Hirvine - BF - Twice ??

Again fav today ! -

Cant Jump to "save its life"

Beaten "out of sight" !!

mind you - I backed - "Whiford Don"

Hi Walter Pigeon,


"horse was priced at say 10/1 in a 10k race within his last 3 races (or further out if need be) why then would he be offered at shorter odds in any 10k race run today?."

Good point, Walter. What's the answer?

Who fancies it and why?

Don't talk to me about jumpers, TC!

I backed Test of Friendship and Amadeus!!

Best BFs are 2yo that are in the top four of the betting, imo.

Where to next.
VDW,well I assumed this thread was for one to learn about the methods of VDW.How does one learn?usually from others with the knowledge,to impart to others who wish to learn.I have and no doubt others have gone a long way,but are still well short of the ultimate conclusion.

We are fortunate on this thread that there are some who know plenty,much more than others.However there seems a reluctance for some reason to carry it further.

In this year of 2004,we are still referred back to examples of over 20 years ago.Fair enough if that was the only way,but I don't recall VDW going back too far,in giving his examples,in fact all were very recent.This enabled people who were interested,to pursue his methods at minimal expense.In order to obtain the relevant formbooks,requires considerable and in my view unneccessary expense,to get a bundle of raggedy dishevelled almost illegible books.Why make life more difficult than it needs to be?

In order to move this a step further so that ALL who are interested,can learn everything they want to about VDW methodology requires a gesture of goodwill from those with the knowledge to make this happen,the ball is in your court.

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

Just - "Lead the Way" !

"Blind" leading the "Blind" -

I suggest that you need to get some more recent examples and then you can use a whole load of new data analysis on those examples. There are so many ways to restrospectively look at recent selections now that you can't do with the old examples

It wouldn't be my idea of fun but I think if you want to move forward you need these more recent examples for exactly the reasons mentioned in Pipedreamers posting.

just a thought

I'll just add that individual horse profiling with the idea of using that profile for future horses also isn't something I would do.. because each horse is different and each trainer uses different methods. Coincidence can play a part too.

so many ways to look at the game..only so many days in your life though

For sure - VDWs examples didn't go back 20 years in order to "prove his point"

If you have "studied the data" that he used - then "show the evidence"

I thought Pipedreamer's point was valid and sensible.

Unless those, who can, are prepared to give us more " live" examples ( no need to hand anything on a plate), I feel many will come to the same conclusion as Ectoo, JIB and Swish, ie. it's not worth the candle.

Strangely, I don't feel that all is lost just yet. I live in hope.

Am I waiting for a miracle?

i can't see the difficulty in supplying examples from the last 3 months.

I can supply examples of compression horses and trainer/course/month quite easily..just read those threads..i just can't see a problem with supplying examples..before and afterwards.

then you can study them as much as you want..if thats your bag.

Pipedreamer,

The problem is how can we be sure these recent selections are the same horses as VDW would have selected. I go back to the old examples because I know they were his selections.

I have tried to explain to you how I work, I can only assume you don't think it is the way forward. Fair enough. So what is the point of me putting up selections, how will it benefit you? By telling you how I work I would have thought it wouldn't have taken long to to check past and present results. You then would have the basics of my work if not always the final selection as I see some of the answers differently. ie. My ideas of the effect of a course maybe different from you unless the horse is a course winner you may have decided a course wouldn't suit. I also have a tendency to only look at the course in relation to the class of the present race, just because a horse has won on a course in a lower class doesn't mean it can if raised in class.

Ok you are not happy that my way is the correct way, but I have at least studied the subject. More importantly I have tested my ideas against the old examples and in most cases it works. There was a person who was regarded as the expert on VDW selections but did his ideas work any better than mine? Did he have the answers, I don't think so, but how does putting up selections prove they are genuine VDW selections? This chap selected Doyen as the class/form horse and selection for the Champion at Leopardstown on the 11/9/04. As far as he was concerned he had followed the procedures set out by VDW. I made Azamour the c/form horse and I think I followed the correct procedures, can we both be right? Whos wrong the one that backed the loser? Couldn't Doyen just have been one of the 20% VDW loser? I will say this wasn't the only time I disagreed with him in a big race, and had the winner. He is/was recognised as the expert who am I to say he's got it wrong? Although I was more than happy to challenge his ideas.

The only way to get to the bottom of it is to take the methods apart piece by piece and discuses them. On a public board like this the best that can happen is for the pieces to be laid out, discussed and you make your own mind up on the best way to make it work for you. No one is going to ever spell it all out and make final conclusions in public.

I was going to answer some of the other threads, but it will have to wait until tomorrow now. The one thing I can't get my head round is this a/rating, what do you think of it? Personally I think it is the biggest reason people are struggling with VDW. Do you think it is the way VDW worked using it? If so why do you think it works, why is it so important, does it do what it says on the tin? How does it show a horses will to win, why is only winning form used to judge ability?

Ectoo,

I think I should point out when I talk about a horse's profile I am talking only about that horse in THIS race. When I say a horse has the same profile as PK I mean it has shown it has the ability to win the race in question, it is consistent, can act on the track and I can see the reason why the trainer is going for this race. I can also find a good reason why I think the trainer has picked the right race and isn't just hoping. That doesn't mean we, (the trainer, and I) never get it wrong.

Be Lucky

I would be prepared to give a recent example of how I work. As mentioned before it is VDW influenced, but certainly not full-on VDW. (E.g. I do not stick to top value races and don't have time to calculate all the AR's at the moment).

However, will I be accused of "after-timing"? Hopefully not if I use a loser! So that's what I will do. Give us a few hours, and I'll be back.

It was here. No comment.

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

"Continued" -

seems to have taken a "back seat" just at the moment

We have however 3 new threads based on elements of the VDW "equation"

perhaps someone would like to start a 4th based on "consistency" .

we would then have 4 separate areas of discussion - but within each area - we would (mostly) know what aspect was being talked about

Good old - "continued" - could be used to pull them all together

Daft idea init ???

I'll continue with a VDW= based (imo) selection attempt on the AW!

230 Southwell, £13.3K C1 hcp, 5f

I got in one hell of a muddle, mainly bc of form on turf. Anyway here's the shortlist of four:

MAGIC GLADE
MOAYED
QUIET TIMES
HALMAHERA

There's something I'm uneasy about, so, I have to say, only take a small stake place bet on any that are priced at => 3 on Betfair place market.

I expect everyone to go for Moayed and Quiet Times to win.

Hi Seanrua

Had a quick look at it:

From the first 6 in betting forecast, Moayad, QT, DM and J have the lowest CR.

Of these form horses, Moayad had the best AR @ 87 with support from RPM, TS & OR and would be the selection.

Nest best is DM with 67 but no support at all. QT and J both have AR of 50. No support for J, but again, QT has the support of the three ratings (imo).

Although W and H have dangerous AR's they do not seem to be in form. MG is not really in it imo.

Other considerations: Only had time for the briefest look at the form, but Moayad bt some of these LTO. But not over 5f. And the last time he met QT over 5f, QT won. Don’t like to back form reversals… do these horses take turns in beating each other? Weight terms need looking at too.

Therefore, if a selection has to be made, the selection is Moayad imo. (But not with my money!)

BlackCat

Black cat
You took the words right out of my fingers,Nice post.

Southwell 2:30

Not my sort of race I don't like 5f sprints.

My top rated is Justalord. His record on the track is very poor 0-7 all 11 wins have been at this distance. Has the beating of this field if he is fit and on a different course.
2nd rated Dancing Mystery, course & distance will suit. Is fit and at his best can win. Age has to be a slight worry, but the last run was good when the slow start is taken into account.

Like Sean I think the way to go (if one really feels the need) is a place bet, on Dancing Mystery.

Be Lucky

Mtoto
Good call,Not a betting race for me.But if you can see what was in D.M's form why can't you fathom Roushayd.

Well done Mtoto... 9/1 winner

Investor,

I have said many times I'm more than happy Roushayd is a good selection. All I querying is the way you and others make him the selection.

I suppose thinking what you are trying to point out is going over my head. It isn't, I just can't see that R can be classified as a form horse without the s/f. If there is a logical way to make him as an improver show me. I can't see that a run against a heavily eased horse can be taken at face value.

To be honest I can't see any reason why R couldn't have won the Epsom race, in fact I think it was the target. The ONC was the consolation prize.

Be Lucky