VDW

[Sailing Shoes]

By this time tomorrow the folk how complained about the VDW thread should be more than happy, it will have fallen on of the Horse Racing thread. I do accept it should never have been on there of course, what the devil would a method of analysing horse races do featuring on a thread that would be better served be called the Horse Racing Lounge. Nobody on here wants to discuss any sort of detailed horse race analysis, in fact I think I only found one thread that even came close.

For me at least one interesting thing emerged, and that was written by a “handicapper” class plays no part in handicaps. Well that person certainly wouldn’t understand VDW, but then I do wonder if he (the handicapper) understands horse racing. Now this person isn’t shy about giving his opinion, so no doubt he will put me right, if class doesn’t effect the result of races why bother to handicap them? Isn’t one of the aims of handicapping to give all the horses in a race the same chance, and to classify the grade of horse that can run in certain races? Does he really believe weight has the same effect on all horses, i.e 6lbs extra will slow all horses down by the same mount?

Not only would VDW give him an insight into class, I think it would help him and others to look at the course the horses perform to their best. Now again it may just be me, but I can’t help wondering why some folk think a horse who’s best winning form is on left handed speed course can’t perform on a right handed stiff track when it is competing against top class horses who have.

Then throw in a gentleman who somehow thinks the aim of the VDW thread is to seduce the “brains” into some dark website. If they have brains that would be impossible, and what would be the point? Charge these brains for information, torture their secrets out of them?

As I’m not sure who Hensman is I can’t speak for him, but for my part if anyone had shown any interest in analysing a few races I would have been more than happy to take part. Again I can’t speak for Johngringo but I do think he would have joined in and then perhaps some of the 9650 who bother to look in would have had something to judge the worth of the methods against. Who knows they may even had something to judge if class matters or not against, rather than just the word of a racing journalist/pundit.

The first paragraph is absolute rubbish.

As for the part about Horses and Courses – A horse whose best form has come on a left-handed speed track, then goes onto to take on horses of similar [b:14p4gqvs]“Abilty”[/b:14p4gqvs] on a right handed stiff track there must be a question mark against the chances of reproducing, but the horse could be even better.

I don’t want to rubbish VDW, because I have no idea what it consists off, even though this thread is now 21 pages long!

[L33]

Mandrake,

Forgive me, but this is exactly the point I was trying to make in the first paragraph of my post. If your way of assessing class is ‘conventional’ i.e. Gp1 is better than Gp2, and Gp2 is better than Gp3 etc, then you aren’t going to get very far in your quest to unravel the VDW conundrum. Cherry picking just parts from his writings is fine and may produce a sound winning method, but I’ve yet to witness a more successful one.

Lee.

[maggsy]

Sailingshoes would’nt it make sense then to find out what VDW was about and then you would be able to make a more meaningful contribution to the discussion.

[johnboyirish]

The unquenchable thirst for success among the punting fraternity Is MAYBE why this thread is 21 Pages long.
Magggsie, I would also contribute to pre race selections for a while and disscutions on how we arrived at them, But This could cause an awfull lot of trouble as has been on other Forums,
My contributions could not start untill next week,
What do others think??

[Sailing Shoes]

maggsy,

Anything that divides Prize Money/Starts etc.. doesn’t really interest me. Although, why all you guys go on about causing problems with posting selections – that is positively encouraged.

[Anonymous]

L33

Right, the conventional way is going in the bin, VDW said it was prize money on offer when he said that Roushayd was being raised in class from a listed race of £7752 at Newbury to a Hcp race at Epsom worth £22710, and you are right in what you say.

Back to the drawing board

Thanks for your reply.

Mandrake

[Matron]

"Magggsie, I would also contribute to pre race selections for a while and disscutions on how we arrived at them, But This could cause an awfull lot of trouble as has been on other Forums,
My contributions could not start untill next week,"

– there, certainly will be no problems if you wish to post your selections on TRF.

Please feel free to do so.

Regards – Matron

[Mtoto44]

Most will be acquainted with the idea of looking for horses which are dropped in class. Often this is a race offering less prize money, but not necessarily so. The quality of horses engaged is more to the point.

Mandrake,

I don’t think any race can be classified by just looking at the title, G1. Listed, Hcp 2, that doesn’t work any more than looking at the penalty value. The words above are VDW’s so I think he would agree.

Be Lucky

[Hensman]

Mandrake

L33 and Mtoto are both absolutely correct, and you would do well to jettison the official classification. If, for example, you consider the races at Kempton on Saturday, you may feel that it is a rare class 5 that has as strong a field as the 3.45.

You will find less agreement on what to put in its place!

VDW used two measures, as Mtoto says. His primary one was the value of the race in terms of win prize money, his secondary one a measure of the class of horses involved. (In this latter respect VDW’s first ever example, the 1978 Erin won by Prominent King is worth study. Prominent King’s last race prior to the Erin was a very lowly affair if looked at from the perspective of win prize money – a class 6. But when looked at from the perspective of the class of the runners, especially the winner, a different picture emerges.)

Some still use win prize money as the primary measure. Others take the view that the growth of sponsorship since VDW’s day has made that less reliable and use alternatives, often involving ORs. (And of course if one uses a measure involving ORs the need for two measures arguably doesn’t arise). It’s a question of what one finds the most satisfactory.

[maggsy]

Sailingshoes if you have no interest in the VDW methods why are you taking part in this thread?

[maggsy]

I agree Mtoto and Hensman that the class of horse in a race can be different from the class of race. I think VDW did use ability ratings , but I think he also used cross checks to bring balance to the evaluation. Mtoto uses OR I think I don’t. The problem I have with the OR is that the ahndicapper is sometimes behind and the horse is improving quicker than he can keep up espiecally 2 and 3 year olds. Also sometimes the OR does’nt come down quick enough when a horse has’nt won for along time and it is doubful whether the horse is as good as it once was. i realise that Trainers play tricks to try and bring a horses handicap mark down and I’m sure the handicapper knowws that Trainers do this as well.
As some one has said recently each has his own way after the 2nd numerical picture.VDW said there was many different routes to arrive at the same conclusion as long as you proceed in a logical manner.

[onefurlongout]

There seems to be a lot of people for VDW methods and a few against. Not sure if this has been muted in previous posts but why not have a couple of members go head to head on a select few races this week/weekend?

Any rationalle for there selections could be given, I just think it would be interesting to see who has the the greater strike rate. Obviously to get a better grasp on the trends you would need to do this for a longer period.
Any volunteers?

[chipmunk]

i find vdw a bit too complex but on the subject of ORs i always use the following to get an idea of the class of the race, add up all the official ratings and divide by the amount of runners. it isnt foolproof but can give you a picture of how classy (or otherwise) a field is,chipmunk

[Hensman]

Maggsy

I agree with your comments about ORs, but I doubt one can find any "off the shelf" ratings that are immune from such criticism.

Chipmunk

I have come across various ways of utilising ORs in measuring class: using the OR of the highest rated horse, the mode OR or, when looking at completed races, the arithmetic mean of the ORs of those horses who performed adequately/well (this latter being defined in terms of the winner and those finishing within a given distance of the winner, the first six, finished better than their market position indicated, etc etc). Personally, I have yet to be convinced that the more sophisticated variations produce better results than the one you use.

Onefurlongout

That is at first sight a worthwhile suggestion but if we want to compare the efficacy of a VDW approach with, for example, "value betting", we have a real methodological problem. Unlike rule-defined systems, both are subjective, and properly thought of as methods or approaches. Thus while over a given series of races the selections of a "value" adherent might or might not be more successful than those of a VDWer, what conclusions could we then safely draw?

By way of specific example, early in this thread Mtoto mentioned the Totesport winner, Candidato Roy (deleted). In my own contribution on the race, I showed how in my view Candidato Roy was the highest ability rated of the consistent form horses. But the fact that, on two presumably somewhat different takes on VDW, the horse came out top does not automatically determine what one does. Mtoto’s post gave his conclusion – top rated but with significant doubts, warranting only a small place bet. But there were at least three other possibilities: too many doubts for a bet at all (and VDW himself wrote that he only backed about 20% of the horses he regarded as probable winners); doubts but to be included in a book on the race (an approach VDW favoured), or clear enough to warrant a win or EW bet. None of the four was the automatic result of the horse being top rated and in my view all four could be defended as rational. But, with a horse readily available at 80.0 and above on Betfair, the bet/no bet, and if a bet what form of bet, judgements would make a huge difference in the kind of head-to-head you suggest. And those are solely down to the individual.

[onefurlongout]

Just thought it would interesting to see how each selection did

[Mtoto44]

Sailing Shoes,

but the horse could be even better.

I could accept the above IF the horse had never tried a stiff right handed course before, but of course he had and failed. The going and distance were suitable and for those who put faith in the market he was a very short price.

Johnboyirish,

I’m afraid I have to agree, but also have to point out in many cases the problems are not caused by the doubters, but by the so called VDW fans themselves. Put up a winner they don’t agree with and the cry goes up but thats not a VDW selection. it wasn’t top on ability, consistency, in the forecast, hadn’t won on the going and/or distance, etc. IT ISN’T a system, there are no hard and fast rules just guide lines. Of course the doubters often have cause to complain because of the after timers "how many found the certainty in the 3:30 at X" posted at 6 o’clock later that night, or even the next day.

It will be interesting to see if any do decide to put up any real sort of analysis of any races. Here when I say analysis I don’t mean just a name or even a short list but some reasons why a horse has been selected in front of another. There are people who are quite happy to do this BEFORE the race, but ONLY when they can see others joining in.

Be Lucky

[maggsy]

Hensman I agree no rating system is foolproof which is why ratings can only be used as a guide, but some ratings are better than others and VDW did say to use ratings divised alog different lines like Speed figures and Collateral form to bring balance to the evaluation.

[Author]

Posts