Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Sorry if my post came over wrong.I was just "hinting" that the "key" as G.Hall called it,was not anything regarding ratings.The ratings you mention were never released,although on occassion he did use Formcast.He did actually mention in at least one letter that the ratings were not " the be all and end all".
As a new member to this forum I was shocked that discussion was still going on regarding VDW. I still have all the books ‘Golden Years’ ‘Racing In My System’ & Betting The VDW Way’
After exhausting every avenue to arrive at what became known as ‘the missing link’ (the last two ratings) I gave up after spending years on it.
The biggest surprise to me has always been that for a method so well documented no two people arrived at the same conclusion for a race as they all introduced their own interpretation to the method which was1) Take the first 5 (6 in handicaps) in the betting
2) Add the last 3 form figures together (0 = 10) of those selected
3) For the whole field average total winnings by number of wins.After carrying out these three disciplines. If no horse has ticks in all three boxes forget the race. Else introduce your choice of 2 ratings to confirm selection.
There seems to be little room for poetic licence!!
My best guess would be that Tony Peach was VDW and was simply
doing his bit in promoting The Raceform. Remember no selection were ever given prior to racing always after!The reason you failed to find the "key" is because you were looking for something VDW told you himself was not available(HIS ratings).
Most probable two questions to come next are ;
Do you know the key?
and
Can you divulge it?Mr Kildare
Interesting post, and a very nice memory to have.
Actually Prominent King was not a strong selection by VDW (too far down the ability rating ranking for that), merely a "good prospect" in a race with no strong VDW bet (strong here meaning a bet having an 80+% chance of winning). He (PK) just edged out your father’s horse in the analysis, so perhaps due to the mischance of a split shoe, VDW got the first two in the correct order. As Actuary says, VDW didn’t post that, or any other selection, prior to the races concerned but as the selection method is objective and anyone who fully understands it will arrive at the same horses, whether they look at the relevant facts before or after the race, that is of no significance.
VDW (who is still alive and most certainly not Tony Peach) generated a method which still regularly "delivers the goods". But he was not so obliging as to spell it all out and left much to be worked out by those interested. And that takes a great deal of trouble and no little expense (assembling the necessary material for the literally dozens of selections he gave over a period of more than 10 years), time (exploring that material and testing the numerous hypotheses that emerge), and capability. As Actuary has found, putting in time alone gives no guarantee of success in working it all out, but some have.
Just so we are not confusing an already clouded issue.He did not say prospect he said proposition.Its these half truths that keep people from finding the answer.Kind of makes you wonder if people are trying to "cloud" the picture on purpose.
