On bare ability ratings both Tillerman & Carnival Dancer stand out today.

We are accept the ability rating alone has no value.

The opposition against both in my opinion is weak. That said, are there factors against the 2 ?

More later but it would be nice to receive some feedback.

Also, do we have a penalty carrier who is also clear on ability in the first at Leicester ?

At the time of posting I haven`t looked at the NH meetings & I doubt I`ll have the time to do so.

Cheers,

hi determined


i am looking at tillerman now will reply.

220l numerically is clear but the form is not as clearcut as the market suggests, it is on my shortlist so far though as is 235h.

tillerman


there has to be something wrong with this horse, usually targeted at the ascot july meet, and now comes here for 6k.k abdula doesnt need the dosh does he?

grannys pet and omaha city are both confusion seeking and vicious circle/knight has lumps on.

i will therfore plump for don fitz to spread a little mama mia but only if lincoln dancer doesnt run.

there clear as mud

I believe T` had been trained for the Lockinge but the ground went against.

Todays race in my opinion will do 2 things,

- get a race into him

- get him use to winning again

-*** the horse is receiving wgt` from lesser horses. A very clever placement & at odds against although I hate short prices it will be like finding money in the street.

`T` is a keen sort but if there is no pace why not make the running.

Cheers,

good thing in the 530l against not much oposition.

they are everywhere today 310s

225h

325h


i better take my wheelbarrow today

How many "hidden factors" have you identified and how many do you think you're still looking for?

there are 35-36 considerations at the latest count
but there is always something to learn as different trainers have different tricks, some are very strange

Thanks.

determined well done on your two named winners i hope you were happy with the results.

epiglotis- they must be applied to every horse in each race

barney 35-36 hidden factors that does seem an awful lot & youve to apply them to every horse? have you sussed the one that lee mentioned that was dangled like a carrott like never before pmsl, that would be a good one to know.
mac.

Barney,

Are you trying to put us of ? I know we have to put in hard work but how much !



Mac,

I eat quite alot of carrots but I`m still looking the one that counts.

Cheers,

mactheknife

I don't know about 35 or 36 factors. Working initially from the first five or six in the betting forecast (non-handicaps and handicaps respectively), there are two central factors in much of VDW's work - "ability" (or "class", VDW tended at times to use the terms inter-changeably)) and "form". The first was given to us all on a plate: divide the total WIN prize money by the number of races won. The second was not set out, and is what has to be worked for, and even then is not unproblematic (as VDW made clear in paragraph eight of his article of 26/1/1985).

Once one is able to isolate the "class/form" horse - in VDW's sense of the term, not as used more generally by some contributors to the thread - its a matter of further exploration to see whether it warrants support, or whether any other runner is "strong" enough to back, by applying the various cross-checks that VDW suggested in his letters/articles. (These cross checks are, again, largely given to us on a plate and essentially comprise what any serious form analyst would consider.)

Fell asleep looking through systematic betting last night often read last thing at night helps to put the sub-conscious to work, page 25 "it was then all three lined up for the old newton cup at haydock over 1m 4f where they finished, roushayd 1st, ile de chypre 2nd, vouchsafe 3rd" think vdw was playing with the text a little here in regards to what had gone before, thoughts anyone?.

mac.

fulham cheers for trying to help .

[This message was edited by mactheknife on June 04, 2002 at 10:26 PM.]

mac

whats the difference between those three and the others and how would you get them to finish in that order????

and how did he rate iyl de chypre with no class rating as good enough for second????


what does dropped in class really mean?

[This message was edited by Barney on June 04, 2002 at 11:09 PM.]

Barney, hoping to suss how to simulate those three factors into true odds of the three runners in practical terms he was sure the fav was a false one just like you were at goodwood the other day sorry i could not reply to you then but your post got me thinking, am i on the right track here?.
mac.

hi mac

i dont know what you mean

there are many false favourites for different reasons but there still may not be anything worth a bet in the race, sometimes we get lucky and there is.

the true odds of a horses chance are not always as the market states, but a lot of the time they are pricing up some of the right factors but lack detail in the analysis.

THATS PROBABLY DUE TO THE NUMBER OF RACES THEY HAVE TO DO, AND THEN I THINK THEY CONCENTRATE ON THE BIG RACES SAME AS US!

I THINK THATS WHY THEY DO BETTER IN NON HANDICAPS AND SMALL FIELDS, IT'S EASIER

morning all,

Barney vdw talks about ile de chypre & vouchsafe who dominated the market in front of roushayd were both out of "significantly" lower class & were going up "for this race" beyond what they had shown they could achieve , this is a pointer to b/f/c situation no doubt.

ile de chypre was 2nd rated with no class rating as such as he was racing from royal ascot where he had been "whacked up in class" in a handicap over 1m4f where he "made a good show" until he unseated "inside the final furlong".

Vouchsafe who had also improved in the epsom race was placed to win in "much" lower class l.t.o, what is interesting though is roushayd had all 3 factors line up on july 2nd & ile de chypre had 2 if im on the right lines.

mac.