Fulham
I agree that pk didn`t run in much class lto
but he did have a massive 12-7 on its back
and seemed to perform well coming 2nd.But
having said that there are no form comments
for the race.It could be that PK finished
tired which would put the race in a different
light or he may have ran on well we just don`t
know.VDW said this was the most important
factor in weighing up form.Hw also said to
look at the pace of the race, which is something
we can`t do with the PK race without sf and
no race comments.So how could vdw weigh up
the form when some of the most important factors
are missing.BL was ruled out i think because
he had a hard race only 2 weeks ago before
coming into the Erin and that isn`t long enough
to recover , not for top class horses they
need a longer break to recover.

Maggsy

Maggsy

All the points you make are valid: we don't know all that much about PK's 2nd in the class 6; BL did have a hard race, and two weeks may not have been long enough.

But you are essentially establishing my basic point - much about the Erin, prior to the off, was a matter of conjecture. Sure, when PK wins, and BL runs poorly, we can reasonably infer that PK's race set him up nicely, and that BL's probably took too much out of him. But that's the danger with post-race rationalisation. Had BL won, we could have said a horse with proven class and clearly in form won, and must be as tough as teak after that hard run a fortnight ago. Ditto Decent Fellow - had he won, the post-race rationalisation would be on the lines of DF returns to Sweeps form, having had a gentle jog round lto to keep him fit!

Really, the ONLY point I want to emphasise is that, for those of us who believe in rational form analysis (looking at all relevant factors), these well-contested, decent class races are almost invariably problematic, seldom throwing up a selection for whom there is neither contra-indications nor plausible alternatives. That was the case in all the VDW examples I've studied, and in all the comparable current examples posted pre-race on this thread, up to and including Determined's Rosebery selection today.

Michael,

Those that have studied VDW generally regard the Prominent King example as one that holds many clues and answers, as indeed it does. It tends to be the one that gets the newcomers to VDW thinking because it appears to contradict a lot of what VDW later goes on to reveal. In particular, Prominent King was without a winning class rating, as you’re probably aware, going in to the Erins, which contributes to the opinion of some that the ability rating is not important.

Fulham,

I promise you that there is a definitive answer as to why Prominent King should be considered to be in form in the Erins, and also on the flip side, why Beacon Light should not be considered as a form horse.

You’ve asked a very relevant question in your last post that needs answering. Maggsy has given you his view in his reply, but what I will say is that his view is in contrast to the correct answer.

PS. Fulham, I’ve just noticed that you’ve posted again! I haven’t read it yet, so please read the above post as if Maggsy’s was the last!

Lee

At depth, it depends on how one construes the idea of "form". I don't for one moment doubt that, from your construction of it (which, for all I know, may be identical with what I assume to have been VDW's) both PK's being in form and BL being out of form, seem definitive. I'm simply questioning the adequacy of that construction.

We could, if you wish, check the congruency of our assumptions about how VDW assessed what being in form meant, and how he assessed the class/form horse, by naming the class/form horse in the race won by Love from Verona!

hello all..firstly well done hedgehog..statajack/all you probably didn,t evaluate this race, because it was below class 50,but i feel FRENCHMANS BAY was as good an example of roushard you,ll see,had thi horse been beaten there would have been serious questions asked..regards investor

Todays early summing up,

Hedgehog – an excellent days work with TBB and VS. Hope you had a few pounds on. Well done.

Fulham
- your responses to my posts today were very much appreciated and lets hope one or two more get involved in the future. Regarding your comments on Elmhurst Boy, I agree with you that his previous turf form did not match his A/W form and one could therefore say that he did not have the form to win today (proved to be the case) however I wrongly took the view that he was becoming more consistent with age and dare I say improving. That led me to the conclusion that he would translate his recent A/W running onto the turf and if doing so I expected a big run.
Added to that I was confident all the other consistent and `ability` horses would not show today because of varying factors hence the decision to make EB a bet.

*** VDW stated that we must deal with fact and if I`m honest my decision in hindsight was based on assumption not fact ***

Money lost and there`ll be plenty of days like this as I strive to learn this methodology. That said, the majority of my evaluations on horses not expected to show today was right which gives me confidence.

Kuster – his victory in a good class hcap last season was when wearing blinkers for the first time. They weren`t on today.


Barney
-as I stated to Fulham thanks for your response today. Your statement , “ I found myself trying to find the winner” is one all striving to learn this methodology should inplant firmly in their minds.
That is the time the race been evaluated should be well and truly left alone.

Granny`s Pet , Vol Solitaire, Grey Abbey – anybody identify these as selections today?

Cheers,
-

Determined

In the intro. to one of his booklets, the late Jock Bingham emphasised the idea of fact rather than opinion. Its neat, sounds rigorous, and at first read may seem compelling. But it is wholly simplistic.

The only way any of us ever arrives at a rationally-based selection is to draw inferences, make assumptions if you like, from facts. "Facts" simply don't speak unambiguously for themselves. Your assumption re Elmhurst Boy today was certainly plausible, and it would have been no great shock to me if it had won. My assumption was that, as a six year old, EB had not improved in any real sense, but had simply looked better in less strongly contested, albeit high class, races on the AW. One could not be certain either way.

good evening..i felt grey abbey looked good,it had the beating of three of of the seven, without looking to far the granby didn,t have the class to cause an upset,emporers magic had shown something in it,s second last race, but again not the class non runner anyway that left native man,which had to be respected hence a book was made.the only other was of course frenchmans bay regards investor

Lee,

You say in a post earlier today:

quote:

---

In particular, Prominent King was without a winning class rating, as you’re probably aware, going in to the Erins, which contributes to the opinion of some that the ability rating is not important.

---

I wonder if you would care to elaborate on that statement as Prominent King had won a £1041 17f race at Naas and also won over C&D in a £2497 race. Therefore by my reckoning Prominent King had a class rating of 17 going into the race. Am I missing something?

Cheers

Fulham and Investor,

Thanks for your responses. I`ll reply later.

I`m having a break. Going to watch a film with my lady wife who has forgotten what I look like.

Cheers,

hi investor,

firstly i didnt look at this race but since you mentioned it i thought i would have a look.

i find

on first inspection that it does indeed appear to be roushayd, but on closer inspection i find that 1)there is blip in the SF at the second race
2)there is a gap of 6 months between the first and second race and the last race was 11 months ago.

this is not the roushayd method as laid out in systematic betting which was predominantly concerned with when a horse is on the boil and due to replicate a good performance from the previous season.

i could be wrong but i thought it worth mentioning

determined,

i bet she can do a wonderfull sketch of the back of your head.

to those that know

it must be strange watching us grope round in the dark.

statajack,

when considering the list did vdw ever take into consideration the ground?

if not do you consider it important?

evening mate..yes your,e right the example is o.k with exception to the periods since runs don,t forget though the blip you speak of in his next race class 1740 finishing third he again showed an improvement in s.f therefore marking his card,there,s a world of difference between 1740 held up one furlong out ran on well and a class 45 maiden where there was nothing,remotely in his class.regards investor

Crock,

VDW’s quote regarding Prominent King related to current season. To get the point across in relation to peoples reasoning about the ability rating I would have been better pointing out Rivage Bleu, who had up to the point of being selected not won a race.

Fulham,

Again on the face of it Love From Verona looks to be up against things, towards the bottom of the pile on ability, coming out of the 2nd lowest class race last time, but a study of the form that it is the best amongst it's rivals, and of course meets the pre-requisites of the consistency method.

Lee

Do I take it that, for you, Love from Verona was what VDW would have termed the class/form horse in the race (on the lines of Wing and a Prayer, Canny Danny and Cool Gin)?

Fulham,

No, there's a difference, and that being that EVERYTHING doesn't go LFV's way, but the price compensates for this. Wing And A Prayer is the ultimate balance of class and form, just like Little Owl, Canny Danny has everything there but for the weight negative that VDW mentioned, and Cool Gin has almost everything in his favour. The Wing And A Prayer types are the ones that I go for.

May I say that, it is my view from what was written that VDW had a knowledge of racing that far surpasses most that play the horses, past and present. And to be able to select a high percentage of winners at prices LFV returned at calls for a knowledge and understanding (and patience) far beyond that of the main factors that VDW didn’t quite spell out. For me personally understanding the examples such as Love From Verona was like running the London Marathon in preparation for competing in a 3-mile fun run. I generally stick to the sore thumbs. Now and then I’ll get sucked in to the more complex situations, where some win and some lose, but I’ve no need to. The majority of my bigger price winners come from the Roushayd method, which still calls for an assessment of the unexposed form before studying the exposed form; Improving speed ratings etc.

I must say though that since being a member of this board it has been great to listen to what others have to say on the subject. I’m sure that some have gone a lot further than myself, Guest for one from what I can make, and each to their own, but for me I’m more than content with what I have and the lengths I go to find my winners.

For those that are still at it, Every time you get peed off or hit the next brick wall, just remind yourself that when you discover what you are looking for, you’ll seriously wonder how on earth you ever passed it by, and how it could be so simple.

Hello All,

Investor/Determined - thanks.

Determined - I didn't have a penny on. I'm not going to bet until I can win with regularity.

Maggsy - I've read that a better class horse holds it's form for longer than a lesser one.

Lee - I think I've understood you. BL and DF could be expected not to perform at the level of their last races much less the Erin. PK on the otherhand could be expected to perform better than its last race. The form equivalent of swings and roundabouts. Am I right?

All the best
hedgehog

Hi Lee
For me, a very interesting comment you made yesterday was that if two people who know the factors that are required in implementing vdw correctly analized the same race they would both come to the same conclusion in the same race.
Would this then imply that there is more to the mechanical procedure than meets the eye.
Chris B