greg-

certaily no reference to yourself - you have the wrong end of the stick !

I know and respect your postings -

tc

Pkboy,

I presumed that because you asked the question on this thread that you presumed split times were part of the VDW method, and so instead of simply replying with NO, I offered a reasoning.

Lee,

"I presumed that because you asked the question on this thread that you presumed split times were part of the VDW method"

LOL. That is a good one. Some of CVDW's examples do not even have a LTO race time recorded.

I was merely pointing out a line of investigation and inquiry that might lead some to modify their view that the "race time" was an indication of Best Mate having put in a below par performance and in that performance exhibiting a lack of peak fitness.

Pkboy,

For sake of confusion, when you refer to split times, what do you specifically mean?

Investor: do you agree with Guest, Determined and Fulham that the Grand National is a sensible race in which to seek the winner? Personally I would say Greg's choice of race today suggests far better judgement.

Maybe it will clarify things a little if I explain to PKboy, why I thought it best to ask Lee.

Way, way, back in this thread, Lee mentioned something about the importance of the last two furlongs.

Most of the non-VDWers couldn't understand what he meant, as he told us that sppeddfigs/time/race report comments were not relevent. We were, as usual, advised to read and study the scriptures.

Well, I still don't know the secret but here's a snippet from the " Golden Years" or, at least, from the commentator, Peach:


""PEACH-NOTE: As well as introducing two cross-checks VDW also introduces
another new feature, looking at what a horse does over the last two furlongs in
its previous three outings. He states 'What a horse does, or does not do, at
this stage will provide the answers'. And this, perhaps, is one of the most
revealing paragraphs of the whole series, and I quote 'As one example, a horse
that noticeably improves to make a race of it at this stage without winning can
be looked upon as a potential candidate in the near future and note should be
made of how the trainer places it'. END NOTE""

Epi
Your stretching things to the limit now,The Grand National is rather an extreme example wouldn't you say.

T.C
You want to try and be a little more constructive instead of continually jumping on the bandwagon in trying to belittle someone.I have made it known in the past that i would like to see lee posting again.Wether he has the same view of me as the rest on this thread doesn't really matter.It's his input that is important,If you call that arse licking then yes,Im guilty and of course i want to learn more,Bu unfortunately i won't learn anything from you.

tc,
apologies for my post,all the riddles on here confuse me sometimes

investor,
these so called donkey derbys as you put it,are a lot easier to work out,from a punting angle.
which is what it is all about.
you carry on with your high class races,working out all different figures,to come up with a 4/7 horse.

epi,
thanks for the vote of confidence in a/w racing,
8/1-4/1 2nd cloud dancer

investor,
i know you will now ask why do i post on here,as i am not a vdw fan.
the reason is that this is the only part of the forum where horses and form are talked about,which intrests me

2/3 YR OLD LIST.
This is usually the time of year that I make the list for the following season.

I used to use split second,but now use raceform speed ratings,which I believe are different,to split second.

Are there any views on the different speed ratings for this method.

Lee,

The race time broken down into, for instance, time per furlong.

Seanrua,

Thanks for posting that comment by Peach. The split race time could be a modern adaptation Of "looking what a horse does, or does not do at this stage will provide the answers."

If a horse "noticably improves to make a race of it" and it is noted with an actual Quantifiable figure, relative to its last three runs. Rather than some obscure comment like "ran on well" or "quickened" or "just failed".

PS. I am fully aware of the varying course characteristics and going conditions which makes this avenue of investigation less viable than, for instance, in the American scene. But if we dont have it, we cant figure out a way to use it to advantage.

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

According to Lee it is in neither the race comments nor the time.

Pkboy,

I figured that was what you were getting at, and so I’m not sure why you found my post so funny.

Your reference that some of VDW’s examples don’t have speed figures is surely irrelevant to your question regarding split times? Sectional timing isn’t around today, as it wasn’t then – speed figures will not assist in this area.

Again, my point was that the stopwatch is not where the answers to VDW lie in any way, shape, or form.

Pipedreamer,

Raceforms speed figures still are referred to as 'split second'. They are now formulated without the inclusion of weight at any stage of the process, leaving the user with a raw figure which they can adjust or not.

Epiglotis,

Nice to be linked with the likes of Guest & Fulham but unfortunately I cannot lick their boots when it comes to understanding VDW.

That said, the last part of the VDW equation was HARD WORK and that is what I am doing.

Lee,

In your opinion are the present speed figures better than when adjusted to 9.00.

Also, can I ask, do you still cross check all your potential bets with speed ratings before you decide to place a wager ?

Lee,

You asuming, that I presumed, that split times were part of CVDW's method.

That's what was so funny and still is. LOL.

you can also use POOR speed figures to find LAYS

for example

tomorrow in the 12.50 Warwick the favourite HE'S A LEADER is favourite based on it's last run which was NOT a good performance.

The time was extremely slow telling you straightaway that the form is in question..to back up that we have two horses finishing 2nd and 3rd that were hammered in their previous race before meeting He's a leader and actually ran no better in this race ..highlighting the fact that He's a Leader has achieved little. Also notice how the 2nd and 3rd were given very high RPR ratings for that run ..virtually career best ratings. Rate the winner now off the previous RPR that the 2nd earned..doesn't make HAL look to clever now..that would be a more accurate reflection though and the time confirms that is how it should have been rated.

The handicapper is wrong imho and HAL is well worth taking on at Even money..it may win but the clear evidence is that HAL has finished 5 lengths in front of two poor performers that would have been beaten miles in virtually any other race if running those poor figures.

good angle heh..bloody good me

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

ECTOO,

Why were those horses "hammered" in their previous races?

Lee,
Thanks for clearing that up

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