change once more, continuing all the time to lose.

I agree that punters have never had it so easy, if of course they have the inclination, but the majority, no matter what information is available to them, still fail.

Nothing has changed.

Nessie,

Yes there is a common denominator that occurs in EVERY VDW selection, it really is that simple.

JohnD,

it can only by classified as simple once you know the answer, but as I've said without the form of his selections I doubt anyone would ever dream of what that common denominator is.

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

Sean,

There are various threads on the Van Der Wheil section of the forum. Until this weekend the one most being used was the 'vdw contd' one. But if you click on the Van Der Wheil section all the other threads will appear.

JIB - I'm loosing track of them myself !

Perhaps at last - we have - "Liftoff" !!

Thanks Lee.

But what is it ? are you able to help and say what the common denominator is or would the answer give the whole VDW 'game away'?.

Lee,

If you demanded of every historian that he was present during the events he writes about most history books would be v slim editions!

JIB,

A poor analogy in this situation, I think.

Naw - that was when "Nostradamus"- pressed the "Red Button"

JIB,

I suggest you get out from under you quilt, nip down to PC world and get an upgrade then!

Nessie,

It would give you everything you needed to succeed – simple as that.

With my selections I could have posted a whole load of spiel about how the horse has been dropped in class here, raced over the wrong distance there, and carried top weight last time, but why? Everyone can read on here, everyone knows how VDW set out the information, and the information is there in the formbook. That is NOT what VDW is about.

Lee - I trust that -your knowledge of VDW - is better than your knowledge of the Logistics of the Brazilian Jungle !