Seanrua
Here's an example (again)

Tempsford has WON 19,951 and has won 5 times.

19,951 divided by 5 = 39.90 it's nearer 40.00 all we do is take the 2 noughts off and we have an ability rating of 40.Which in effect means this horse has averaged 4 grand a race in win prize money.

Now i have told you that,You give me the ability ratings for a race tomorrow and i can guide you through it.

Cheers, Investor!

Thanks for that. I'll give it a go tomorrow.

Win Prize money/ number of wins = AB.


Btw, no deliberate twisting of your words; I must have misunderstood your post:

""And try and evaluate the race in question the way that vdw would have done.Forget collaterral form.And again i will put this Consistent form + ability + capabilility + probability + hard work = Winners.It would appear that my last post has gone straight over the top of your head,Which really does my nut in.Start thinking about A horse rather than THE Horses otherwise you will never get "the winner" and that is the one we want. ""

Seanrua
In order to get to A horse we must look at the ability of THE horses in the race.it wasn't this particular part of my post that you twisted it was the bit were you mentioned horses not acting on a particular surface.To which i said 'if they are proven why not" but there's a hell of a difference to running on good /soft or soft than running in a quagmire.

Flat Earth Society

Investor,

You must be the last person alive who still uses the Ability rating as vdw gave it!

I dont like to repeat my posts but if you are going to revive this nonsense, I'm going to resurrect mine!

I have previously written both here and in other places about the grave dangers of the 'ability' rating. Rooster Booster is an excellent example of the frailty of this mechanism. If you go to page 428 of this thread you can see one of my contributions on this matter.

"As we both agree the debate will go on for the forseeable future and I doubt anything written here will change that prognosis. However for the record my point is that the OR is more reliable than the AR for reasons I have stated previously.

I dont expect all you vdwers to suddenly abandon the AR just because JIB says its crap, however when I make what I feel is a serious point, I will come back to it at a future opportunity if I havent had a straight answer before then.

The reason Rooster Booster is a problem for the accuracy of the AR is that whilst the horse was transforming itself into the Champion Hurdler your rating completely missed what was happening. Rooster Booster went 15 races without winning, 12 of them hcps, it won a lot of place prizemoney and constantly improved as recognized by its constantly increasing OR but the nature of your AR had its ability improvement measured at zero.

As we are talking about the champion hdler the much used arguments about lack of class invalidating your methods do not apply. As Rooster Booster won in such an emphatic fashion in almost ideal conditions I can see no suspicion of a 'fluke' clouding the issue. Neither can the fact of this AR failure be put down to one or even two flukey results in Rooster Boosters previous form there might have been one or two but never 12 of them. The only possible explanation in this case is that the methodology of collating the AR is flawed."

And from another board:

"There is one horse in particular that the VDWers would like to see packed off to a new life as a Mongolian pit pony. No one other than the actual champion hurdler, Rooster Booster, is a horse that has made ample ridicule of the VDW methodology.

One has to go back to the 6th of January 2000 when Rooster Booster, then a 6yo, won a little 4k maiden hurdle at Taunton earning an OR of 114 for his efforts. Strange as it may seem our Champion hurdler would only win again two years, two months and 8 days and 17 races later, but off a mark that had steadily risen during this winless interval to 144.

The 17 winless races record no less than 11 second or third placings in a steadily rising category of races, efforts for which the official handicapper, in common with anyone who has ever seen a real race, was of the opinion that the horse was improving.

But VDW methodology can only acknowlege improvement if the horse in question has won a race, being placed means nothing to them. Neither are they interested in the quality of the opposition, the ease or difficulty of the win, the time etc etc, they are only concerned with the prizemoney the horse has won, and this they euphemistically call ‘Ability’.

When Rooster Booster returned to winning ways it was not another class D hurdle but a class A hcp at Cheltenham, and he went into this race with the lowest vdw ‘Ability Rating’ of all the 21 runners, a miserable figure of 40.

During the next year until his date with history, Rooster Booster won 4/5 finally making his vdw ‘Ability rating’ more respectable, but still woeful in comparison to the opposition he would face at Cheltenham 2003.

Any criticism of VDW methodology failure is always quickly challenged with the well worn excuses that it only works in the higher class of race where all the horses are trying and ‘class’ will tell. There also has to be enough runners to make sure there is a true pace, the ground must be neither too soft nor too hard , etc etc.

Run over good ground, at a true pace, and in a fast time Rooster Booster, in colloquial jargon, defecated on them, winning by 11 lengths. Rooster Booster was clearly at least a class above the others, but VDW never saw it.

VDWers will talk for hours about 'Prominent King’ or ‘Rifle Brigade’ or the ‘Erin Foodbrokers Boxing Day’ example, but its funny how they don’t want to discuss ‘Rooster Booster’ or the ‘Champion Hurdle 2003’.

It is common to see in a horses form a string of improving ORs though usually the starting and finishing marks, as well as their difference are modest, but Rooster Boosters form is special.

Firstly he is not a young horse where this phenomenon is more common, secondly the improvement is steadily maintained over the astonishing period of 3 years and involves an overall gain in OR of a massive 53lbs.

Only something profoundly stupid cannot see that an exceptional event has been taking place here, indeed it was nothing less than the magical transformation of one of the ranks into a champion.

And neither can VDW claim that this transformation was hidden, it is all in the horses form, but I suppose you cant see it if you are convinced the Official Handicapper is an intellectual dwarf compared to your Dutchman.

If Rooster Booster was to be discussed it would soon become apparent that the ‘Ability’ (as well as the ‘Consistency’) rating makes very dangerous assumptions as to the true potential of a racehorse. Common sense insists that only an idiot would ignore a horses performance because it didn’t win, but what kind of cretin would then risk money on the basis of these evaluations? "

This message has been edited. Last edited by: john in brasil,

And just to show that VDW himself is confused about the concept of ability here is a quote from one of his writings:

“These were Zilzal in the Queen
Elizabeth II Stakes and Braashee for the Tote Festival
Handicap, both of whom had given the same classic tell-tale
of improvement when raised in class.

Jib
O.K give your explanation on Zilzal and braashee.Do an evalation in the way that vdw did.And it is you who has dipped into the archives not me.Nonsense.

Seanrua
Don't be put of by jib's comments,he is and always will be the most critical of critics.You put your ab ratings up mate and don't be swayed by his ignorance.

Sunday, October 24.

Here's my attempt at the Ability Ratings derived by following Investor's Instructions:

VDW Race:

250 Aintree, £40.6K, ClassA, Grd 2, Chase 2m 4f.

Le Duc 244
Take The Stand 139
Farmer Jack 75
Vodka Bleu 59
Atum Re 51
Europa 47
Bold Investor 47

I don't follow jump racing, but MY selection would be
TAKE THE STAND.

I await Investor's verdict with great interest.
All bar Europa are in the top six of the betting forecast; there are only seven runners.

Morning Seanrua
I have been waitng before i put anything up this is what i wrote prior to seeing your post.

C/f horse is Take The Stand.
This horse has been mopping up races left right and centre.But has subsequently gone up 11lb in O.R and is giving 9lb to the next in the handicap.To add insult to injury He is giving 20lb to Vodka Bleu Which was narrowly touched of by Monkerhostin carrying top weight now 22lb lighter.

On occasions they win and don't let me put you off.But Take the Standhas anhell of a job on his hands today.I have said in past posts that not all c/f horses should be supported and this horse imo is a good example.

Thanks, Investor.

You won't put me off, because I'm not betting or offering a "VDW" type selection in this race.

My only bet today will be on the Thriller at T, but, frankly, I doubt that she'll place.

Anyway, here's a few more "ratings" to muddy the waters:

Official Rating
Take the Stand 156
Farmer Jack 147
Le Duc 137

Massey
Vodka Bleu 801
Atum Re 779
Take the Stand 701

RPR
Take the Stand 174
Vodka Bleu 169
Bold Investor 168

"fineform-type thing" (( out of 20 max pts)
Take the Stand 17
Vodka Bleu 17
Bold Investor 9

ABILITY RATINGS
Le Duc 244
Take the Stand 139
Farmer Jack 75.

Seanrua
Then i shall keep looking with interest.Incidently you have put up Le duc and farmer Jacks ab ratings but do you consider them in form.

Jib
for some unknown reason i can't get into the past form data on r/p websiteso i can't give any kind of reply.But i would be very interested in what you have to say r.e Zilzal and Braashee.

No, Investor.

I'd say that Le Duc and Farmer Jack have either been badly out of form or have been fking about for some reason.

Vodka seems to be the "recent form" horse, but I'd say that TTS should outclass him - despite the weight.

Seanrua
You may be right,i remember vdw giving Desert Orchid as a cert when he was giving Nearly 2 stone to the next in the handicap.But he was miles clear of anything in that particular race on a class basis.But they lose more often than they win,We shall see.I wouldn't go against him but there's no way i would back him.

Investor,

I fear you are missing the point with the Zilzal/Brashee quote. It is reproduced not because of the details of each animals form, but to show that VDW contradicted himself.

Firstly he teaches that ability has to be measured by winning prizemoney divided by wins, then he seems to come to his senses and says that a horses ability can be sussed out when it improves in better class.

The latter obviously implies some form of rating, (at which point I defend the OR which did such a magnificent job with Rooster Booster.) But whatever VDW originally meant the two ideas are incompatable if not mutually antagonistic.

The General Reader will once again note that the extreme reluctance on the part of the vdwer to even type this horses name!

Jib
Zilzal and Braashee A with Desert Orchid were mentioned directly after Roushayd.Which of course showed improvement in higher class that was noted in his SPEED FIGURE not the O.R.All 3 could have been found using class and form regardless,If you are going to present an arguement make sure you understand the meaning behind it in the first place.

As for ROOSTER BOOSTER.If i could get into the r/p website then i would gladly pass comment,But unfortunately i can't.I don't really think it would make much difference because as you have admitted in the past "your too set in your ways".

Well, Farmer Jack wins at 14/1, beating Take the Stand.

Top Two OR.

3rd and 2nd Ability Rating.

Also in the top three TS.

I understand Farmer was prominent most of the way and TTS was a bit one- paced.

Nowhere in the RP can I glean that this would be the case.

So in future, I'll look at AB, OR and TS.

Btw, Thrilling Prospect won at 7/1, proving me wrong even though I backed her.

Seanrua
Well done with Thrilling prospect,I'm Chuffed for you.

it is the class form horse that wants supporting when everything is in it's favour.That clearly wasn't the case today.It may be worth noting that farmer jack came out the highest race class lto and this was his seasonal re appearance,I personally couldn't foresee that result,But i'm glad i got the race reading right and left well alone.

Seanrua
A couple of points regarding Take The Stand.

All his form points to his being a better horse over 3m plus. Although his last victory was over 2m 6f, it was against lesser horses than today, over a more galloping track. Indeed, his finest hour came 2 runs ago over 4m.
Today's defeat had nothing to do with the going, and little to do with the weight, but had a lot to do with class.
He simply isn't as good over a sharp 2m4f, and it showed today when he met a nippier horse at the top of his game.
It would have been difficult to foresee Farmer Jack running so well on last season's form, however, I would disagree that Take The Stand's one-paced finish today couldn't be gleaned from his recent form.
Investor draws his knowledge from former members who are convinced that VDW is all about figures; it isn't.
It is about class, though; and once again it is demonstrated that a horse's class differs with the circumstances.
Had he been conceeding less weight today, it is conceivable the result may have been different; had the race been over 3m, then it is much more certain.

Seanru

RE:Farmer jacks last 2 runs in high class
Although bum runs down the field
They have to be considered
And you have to ask why they are placed in those races in the first place

Thank you, johnd and Boozer for your points.

Good form over today's distance seems to be significant.

Trainer's placing ( JIB's field) seems also to be significant.

In fairness to Investor, the numbers I came up with by following his instructions weren't bad; winner and runner up in the top three!

What has struck me this weekend is the fact that twice a good-priced winner has been the animal that ran last day in the most valuable race.

Jumping to conclusions with insufficient data, but I did this:

Add values of last two races for each animal.

Then add this figure to animal's OR.

Well, it gave the CSF ( on this occasion)!

FJ, 43+61+147 = 251

TTS, 27+43+156 = 226.

The rest weren't in correct order, but, if we eliminate any, that have not won at least £10K this year, we get the Tricast!

This must be just a fluke, but I'll check it out in future races.

Johnd
Complete bollocks.I draw my conclusions from what i have seen in the form books and also from other examples such as canny Danny.And to say that vdw isn't based around figures is mind boggling to me.He even said himself "That now days most things are done on a numerate basis"Where were you before the race.Instead of coming out with this clap trap when it's finished.One other thing Give me an example where a horse is giving this kind of weight to the next in the handicap or more to the point how many times one has won.Take the stand was the class form horse with factors against end of story.