Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Hensman,
It’s my belief that once fully understood people will not come up with ‘different’ VDW selections for the race. The betting process of course is far more abtritary and may result in differences of opinion.
GL,
Nobody is going to come and here and explain to a ‘newbie’ how a selection is arrived at, whether that be from the past or from a current race. I’m afraid it’s totally unrealistic to expect anybody to do so.
Although as is obvious from threads on here there is some disagreement from enthusiasts over elements of the method it should be bourne in mind that VDW said once everything is understood, everybody will have the same horses.
Although it’s a ‘method’ and not a ‘system’ the results of explaining exactly how selections are arrived at would have the same results as a system. If you released a very profitable system into the public domaim then I could virtually guarantee it wouldn’t remain profitable, weight of money as word spread would see to that.
If people did start to explain exactly how a selection was arrived at then I think they would either:
a) Be doing so without a full understanding themselves, which will only serve to push people down the ‘wrong’ route.
b) Be padding their posts with superfluous information to disguise the ‘real’ reasons a selection was made.
The only way to fully understand his method is by studying his writings and those 30 year old examples you’d like people to steer away from. Following the route of some others who ‘claim’ to have an understanding can be a dangerous and time-wasting exercise as I know to my cost.
Even study of his writings and those 30 year old races is no guarantee to success as countless people will tell you. I floundered for years without spotting certain vital elements and I’ve still not fully come terms with all aspects. Fortunately there are some generous people like L33 who will drop some subtle hints to help people studying his methods or give some current days selections (without the reasons) to help people who are prepared to help themselves better understand.
I can fully understand that it’s this reluctance to discuss things openly that frustrate others but it won’t happen here or anywhere else I’m afraid. There is only one ‘true’ expert on VDW’s writings and that’s VDW himself. Following the route of other ‘self-proclaimed’ experts can be a futile exercise.
aaronizneez, your story reminds me of the other old one about the 3 prostitutes getting married.
The first lady went to the doctor and said ‘Doc, I’m getting married shortly and I’ve been on the game for 5 years but I’d like my husband to think I’m a virgin, what do you suggest?’
The doctor gave her a small elastic band with the instructions to ‘strategically’ place it…. ‘that will do the trick’ he advised.
The 2nd lady went to the doctor and said ‘Doc, I’m getting married shortly and I’ve been on the game for 10 years but I’d like my husband to think I’m a virgin, what do you suggest?’
The doctor gave her a large elastic band with the instructions to ‘strategically’ place it…. ‘that will do the trick’ he advised.
The 3rd lady went to the doctor and said ‘Doc, I’m getting married shortly and I’ve been on the game for 40 years but I’d like my husband to think I’m a virgin, what do you suggest?’
The doctor gave her a strip of 2" dressmakers elastic with the instructions to ‘strategically’ place it…. ‘that will do the trick’ he advised.
Come the wedding night….
The first chap is enjoying ‘conjugal rights’ when he hears a faint twang, ‘What was that?’ he murmurs. ‘Don’t worry darling, that was just my virginity gone’ replies his wife.
The 2nd chap is enjoying ‘conjugal rights’ when he hears a louder TWANG, ‘What was that?’ he shouts. ‘Don’t worry darling, that was just my virginity gone’ replies his wife.
The 3rd chap is enjoying ‘conjugal rights’ when he hears a reverberating TWANGGGGGG, ‘WHAT THE **** WAS THAT!’ he yells. ‘Don’t worry darling, that was just my virginity gone’ replies his wife. ‘Well you’d better get it back damn quick’ he screams ‘because it’s taken my bo!!ocks with it’ .
Sorry
As said before consistency is a separate issue to form.
Mtoto,
Consistency isn’t and can’t be a separate issue to form. It is consistent form that we are assessing!I agree that it’s a different issue to measuring the strength of form but you can’t disassociate form from consistency completely.
VDW said consistent form + ability etc etc
He didn’t say consistency + form + ability etc etcI wouldnt expect it to run over the wrong trip in three of it’s last three runs, no.
Dave,
I didn’t mean in all 3 of it’s last runs. If you are using ratings as a guide, let’s say we had the following scenario for a proven miler:
3rd last run – 8f – Rating 95
2nd last run – 8f – Rating 98
Last run – 10f – Rating 89Would you say the horse was ‘inconsistent’ because of it’s ratings dip of more than 5lb last time?
Personally I’d be much more interested in what it did and against what in that 10f race. For instance did it hit the front at the mile post in that race and then fade away etc.
How do you measure the +/- 5Ibs Dave? This lot have a got an answer for everything that none agree on…
.. or a straight answer to a simple question apparently.I would suggest you would look at whatever rating you are using, as a part of your assessment and work out your beaten lengths formula from there. Be that weight, time or something else.
I just put up 5lbs as a value, you could say 7lbs or 10lbs … consistent application being the key. Each horses own rating needs to be relative to itself and not to the other horses it is racing against. To do this type of assessment you need to hold the pre-race rating as a constant and measure the deviation from that.
Dave,
VDW once used the phrase ‘observe intelligent judgement’. I like that phrase as to me it sums up the difference between a method and a system.
Regarding your idea of using ratings as a guide to consistency. What about the miler that the trainer has somewhere near it’s peak and he decides to get a 10 furlong run in to build up his stamina before going for the big day. Would you expect the horse to run to within 5lb over the wrong trip?
One thing VDW has given me is a greater appreciation of how good trainers place their horses to bring them on and there are many permutations.
The most succesful one I used at the time was called ‘Form Master’ which was out briefly in the late 1980’s.
It was released by a company in Harrogate who’s name escapes me.
It was very succesful and quite obviously based around VDW’s writings (which was the trigger for me to study VDW in more detail.)
It was taken off the market after about 3 months, it was rumoured at the time that one of the big 3 bookmakers bought the rights and took it off the market.
One of the problems for anyone wanting to study VDW’s methods in depth is, as Mtoto has already said, that the relevant form books are no longer available.
Goodlife,
The form books are still out there for anybody looking to buy them. True, it may take a little while to put a full run together but most are widely available for £6-£8 each.
I don’t want to fall foul of Cormack’s ‘advertising’ guidelines but am more than happy to PM you details of the specialist booksellers if you are interested.
Cormack,
At it’s heart lies VDW’s often quoted formula:
Consistent Form + Ability + Capability + Probability + Hard Work = Winners
As you’ll see from the other thread, there are many varied opinions as to what constitutes each of those separate elements
I suppose you could say it’s summed up by learning to spot when a horse with all the capabilties to win is really placed to win and is available at odds greater than it’s probability of winning.
That all sounds very simple and is pretty much common sense, which is why many of us become amused at those who denigrate it when in all probability it embraces the very same elements they use.
I guess what makes VDW methods somewhat unique are the methods he uses to gauge those elements. However, when you unravel certain elements (and I don’t pretend to have unravelled them all) it is all entirely logical.
Most people take great amusement at VDW’s claim of 80-90% winners but you have another poster here who very ably demonstrated on another forum that can be achieved. At that stage people will often say but that only demonstrates that person has an exceptional judgement himself and in no way validates VDW’s methods. However those who have gone to great lengths to study the methods and can spot the ‘common’ traits know different.
I know this doesn’t answer your question but if you ask people to summarise or simplify the method you’ll soon need extra bandwith to accomodate the thread and I’d wager 90% of it would be rubbish.
The simple reality is that knowledge of VDW’s methods can only be learnt with a great deal of time and patience poring over 25 year old form books and those who have undetaken that hard work and achieved success will never spell those things out on any forum, they will only point people in the right direction to study themselves.
Hi GL,
For clarification, I assume you are talking about the weights ‘on the day’ ie culled from RSB or similar rather than the initial ‘framed’ handicap?
Hi Barney,
Hope you are keeping well and getting over your traumatic events of a few years ago.
I sort of understand where you are coming from but I’m not sure it really helps when the figure is 50%.
Looking at the example you quote of a 0-145 handicap, you could turn that on it’s head. Lets say the top 10 weights withdraw on the day leaving 3/4 of the field from the bottom half. If we look at that logically, if 50% of the winners come from the bottom half, then equally 50% come from the top half. So, it could be argued that if 50% come from the top half of handicap and they make up only a quarter of the field then the odds are in their favour.
I guess for those figures to have any real meaning we’d need to know the % of declared runners that came from each section.
I’m sure I’m being stupid and missing something obvious but I can’t quite grasp it
looks like the heavy team have arrived welcome .remember the futures bright
I hope you are not including me in that statement, Class Tells.
My ever expanding waistline has sod all to do with you and it’s the only way I could be described in the ‘heavy mob’
I suppose it’s down to interpretation, Mandrake.
When VDW wrote about the framed weight he said 50% of winners (Handicap Hurdles and Chases) came from the bottom half of the framed handicap (I must confess I’ve never really figured out the significance of this as it means the other 50% come from the top half!).
If we look at the framed weights for this race:
Weights were raised 18lb and Canny Danny carried a 4lb penalty, which means in the framed handicap we would have had:
Canny Danny – 10st 3lb
West Tip – 8st 11lbWithout knowing the bottom weight it’s impossible to know the mid point (if we assume it was West Tip we have a mid point about 10.09 putting both horses in the bottom half).
I can’t really see a 1/2st advantage to West Tip in any way here but I may well be missing something
when summing up cool gin, just for information this should have been mr spiers, last wager to date.. any reasons why this was selected as a bet ahead of wing and a prayer, beat the retreat, brave george,.. on the same racecard
Nagwa,
It’s some time since I’ve studied these races but VDW’s comments don’t negate Wing And A Prayer being a bet. Cool Gin came after Wing And A Prayer so could still have been a bet with Cool Gin being the last one.Hensman,
that has led me to reverse VDW’s approach and regard class of runner as primary to value of race.
I’m going to draw a line under this one as we debated this to death on another forum some time ago but for me the two are inextricably linked ie finding the class of runner by value of race(s).
Mandrake,
I may well be wrong in this assertion as I don’t have my notes to hand. When VDW mentioned West Tip having ‘half a stone in hand’ of Canny Danny at the framed weight, I think he was referring to Dick Whitford’s form ratings in the Sporting Life (remember for this partcular article VDW was highlighting using the Life & Mail ratings instead of his own). West Tip was indeed 7lb better off at the weights according to Whitford’s ratings in the Life.
I suspect when referring to a ‘3lb’ pull last time he was again referring to these ratings with Whitford rating Canny Danny 3lb clear that day.
Hi John,
I don’t think anybody (least of all VDW) has claimed win prize money or the abilty rating to a be a definitive guide to class. In fact his own words were ‘for obvious reasons this is not foolproof but at least it enables a better judgement to be made’ .
This is only commonsense really, is the winner of one group 1 race of significantly higher class than another group 1 winner because the latter took in a maiden on route to his group success whereas the the former didn’t!
It isn’t just about finding the highest class horse it’s about isolating the class of race a horse will be ‘primed’ for. This is a judgement error I’ve seen many VDW enthusiasts make when a horse has an obvious class advantage (myself included far too often in the past!) which often results in backing horses in obvious ‘prep’ races. If a horse has shown himself capable of winning in a certain class then why on earth would a trainer prime the horse for something significantly lower.
I can remember a debate on another forum a couple of years ago when Best Mate ‘scraped’ home by a short head from Seebald in the William Hill at Exeter. Does anybody really think Seebald would have got within a short head of a fully primed Best Mate over 3 miles! The person backing the horse ‘saved his bacon’ in VDW parlance that day but it doesn’t change the facts.
A study of the value of race an exposed horse is usually aimed at, particularly for good non-gambling stables will usually answer several questions.
.. or a straight answer to a simple question apparently.