swish,

the selection i put up was harnour.

determined,

any vdw selections i find will come on here not on other threads.with the races i checked i didnt find much worthwhile and am still temprementing away.with kaysari the lack of a run put me off him although hed done everything asked.

all thats in my mind at the moment is "MANY GRAVES ARE DUG AT THE START OF THE FLAT" i will give it another month or two yet, anyway ive still got a couple of jumpers to look forward to this week and there will be some rifle brigades at newmarket on tuesday.for some reason i am finding myself drifting away from form study and into watching out for good performances and looking where they are placed next.(roushayd)

nice to chit chat again

Just come back from my bike ride. Will respond a little later.

I couldn`t echo your comments more about the early months. Earlier this week I looked at the April - May back issues of the Post from 2001 and yes judging by last year and what I think I have learnt recently bets maybe fewer than in the pastbut hopefully they will be winning ones.

*** Pole Star`s performance yesterday may have`half` marked his card, ie - connections of Kayseri believe he is better than a h`cappr in which case makes PS weight concession ( albeit WFA ) a very goog run.

Cheers,

Several members have commented on this race, and Guest has stated that Kayseri was the class/form horse, though others may have drawn different conclusions. I've only had a look at it this morning, and find myself rather confused.

On 25 March (12.36am), Guest described how he arrived at the class/form horse by reference to a specific race: "Through the Rye was in form and thus having the highest ability rating of the form horses, he was the class/form horse".

Taking that as my point of departure, the horse with the highest ability rating in the 3.25 was Harnour (58) with Kayseri second (40). Presumably, therefore, Guest did not regard Harnour as a form horse, in VDW's sense, a view possibly shared by Determined and Swish. Barney, on the other hand, selected Harnour and therefore clearly regarded him as in form, as I would have done on the basis of his last run (supported by his 2yo record).

The result shows that, on this occasion, Harnour was not good enough, and Guest, Determined and Swish were therefore right to pass him over. But (irrespective of the considerations that led to others being preferred) I would find it most helpful to know why Harnour was not the class/form horse in the race.

Harnour - fully exposed and flattered on his seasonal debut.

Kayseri - on the up and open to significant improvement. Also, very well thought of. Gallop reports promising. Various stats, etc all plus points.

An excellent placement by a very clever trainer.

Short and sweet as the London marathon awaits.

Question for us all - WHO ARE THE CLASS/FORM HORSES FOR THIS WEEKS EUROPEAN FREEE HCAP.

Cheers,

i put up REDBACK as the class horse in the race,of the form horses you have to ask yourself in what class they achieved this in and in my opinion conflict in the class/form arises,the above may not come out top on form but with doubts surrounding other contenders namely have they trained on i stick by the above named as a viable selection at this stage.
max.

Swish - A couple of further things in response to your last posting. Using your reasoning as to what Kayseri had achieved as a winner, can I ask what exactly had Pole Star done to earn his corn? Auction maidens don't take much winning at the best of times.

I'd direct you towards Fulhams post regarding form. Pole Star was a form horse as was Kayseri, but Harnour was not for much the same reason our old pal Beacon Light wasn't. Using ability as our guide then, which of the form horses had achieved more on the track in his winning achievements?

I do find it strange your constant boasting (for want of better phrase) about your knowledge and success with the Roushayd method. You made similiar comments about your strike rate with your 'certs' from another thread (most of which were not VDW type bets in my view) and I notice you have now changed your description of these selections somewhat. It says a lot about your own temperament that you feel obliged to find a selection in virtually every race, though I accept you don't back them all (at least I hope not). When I have given my own analysis (often a bit more than just a named selection) if there is no clear selection then I say so and move on. Even when there is a clear selection it is not always backed and again I have made this very clear in the relevant posting. As stated many times, finding the class/form horse and backing it will not give a very high strike rate and that is exactly why VDW said he only backed less than 20% of horses he considered should win. Finding a horse who has improved it's speed figure when raised in race class and then backing it when dropped in race class will not in itself give a very high strike rate. I think I'm right in thinking that you started this thread because you didn't understand this method (correct me if I'm wrong here) yet somehow you are now an expert with it in a very short time. I have been criticised in the past for not giving too much away (including from yourself) yet so far you have given little away about what you know about the finer workings of the 'Roushayd' method. Again, if I have missed these postings please point me in the right direction. I am not interested in gaining pluadits for tipping winners, that doesn't pay the bills. All that matters is what horse we put our hard cash on and that we get it back with interest. I'm sure your response will again amply demonstrate your real temperament.

Fulham - Yes, I didn't view Harnour as a form horse. The answer as to why has been outlined in one form or another in the past.

Thanks to all who commented on why Harnour, in their view, was not in form.

But I have to say I remain confused, especially by Guest's post where he says the reason was "much the same" as that applying to Beacon Light.


Guest

In your post of 31 March (9.13pm), you indicated two reasons why BL was not a form horse: "It wasn't just the drop in class that proved the negative about his form [implying that the drop in class was part of the story]. It was the fact that even though race fit, he was unable to do something that should have been a formality".

Now, there is no doubt that, on 30 March, Harnour was dropped in class from his last run in 2001 - dropped indeed from the class of his last two races where he was outclassed to the kind of level at which he could realistically compete. However, there, as far as I'm concerned, the similarity ends.

Unlike Beacon Light, on 30 March Harnour was not "race fit" - indeed the Form Book comment describes him as being a "bit backward". Neither by any stretch of the imagination was his task on the 30 March "a formality". In Kaieteur he was facing a palpably fitter rival (Form Book comment "looked well") with good 2yo form, who was sufficiently highly highly regarded to hold an entry in the French Derby, and was the clear market choice, being backed to 8/11 favourite. (Beacon Light was, of course, the favourite on his race prior to the Erin.)

That, in the circumstances summarised above, Harnour came second, albeit flattered by the bare 2.5 length margin in the Form Book and in so doing record his best ever sf, is to me not suggestive of his being out of form. And its interesting that the Official Handicapper took the same view - he was raised 3lb in the ORs for that performance.

Sorry if I'm being obtuse, but I can't at the moment see the parallel you suggest with Beacon Light. (Unless, of course, in your interpretation of VDW's approach any horse dropped in class which fails to win is necessarily regarded as out of form.) As ever, grateful for any further guidance you feel able to offer.

Guest
Thank you for the help you have given on this forum.Usually when people like yourself or Statajack or Lee give an opinion on a horse, and why it was a good thing or not, I can't see it straight away.Gradually however by referring to the old form books and to your up to date examples a couple of pieces have fitted into place for me.I'm still only working slowly through the early examples that VDW gave and I'm still not confident enough to back anything however.
One puzzle that I haven't been able to solve though is how you could think Florida pearl was a good bet at Aintree.The class horse certainly.But a form horse? I just can't see how you were sure he would reverse the placings with See More Business.
Did VDW ever give an example of a similar situation that I could look up in the form books?
cheers

BREAM

fulham

if he had put in a bit more hard work at the right time he would have been a selection.thus only part of the way and not enough to bet on, it wasn't that quick either albeit on par or better than what had been seen from the others.

thats one of the reasons he wasnt a bet for me and that kaysari could be more than known at present (not a handicapper??).

i ended up with out of form V not race fit V not quick enough,conflict!

[This message was edited by Barney on April 14, 2002 at 01:55 PM.]

Barney

Assuming you are referring to Harnour and not Beacon Light, I thought he was your selection.

Am I missing something?
Why the interest in whether BL was in or out of form when VDW dismissed his chances with the following

"Using two methods of rating all five horses, I found that the three starred horses [BL,PK,MrK] came out best. Both methods showed BL well out of itand his last race had been a hard one against SP so I was left with PK and MrK."

cheersIMP

fulham,

in case i have caused confusion,

on another thread i named four selections as part of gummys who wants to be a tipster theme.
sorry to say all lost (stick to the day job!!).

harnour was one of them i havnt said anywhere it was vdw method selection.although i thought it most likely (wrong again).

Barney

Thanks. I'm now clear on that point, if not on Guest's view that there was a similarity between Harnour's situation and that of Beacon Light.

In answer to your question of yesterday with regards my exercise.
The results are promising but remember all my evaluations are in hindsight therefore the exercise cannot really hold much foundation because I could easily be swayed towards the winners.
I have tried to be honest with myself and 3 losers identified were TAKAMAKA BAY in the Old Newton Cup; ANALYSER in race no` 3241; GRACILIS in race no` 3549.
The method I used was a combination of the Consistency, C/F and Roushayd methods, ie - all horses were rated for consistency, ability and every horses last 3 runs was assessed.
I`m sure the experts may suggest different methods are appropriate for different races.
REMEMBER I AM ONLY A NOVICE AND WILL BE FOR ALONG TIME YET SO PLEASE DO NOT TAKE ANYTHING I SAY AS GOSPEL.

I note you have brought yourself into the Beacon Light discussion. I`ve kept well and truely out of it.

That said, to me the whole VDW methodology is about how one reads form therefore given the fact that we are all at different levels in that aspect will always lead to differences of opinion.

Cheers,

Kayseri; introduced at Newmarket Aug 24 class(48) (7f)comments we like scope.sfs improved on all subsequent runs final run (10f) sf100.

Harnour;introduced at Sandown June 15 class(35)(5f)raced 9 times in all at 2yrs.

Pole Star;introduced 2nd season Leicester class (24)comments looked well btn (1f) out rallied to lead last stride sp 4/6 fav.

CLASS/FORM HORSES – 3.25 Pontefract

I am not in the same league as Fulham and Guest when it comes to writing therefore please bare with me.

Were Pole Star and Harnour class/form horses and if not why not ?

In my novice opinion neither were class/form horses.

Pole Star – I assume the well respected Swish identified PS as a bet based on the speed figure recorded in race 2945 which was one of the hottest hcaps of last season. After that run the horse was given a long break which was followed by 2 runs which in my opinion were a downturn in form. I watched this horse closely last year and he disappointed at the end of his races because in my opinion he is a very big horse who has not yet got his strength. There was clearly more to it then that because he has been gelded over the winter which tells its own story. In short this horse couldn`t be supported until it has proved the ability shown in race 2945 was still there.
His run yesterday has shown me enough to keep a close eye on how his shred trainer will place him from now on.

Harnour – 8 runs as a 2yo which is very unusal for a Maktoum horse. Didn`t win until race 6 at Hamilton. Races 7-8 clearly outclassed. First run this season in my opinion didn`t set the world a light and I took the view he was not in form. Pushed along in a 5 runner race and a slow race at that wasn`t the sign of a form horse even allowing for been a bit backward as Fulham quite rightly pointed out.
I cannot question Fulham`s comments with regards the official rating being upped 3lbs in which case the hcapper believes his debut run was an improved performance.
I value the OR`s but sometimes they have to be questioned.

Onto Kayseri – 3 runs as a 2yo recording speed figures of 85-96-100. The latter over 10 fur`s over todays course and distance. How can we consider a D maiden winner as the class/form horse ? In my opinion by looking a little deeper than the bare form. Kayseri`s form to date was all about improvement. Added to that as stated earlier several other factors lended support notably the trainer course stats which read very well plus the gallop reports. Many may suggest such factors are not important. I would disagree as in my opinion today was a good example of seeing a trainer doing what he is paid to do. Place horses to win races.

I look forward to any feedback.

Cheers,

Going to watch your team hopefully beat Chelsea.

Good luck,

Determined

Thanks but, as regards the football, no chance I'm afraid. The gap in class (as important in football as racing) between the top five or six and the rest is just too big.

Class, form, ratings, money earned. To be fair they are all over ridden by whether the horse is fit surely.

I read all the VDW articles when they were first published and think he was playing tricks on readers of the Handicap Book. By introducing his "missing link" he has spawned a lot of interest in something that really does not deserve the time spent trying to find.

The use of money earned as a measure of class is now not so important even in America, in this country you can win a £60,000 handicap but be 40lbs inferior to a Group 3 winner who only wins £30,000. Using VDW money/class rating works only if money represents ability, it doesn't.

I am not knocking this forum, you would lynch me, but I think those articles from the 70's need binning.

Consistency using recent form figures alone is misleading as a horse should be judged on runs where it is able to show it's best, if it then does not, it is inconsistent. Consistency is only relative to the actual chance a horse has got.

If I run a 60 rated horse in a Listed race or on the wrong going it's form figures could be 00000, it could still be consisitent, just unable to show under the wrong conditions.

Please don't rip into me as I am only putting my view on this.

cheers
ec

EC Junior Member? shurely shome mishtake!

not the same EC, E.C. that posts on..........

reading form is your bag is it not?

some people on here have requested guidance about same....so teacher where do we start?


cheers IMP