The discrepancy in ability ratings between compilers for KATES CHARM quite obviously boils down to those who:

a) Calculate the ability rating using all races (62)
and
b) Calculate the ability rating using the specific racing code (hurdles) (82)

One method has MAJED in front and the other KATES CHARM.

I have a reasonably open mind on this subject but have to say that nowhere have I read any offering from VDW that suggested using only the specific race type. For that reason I usually use all races and had MAJED top rated on ability.

Looking back to this race then my thought processes were pretty much in line with Guest & Fulham. I had MAJED as the likely winner but not proven or value to warrant a bet.

Cheers

fulham

i'm not trying to be argumentative but i want a clear picture of the class rating procedure

if you ignore the two novice chase victories by kates charm and concentrate on the hurdles(the race in question) then the class rating is 82.

i have been told previously not to cross dress the race types.

is this correct???

Barney,

Unfortunately there is no right or wrong here just different interpretation.

However, I repeat what I said in my last post. To the best of my knowledge, VDW NEVER said to use only the specific race type, or if he did then I've missed it somewhere

Cheers

guest thanks for the direction to punchestown
it looks to me contender V pretender and the preparation for the distance shone through.

I have never considered to look at other countries races do they all follow the same rules??

o.k you lot give me some feedback, on this animal.

Guest.

To start how else would you describe a horse that twice comes to challenge with a double handful and throws it away? Quirky may by my word. what would you use? Which ever word would not change the FACT the horse hasn't given it's best at the end of the race.

Form is one performance against another. Two men play darts for a prize of £10, in the next game the stakes are raised to £50 (same players) The class of the players is the same, the amount of prize money can't change that. FACT prize money is not the only way to judge class, the doubt must be is it the best way.

Now some FACTS - Majed won a race with good prize money in a slow time, against horse that out of form or past their best. In doing so confirmed the form with the second, not giving any reason to suppose he had improved to any great extent. His best speed figure was gained against this horse in much lower class. None of the above gives any reason to suggest this is a true £23,000 grade B handicap more an illusion. His win before that was in a much weaker race based on prize money, so the last race is the important one to you for the purpose of forming YOUR opinion
Kates Charm had proved it could win a race of this class, by winning 2 races of better class in the past. In it's last race it proved it was back to it's best by improving it's speed figure to an all time best. Against far better opposition than Majed had ever meet. I watched that race, and KC was ridden in a way that made any chance of winning all most impossible. MY opinion. You have shown opinion becomes Fact after the event.

Prominent King's form wasn't evident by just assessing his recent form, you had to go further back to find his true worth. He had to beat a horse that had PROVED it had the class. Unlike Kates Charm.

As for hindering people from understanding vdw, I can't see that one. I use all the factors set out by vdw consistency, ability, class. The formula's may be different but the fundamentals are very much the same. Another difference is I am more than willing to help anyone that has proved they are interested and prepared to put in the work (in private) I also don't assume I have all the answers, and more than happy to listen to any logical theories.

Regards

I wondered whether Hedgehog might just have used hurdles wins for his calculation, but when I checked it I got 82, the same as Crock, not 89, but drew a different (and erroneous) conclusion.

In my view, VDW was offering advice at two different levels. First, through his examples such as Prominent King, Rifle Brigade and Roushayd, he was sharing his (highly skilled)knowledge of how really to read the Form Book. Second, he was showing us how various "shortcuts" can "narrow the field". This second level has led some to try to "systematise" VDW's work, which he certainly never intended.

Articles such as "Van Der Wheil Spells in All Out" and that of 13/4/85 lend themselves to the (incorrect) view that all that it necessary is to stay with the first five or six in the betting, identify the three or four "form" horses (by summing the last three placings) and calculate ability ratings. If a horse comes top on both ability and form, bingo you've got a bet.

In fact, this is far from true, as examples in those very articles (such as Canny Danny, 13/4/85) show. But, insofar as he offered a "shortcut" introduction to "narrowing the field", I think he always calculated ability ratings by reference to total win prize money (ie for a NH horse quite often bumper, hurdle and chase winnings) divided by total number of wins. On that basis, Majed's ability rating was higher than Katie's Charm.

BUT in his examples of "good" or "outstanding" bets, VDW often chose what might be referred to as the REAL class/form horses, not those that happened to have the highest crude ability rating and a low "form" rating. Prominent King and Rifle Brigade were both cases in point, neither being top rated on the overall ability rating in their respective races.

The Rifle Brigade example I have, until recently, always found impossible to understand, but with a nudge from Guest (for which truly heartfelt thanks) I now see it as having been a very good bet indeed. And in that instance I think VDW probably did something very similar to Hedgehog, ie looked at selected results, not the totality of results. I am here in what for me is relatively uncharted territory, but I am very hopeful that in certain cases - some 3yos on the flat, for example - that approach will produce a far greater level of understanding than the mere application of "the highest crude ability rating must be the class horse" approach, which was certainly NOT an axiom of VDW's.

Barney.
Clandestine
Had proved it could win races in this class, improved last run, runs best races after a lay off . Don't want to say to much as I am still learning, expect I got that one wrong as well!! Only surprise was that price, as for me the only danger was well out of form.

Crock

I think when you judge ability you can only take winning of the same discipline into account. Vdw didn't say test the water before you get in the bath. :-))

Regards

Hello All,

Crock - I'm currently at work stealing some time, so I don't have my calculations at hand but I'm happy to accept that memory has yet again failed me and I posted the wrong figure. Thanks you for correcting me.

Fulham - Thanks for the kind words.

This still leaves the question open. Has anybody done race type specific ability ratings before? And if so would you consider them an improvement on the basic ability rating? I've had Fulham's opinion, would anyone else like to comment?

All the best
hedgehog

Further to the Kates Charm debate and in response to Mtotos "facts" here are some more facts , not opinions.

Kates Charm had not won a hcap of that class with that sort of weight - fact.

The 15 grand hurdle she won at Ascot was a conditions race where she was recieving weight - fact.

Using Raceforms split second which has only been in the present format for this season , Kates Charm achieved a speed figure of 114 last time at Ascot in a conditions event won by top class Baracouda. Majed achieved 100 last time but his best rating had been 116. Using Topspeeds ratings Kates Charm gained 119 last time and her best over hurdles had been 130 at Aintree behind Crazy Horse. Majed was rated 120 last time and his best had been 125 at Exeter. As stated before hcap ratings and even speed ratings are based on someones opinion. The ability and class ratings are based on prizemoney levels and whilst they are not foolproof , the fact remains that the better horses will always win the better races where the prizemoney is generally higher. VDW clearly stated in one letter that can be found in the Golden Years that the rating should be calculated by dividing all win money from all NH races. On the flat he suggested using in addition a merit rating based on unadjusted speed figures , especially for 2 and 3 yos.

Quite how Majed beat an out of form horse last time needs some explaination I think. According to the form book Legal Lunch had won 2 races including his last race before finishing 2nd to Majed at Chepstow.

As to Mtotos comments about Prominent King , I'm not sure what he is getting at. I know full well the true worth of Prominent Kings form prior to landing the race and why Beacon Light was a duff favourite. I say this , not to blow my own trumpet , but because you are assuming I am looking for some answers. I have already stated I am not going to broadcast the results of much hard work and study for the benefit of all and sundry , though I also appreciate that many punters will always ignore the truth no matter how hard you tap them on the shoulder.

I'm glad others such as Fulham have found some of what I have imparted as helpful. Yesterdays big race in Ireland showed once again a false favourite though in a different way to Beacon Light. Whilst watching Florida Pearls reappearance last time I overheard many a punter write him off with comments such as "he's gone" "he's too old". Their opinion but based on the way the vast majority view horseracing. Looking at the factual evidence , it's interesting to note how he ran in the same Down Royal race last season prior to a shd defeat in the John Durkan by Native Upmanship. I would wager many who were on at Down Royal were on Sackville yesterday. That last comment is my opinion based on facts.

To conclude all I would say is I am happy to listen to logic when it is based on facts not fiction. Once I had checked out the basics of VDWs methods and understood the reasoning I was able to confirm that a high success rate is there to be had when you know what to look for.

I think all a lot of the comments on this thread show is how much individual interpretation can be brought to bear within VDW methodology.

Mtoto, my thoughts on MAJED's form prior to the race were in complete contrast to yours. You rightly state that the time of MAJED's previous race in the Tote Silver Trophy was nothing special but the form shows MAJED winning unchallenged, clear from about 6 out and never had to be extended to win the race. In a race that pans out as easy as this then I would not always expect to see a fast time, after all MAJED did not need to run one! I interpreted this race (wrongly) as MAJED still being on the upgrade with an unknown amount still to come (a no bet race). On this occasion, I bow to your superior judgement

As far as calculating ability ratings only on the specific race type then I'm not sure I agree. If GALILEO comes out and wins a £2000 novice hurdle first time up would you say he has LESS ability than a horse that has won 1 out of 10 novice hurdles, albeit a £3000 race? On this occasion KATES CHARM gives a boost to just using the same race type but I have many, many examples of the situation being reversed. As I said earlier, I have no strong feelings on this matter but would like to see some further research if anybody has any.

Cheers

i will keep getting it wrong just please keep putting me right.I will get there in the end and some one else may benefit also.

with regard to the letters and articles that we keep hearing about can anyone put them in a chronological order for me and "bated breath" perhaps print one to look at??

Barney

Nearly everything has been brought together in two booklets edited by Tony Peach. The first is entitled "The Golden Years of Van Der Wheil", the second "Ultimate Wheil of Fortune". Both are chronologically arranged, and are about £10 apiece, available from Browzers Books and, no doubt, elsewhere. (You can order from Browzers by email - www.browzers.co.uk.)

Perhaps the main VDW article not in the two booklets is that in which he gives the oft mentioned Roushayd example. That is available in (at least) two booklets - "Systematic Betting", by VDW, which I'm told Raceform are reprinting, and "Racing in My System", by T Peach, which is available from Browzers.

Guest.

Some answers to your statements. I agree with your facts re Kates Charm except you don't point out that she only ever carried that sort of weight twice before. In one of these races she recorded one of her best ever speed figures. In the Ascot race she beat horses that where too good even to enter in the race in question. You say the best horses run in the best races, I agree. In this case the proven horse won against one who's form on the day was an illusion.

Why an illusion. Majed won in a slow time, a lot slower than could be expected when he had proved he was capable of more. Crock mentioned he didn't need to go any quicker, agreed but the second horse only confirmed the form was not that hot. Now the opinion bit, don't know how much proof I would need to make it a fact. Good horses run faster longer, at a better pace than poor horses. Majed scored his best time against much weaker horses. He was comfortable for a long time and went faster because he was relaxed never going faster than he wanted too. Reading the form of the Chepstow race, I concluded these slightly better horses gave him a harder race, and if they took it out of him, what would good horses do? After all the comfortably in the race report was only the race readers opinion, and the second horse is confirming he hasn't improved. That brings us to the speed figures you quoted KC 114 in a group race last time out and 116 in a class D 3 runs ago. Forget every thing else, except these are best ever times, if someone showed you those figures which one would you expect to win?

Now a question, Why do you think that fact that Beacon Light had gone over made any difference to the trainers exception of winning the race. There was no way he could know BL was on the down turn when he made the entry. So to me he had to be happy he could beat a fit, in top form BL. The question must be how did he know? I understand vdw's logic, why he thought BL had gone over. Even if I am still not happy he was right in this case, but the trainer thought it didn't matter. So who am I to worry?

Lastly the dependence on speed figures is bought about by my reading and hopefully understanding of vdw. It was he that showed me speed figures are important by using them in at least 2 of his methods. I object when then people tell me I'm wrong, when I am applying all the same elements to assessing a race. Just because I do it differently to them doesn't make them right, and me wrong.

Regards

[This message was edited by Mtoto on December 11, 2001 at 12:45 AM.]

Dear Mtoto,
I also object when people tell me I am wrong about speed figs (well we both know differently any how). I have taken the time and effort to post that Novice hurdle table of figures (which Gummy has kindly printed in a proper format) and although there are a few who have said thanks very much, there are also a few who think it means nothing. I would willingly lay any bet on any horse that is TS4 or worst. (please form an orderly queue!) What it is Mtoto (and I know you already know) is that a lot of people cannot be bothered to do any research whatsoever and just assume they know best.
In the meantime would you kindly reply to my last e-mail, although it's too late for the horse now, I would be interested in your reply. In the meantime yes I agree KALA SUNRISE was a must bet, more later,
Yours
Swish

Mtoto – Thanks for your response , perhaps I may retort.

At the end of the day your selection , however you found it , won. I made no selection in the race only the observation that Majed was the class/form horse. If every class/form horse won then there would be no need to check the other factors , but of course not every class/form horse does win , far from it in fact.

There are many ways to come out on top , something VDW always agreed with , and if your method is giving you 80% plus then all power to you. My concern is that others who are still trying to learn the VDW methods will be confused by misinterpretations. VDW used speed figures as a guide in a few of his methods , primarily the Roushayd exercise which again has been very misunderstood by the majority. The idea that all you have to do is look for 3 improved speed figures when raised in class and then back the animal if dropped in class next time is way short of the full story. Has anyone else actually gone through all the races VDW mentioned in that Roushayd example ? He left several identified probables alone , most of which had more going for them than Kates Charm did before 2.00 on Saturday. He still was using his ability rating as a guide in the examples , again contrary to what the majority think. He also said at some point that as a guide any good rating will do and it wise to use 2 sets compiled along different lines to confirm findings. The reason I quoted the topspeed and split second figures was to show the degree of disparity. Split Second , which as I said has only been on the current scale for about a year so how they can be “best ever” figures is beyond me , had KC running 14pts better than Majed last time , but Topspeed goes completely the other way having Majed 1lb better than KC last time. The ability figures had Majed top on 76 and KC third rated on 63 , but of course the race was a handicap. Conclusion – treat ratings as a guide only.

From your comments on Prominent Kings race , you seem to be implying Beacon Lights slight downturn in his split second speed figure signalled he was over the top. There were no figures for Prominent King or any other Irish races so why would VDW have been using an incomplete picture , especially when he later stated that he used 2 methods to rate horses that he devised himself. Even so , let’s have a look at Beacon Lights runs that season prior to the Erin Foods race.

First run on 21st Oct 1977 at Newbury over 2m ½ f in a conditions hurdle with 11-9 winning by 2 lengths gaining a SF of 122. Then went to Sandown Dec 3rd up in class for a Handicap hurdle class 70 over 2m carrying 12-1 going down by 14 lengths in 6th with a SF of 81 , not so good then. 23 days later he went up in class 85 at Kempton for The Christmas Hurdle conditions event over 2m winning with 11-10 by 2 lengths with a SF 103. Then out again at Windsor on Jan 2nd to take the class 43 New Years Day Hurdle over 2m with 12-1 by 2 lengths and SF 109. Then out on Feb 4th at Sandown class 39 where he was the class/form horse over 2m with 12-2 but despite leading some way from home was beaten a length by Sea Pigeon (11-12) gaining a SF 104. Those who may not remember or have the form books may be saying “where’s the disgrace in being beaten by the great Sea Pigeon?” . Well he hadn’t attained the dizzy heights of Champion hurdler at that stage. Beacon Light was the class/form horse on his last 2 runs and failed on the latter occasion , Prominent King was only the class/form horse in the Erin Foods , but was 2nd on class/form in his last run when 2nd to Drumgora.

Finally , there were benchmarks VDW said we should achieve if using his methods and reading form correctly. Surely if those benchmarks are not being reached then something is going wrong somewhere. Personally I didn’t just take VDWs word for it , I investigated his claims and examples and concluded that there was indeed a brilliant winner finding tool within his methods. This didn’t happen overnight , but with the wealth of info available today it certainly speeds things up a fair bit.
Mtoto – Thanks for your response , perhaps I may retort.

At the end of the day your selection , however you found it , won. I made no selection in the race only the observation that Majed was the class/form horse. If every class/form horse won then there would be no need to check the other factors , but of course not every class/form horse does win , far from it in fact.

There are many ways to come out on top , something VDW always agreed with , and if your method is giving you 80% plus then all power to you. My concern is that others who are still trying to learn the VDW methods will be confused by misinterpretations. VDW used speed figures as a guide in a few of his methods , primarily the Roushayd exercise which again has been very misunderstood by the majority. The idea that all you have to do is look for 3 improved speed figures when raised in class and then back the animal if dropped in class next time is way short of the full story. Has anyone else actually gone through all the races VDW mentioned in that Roushayd example ? He left several identified probables alone , most of which had more going for them than Kates Charm did before 2.00 on Saturday. He still was using his ability rating as a guide in the examples , again contrary to what the majority think. He also said at some point that as a guide any good rating will do and it wise to use 2 sets compiled along different lines to confirm findings. The reason I quoted the topspeed and split second figures was to show the degree of disparity. Split Second , which as I said has only been on the current scale for about a year so how they can be “best ever” figures is beyond me , had KC running 14pts better than Majed last time , but Topspeed goes completely the other way having Majed 1lb better than KC last time. The ability figures had Majed top on 76 and KC third rated on 63 , but of course the race was a handicap. Conclusion – treat ratings as a guide only.

From your comments on Prominent Kings race , you seem to be implying Beacon Lights slight downturn in his split second speed figure signalled he was over the top. There were no figures for Prominent King or any other Irish races so why would VDW have been using an incomplete picture , especially when he later stated that he used 2 methods to rate horses that he devised himself. Even so , let’s have a look at Beacon Lights runs that season prior to the Erin Foods race.

First run on 21st Oct 1977 at Newbury over 2m ½ f in a conditions hurdle with 11-9 winning by 2 lengths gaining a SF of 122. Then went to Sandown Dec 3rd up in class for a Handicap hurdle class 70 over 2m carrying 12-1 going down by 14 lengths in 6th with a SF of 81 , not so good then. 23 days later he went up in class 85 at Kempton for The Christmas Hurdle conditions event over 2m winning with 11-10 by 2 lengths with a SF 103. Then out again at Windsor on Jan 2nd to take the class 43 New Years Day Hurdle over 2m with 12-1 by 2 lengths and SF 109. Then out on Feb 4th at Sandown class 39 where he was the class/form horse over 2m with 12-2 but despite leading some way from home was beaten a length by Sea Pigeon (11-12) gaining a SF 104. Those who may not remember or have the form books may be saying “where’s the disgrace in being beaten by the great Sea Pigeon?” . Well he hadn’t attained the dizzy heights of Champion hurdler at that stage. Beacon Light was the class/form horse on his last 2 runs and failed on the latter occasion , Prominent King was only the class/form horse in the Erin Foods , but was 2nd on class/form in his last run when 2nd to Drumgora. There are many more factors to point out , but they are for others to work at.

Finally , there were benchmarks VDW said we should achieve if using his methods and reading form correctly. Surely if those benchmarks are not being reached then something is going wrong somewhere. Personally I didn’t just take VDWs word for it , I investigated his claims and examples and concluded that there was indeed a brilliant winner finding tool within his methods. This didn’t happen overnight , but with the wealth of info available today it certainly speeds things up a fair bit.

Just in case you thought I was trying to make my points twice , there was a case of doubling pasting on my last post.

Fulham and Crock

I am ashamed to admit I've only just noticed your postings, I do have a tendency to focus on one thing at a time. They are both thought provoking so I will attempt to give an answer to both.

Fulham

I agree with every thing you say about the Prominent King and Rifle Brigade examples, neither are straight forward to understand. You have to delve beneath the obvious in both. One thought does cross my mind, if vdw submitted these examples now. Would Guest be jumping up and down saying you have that wrong? As neither conform to the set plan that was described in later articles. It makes one wonder if the rules where changed slightly to help the people that where having trouble understanding the real meaning of form. Mr Hall wrote in and said he had cracked it, and we never heard from him again. That is what I would expect from someone that really knew the answers. Before anyone says why are we hearing from you, I have never said I have all the answers. I am willing to listen to people like you and hopefully learn!!

Crock

Your example of Galileo, if he wins 2 more novice races bringing his win prize money to £6000 will you be rushing in to back him in the Champion Hurdle? :-)) I do understand what you are saying, but why the hurry? If we are not gambling why not wait untill the horse has proved it's self. I'm sure you can give me examples where it has been profitable to cross codes. I can also give you as many examples where it was not. Why inflate or decrease a horse proven ability in this way, I thought we where looking at facts.

Regards

Guest.

Sorry I posted my pre typed post before I had read your last post. On reading it can I then take it vdw did change the criteria for judging the class/form horse? I can't see how Prominent King and Majed can both be classified as class/form horses. They are very different, PK failing markedly in the ability rating, as given in later articles. I also find it very surprising vdw (it is said he wrote the book) went into so much detail, failed to mention the ability rating.

That aside I must thank you for filling in the missing pieces re the Prominent King race. It only goes to show there can be 2 logical answers using different methods, coming up with the same (right) answer.

I used the speed figures you quoted, only to try and prove a point. I don't use either sets of figures because I think there are flaws in both. I compiled my own figures going back 5 years, these are the only figures I use. I am happy that KC's last figure was the best ever achieved, I am also happy her last 3 figures (hurdles only) were better than anything Majed had achieved in his last 3 runs. I have explained why I wasn't worried about the one figure that appeared to give him a chance

As I said before because we work in different ways why does that make one right and the other wrong? If we talked instead of arguing is it not possible WE both could learn something new?

Regards

I have a question

if we agree that vdw said only consider races for betting at class 'c' and above, would it be more prudent to only consider races above this grade when considering the real class rating??

lots of small wins at low class events can and does seem to misrepresent the class figure when considered in its basic form, but when the step up is eventually made thats when the class starts to show.It seems to me that untill then they are pretenders.

I am assuming that youve probably heard it before but its a new thought to me.