hi bream,

Should think there are more than a few on this thread that could point you in the right direction regarding the battlement evaluation, if could m8 would help, but would only be guessing really & thats the last thing you need, you seem to be going about things the right way & as most have said already they have had a helping hand along the road , there`s lots of good stuff on here to learn from & ive been lucky enough in the past to correspond with someone who was both generous & forthcoming with his ideas on racing which were essentially vdw orientated but not in the pure sense of the mans works, hence my fascination but lack of overall understanding of the methods, im sure weight considerations play a big part in his methods but its not easy trying to figure out how best to go about it.

mac.

I owe you a very big thank you.

Yesterday, I made 4 investments.

The 3 I identified are still trying to find the winning post. Thankfully all 3 were small investments.

The winning bet was the Derby winner & yes it was totally down to your strong opinion on Friday evening. I had every intension of leaving the race alone but I broke one of my rules, ie - never follow anybody else`s opinion.

I`m pleased I did & thanks again.

*** please re-consider your decision to stay away from the thread. I will be honest & say that your pre-race evaluations teach me so much. Would you consider posting your pre-race evaluations AFTER RACING from time to time as it will no doubt help those like me who continue to struggle.
Royal Ascot is just around the corner & it would be wonderful to have your views (AFTER EACH DAYS EVENTS).

Cheers,

All i had my second vdw winner yesterday
HIGH CHAPERRAL it seems as said before when
theres enough money down the c/f horse wins.
the first one being KAZZIA. this is the first time ever i have had the OAKS and DERBY winner
in the same year. I ONLY HOPE IT CARRIES ON.

Michael.

Our paths haven't crossed for some time, but a grateful thanks for your well done message, Three Legs.

Determined - Glad to hear you backed the Derby winner and at SP hopefully.

Barney - I take it our chat one Sunday evening last month in the chat room has helped open a few hidden doorways in the form book. One word of caution though is beware of having too many bets. Sitting out a few winners is part of the process. Still, glad you are having so much success.

Just one thing to think about re The Derby and it's immense coverage in the press and on TV is this. The amount of so called 'experts' ie trainers,jockeys,tipsters,etc who are paid to give their opinion but got it wrong. Even those closest to the two principles seemed unsure, yet the facts in the formbook clearly showed that the winner had many plus points. Class,form and stamina and many other factors to boot. A few were mentioned in my post on Friday, but there were other points I could have mentioned. As just one example, trying relating how both horses performed relative to the markets in their past races.

hi guest,

that i feel is my next obstacle, when i didnt know temperament was easy now i can get a likely winner in every other race and lots are winning at all manner of prices. I DONT KNOW WHAT TO DO.

Hi Guest.

Good to hear from you again. Well, done with the Derby, I'm glad to see we both arrived at the correct answer. All be it by using different versions of vdw. I found the last sentence of your last post very enlightening. I gathered from some of your previous posts you place a large importance on that factor. I asked before, what importance can be put on that one factor? HW was an unlucky loser, and HS could have won his race on 3 legs (no pun intended). As you say the hype has a lot to do with who starts favourite, surely the quality of the money invested is more important than the volume. I placed my bet at the end of April, on the horse that had proved it could win on any surface, and would stay the distance. I thought the punters had seen sense by Saturday morning, I can't understand the logic that made HW favourite.
I wonder if you could give Bream and myself some guidance on Battlement. It is giving me a lot of problems as well.

Maggsy.

Dancing Brave may have been the best horse never to win a Derby. The problem is to win a Derby the horse must be able to run down hill at speed. He couldn't, he come down the hill like a pregnant crab. Finished like a train, and in the best tradition the jockey was the scapegoat.

I would like to thank the contributor's that have kept this thread going. My wife and son have printed off the postings, and I have been able to keep up to date while in hospital. My one disappointment has been the lack of response to the postings on weight. I thought JIB's posting was very good. I also wonder if vdw's views on weight have anything to do with a lot of the handicaps being governed from the bottom weights i.e for horses rated above 45, not from the top, horses rated 80 or less. Just a thought any comments?

Be Lucky

Missed you.

Very pleased to see you back. I hope you are well.

Well done with High Chaparral.

Cheers,

hi gents,

On the b/f/c front any thoughts on the table below its from a year or so back r/f by a pro supposedly.

s.p last time strike rate this time (%)

1-2 75.8%

1-2 to 20-21 54.55 %

evens to 11-8 42.08%

6-4 to 15-8 33.35%

2-1 to 7-2 23.63%

4-1 to 15-2 13.57%

8-1 to 15-1 6.74%

16-1 to 31-1 2.88%

32-1 to 63-1 0.97%

mac.

should have added in the article he makes mention of behrajan who was beaten at 8-13 64 days earlier & of course he was beaten again in todays race when odds on he then asks if this is a "coincidence"?.
mac.

[This message was edited by mactheknife on June 09, 2002 at 04:18 PM.]

" Tragus made a mess of things & weakened 12th in last race & was then pulled up before the 14th which tells its own story."

That isn`t the whole story as prior to that run Tragus had shown improving form just like Sunset Christo.

*** always allow a consistent horse one bad run ***. On that basis did VDW discount Tragus too quickly ?

How many out there would have taken the same view. I believe I would have done one of 2 things namely leave the race alone or back both SC and Tragus.

ANY COMMENTS,

Cheers,

Determined
Could the reason for the choice be something to do with the trainers methods,This is a shot in the dark as i have no form books to go by but VDW did seem to make a point about trainers methods surely this could be one of them,Hope this helps.
Michael.

I`ve no doubt trainer method`s are the `meat` behind VDW.

In this particular scenario maybe it is something as simple as the a fresh horse, ie - SC coming off a nice break against `T` who VDW may have considered as having a very hard race last time thus going off the boil.

**** I`d be interested how others would have viewed the race if Tragus hadn`t put in the one bad run last time.

In my opinion Tragus` form was at least the equal of SC.

Cheers,

Determined,

Nice to see you've had some reward lately for your hard work.

Regarding Tragus,to me VDW seemed to be quite ruthless in weeding out horses with flaws in their form.Always resist the immense power of the negative force, he said.My formbook says tragus was under pressure early on in the race he was pulled up in having been backed from 9/2 into 7/2 fav.Perhaps VDW thought he faced worse conditions today. This seems in direct contradiction to what he stated about forgiving consistent horses one bad run.I've only had a quick look at Tragus's form but on the lines along which I am researching I think I can see why he did. The big problem here of course is that I am doing this with hindsight and only a lot more study and trying it out on live examples will tell me if I'm on the right track.At my present level of knowlege I would almost certainly have left the race alone.As I say however I haven't had a chance to look in greater depth.

Move Off

I've spent a couple of hours with my head in the formbooks this afternoon and now realise that I have been looking at some aspects in far too shallow a way.If I am guilty of one thing in my research it is looking at things in a somewhat systematic way which doesn't work.Certainly some aspects seem to repeat themselves but as VDW said each race has different problems to solve and for the best results we have to be quite flexible in our approach.

Mac

I certainly agree with you that weight is an important aspect.My present line of thinking is that VDW with his enormous experience knew how horses should perform under the conditions the trainers placed them in.Any that failed to meet expectations were discarded.
I like your thinking regarding Roushayd.That is a way of looking at things that I would never have thought of.I haven't got a clue if you're on the right lines but I think with VDW we do have to look at things completely differently to what we are used to doing sometimes.

Cheers everyone

Hi,

The Tragus race was one of the races that convinced me that the other rating were the important ratings. These ratings show Sunset Christo well clear. He also rejects Fair View because it is not consistent at the moment, AND is not supported by the other data (ratings). VDW says look to see what the horse has done and who it beat. He had a liking for putting everything into a numerical format, I'm sure this is what the other ratings are. His view of the form expressed as a number. In the next example Kenlis, he once again doesn't use the consistency and ability ratings as explained. He makes Kenlis the horse, who is top on the other ratings. He states no bet because the ability ratings are too close, or is it because it is too close on one of the other sets of ratings?
I have stated before I think the ability rating is an after thought to stop people just taking the consistent horses at face value. I would also like to say this is not the only example were vdw has slightly modified the guide lines. I am sure Guest and others will have found examples were this has happened.

None of this is to say vdw doesn't work, or he wasn't honest. I think he, like the rest of us was trying to help, but at the same time not give all the answers away. I do think the only way to make this pay is to back good consistent horses with proven ability. Did vdw actually say allow a good horse one bad run? There were good reasons for Gaye Chance's bad run, but it was still a no bet situation. I do wonder if Tragus had fallen early and not been pulled up what the bet would have been. I think it would have been the same

Be Lucky

Mtoto,



nice to see you back hope you are fit and well!!

Mtoto,

The actual wording from the Golden Years reads (when rating for consistency)

“also use discretion in the case of a highly consistent horse that suddenly puts in, what seem at first, a bad one. It could have been put into a race where it had no chance which is not the same as it had blown its top”.

Looking at the form of Tragus again in race 2173 he blundered at the 12th and was pulled up at the 14th. This race was of lower class than his previous race where he jumped well. Thinking about it, this was his 5th race in 7 weeks and one could draw the conclusion that race 2173 was one to many and he had gone off the boil (hindsight).

If coming to that conclusion on the day of the race then yes SC was the one to be on.

With regards the ability rating versus the `other` ratings, I`m not in a position to comment in detail as I`ve only just started researching the old examples.

Cheers,

Yes I have had a few nice winners but unfortunately I keep having several `small investments` using my own methods which are not doing the business.

Also, because I am very uncomfortable backing short priced horses I have let approx` 10 - 12 winners (what I consider VDW) go begging over the past 2 months.

All rather frustrating but I`ll get there.

TEMPERAMENT,

Cheers,

Mtoto - Good to hear from you again, but sorry to hear you are not well. Get well soon. I'll try and make some constructive comments about Battlement in the near future.

Everyone - Yes I do place importance in past markets, though it isn't the missing answer. It is a fact though that horses who consistently perform well when the market expects them to, prove to be reliable betting fodder in the future given the right circumstances. The point I made about the 'experts' is something I have touched upon before and was demonstrated at the highest level yesterday whereby an acknowledged top trainer and jockey seemed unsure of which horse would perform better under the given circumstances. Aiden O'Brien is a trainer of the highest class as is Mick Kinane jockeywise, yet their closeness to the horses themselves seemingly prevented them from just looking in the form book and coming up with the answers that were there to see. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying form study is rocket science because it isn't, but I have come to learn that trainers and especially jockeys are too close to their charges to make an unbiased opinion. A lot of very good trainers don't even consider the opposition, but simply concentrate on getting their own horses fit and ready to run in a suitable situation that might produce a win. At the end of the day, training and riding racehorses is very different to consistently backing winners for profit. Just try following the tips given by any tv pundit,trainer or jockey.

Re Tragus, the point has been made that Tragus showed a significant downturn and coupled with topweight he was ruled out. Kenlis had the best form shown up by those missing factors that are not really missing at all, just thinly disguised. The same factors showed Sunset Cristo and Little Owl to have the best form along with Wild Gamble and Gaye Chance who was sensibly excused his failure in a top class handicap. Note his absence after that run and a similiar absence by Ekbalco who ran a strange race just prior to landing the Imperial Cup. Note also what Ekbalco had done in previous runs.

For an upto date example with similiar traits take a gander at Kelburne last Monday.

hi,

found guests explanation of why high chaparral was the one to be on very helpful, hope im on the right lines, noted there is consistency shown throughout his placement pattern at both 2 yrs & 3 yrs as well as the consistency shown numerically, could tie in with determindes thoughts on trainers, this horse has progressed & pleased the trainer & connections alike with his performances & if his odds in the racing post at doncaster were anything to go by has surpassed expectations on occasion although the betting market is not a perfect one, a progressive horse then with lots of class & promising stamina, hawk wing drew level but then his head went in the air as high chaparal piled it on, at least they know his distance limitations now.
mac.

Hi Mactheknife
I think the stats that you mentioned are
not taken from the previous race but are
the price the horse is in todays race.
I`ve ran previous sp`s through a database
and the strike rates are alot less than the
one`s you mention.
As for Hawk Wing not staying , ican`t agree.
If HS had not run for some reason Hawk Wing
would have won easily and no one would have
said he didn`t stay.He was just beaten by
a better horse on the day. nothing to do
with the distance.
His trainer said he stayed as well .
If he didn`t stay then neither did any other
horse apart from HS.



regards



Maggsy