statajack,

i never looked at that race but after your post had a good look at it and your right.I was refering to the salisbury hill.yours was the only horse with any worthwhile form at the distance.decoy had no chance did it? It suprises me where they can be found.Its all about having time to look,i wish i didnt work.

chookie heaton

very similar to the ascot hill!

Firstly, Well done Determined for having a go and selecting the winner.

I'm pleased the race went as I expected with Chookie Heiton winning or I'd have been left with a little egg on my face here (although I didn't bet for reasons I'll go into later)

I put up this race because I thought it would demonstrate two things that I think VDW highlighted in his many examples.

1) Horses moving up in trip with penalties are rarely good propositions (Proud Boast's earlier 6f win coming on a much easier track at York).

2) Horses who have been competing in 'so called' better class Group and Listed races without success are rarely good propositions. I say 'so called' because many of these races are of course worth less in monetary terms than most of the good class 'B' handicaps.

However, the other reason I put up this race was to see if any of the 'experts' would comment on the TRIP.

In all the examples VDW gave us, I can't recall him ever using a sprint race to demonstrate. This fits in with my own experience whilst trying to come to terms with the methods. Records show me that I can rarely attain the strike rate with sprints that I can in races of 1 mile+. I suspect this is because of the variables of the draw and the fact that 'luck in running' seems to play a bigger part.

Does anybody else find VDW's lack of sprint race selections significant.

Cheers

Where does it say VDW "died in a parisien bedsit somewhen pre 1983"? Did you actually read this somewhere or only think you did?
Could it be that you are so used to double dutch you can't understand English any more?

Jimmy,
" ...sharing all the gory details of how vdw was warned off for 4 years in 1964 culminating in the great man drinking himself into an early grave and ending his days in a run down bedsit in paris eeking out a meagre living on the back of his books."
Maybe I'm wrong and he drank himself into a late grave instead? I know which one I'd prefer.
regards,

what evidence do you have that peach and vdw were in fact corresponding as late as 95 apart from his say so.not surprising really given the fact that peach has carved out a nice little earner churning out old vdw articles dreesed up as new ideas.gives him just that little bit more credability dont you think.

wether or not b.c's articles did have any foundation or were just healthy competition to a rival charleton what interests me is the whole 64 episode where a certain eric and michael hawthorn were the subject of a lenthy investigation by the racing authorities after race fixing allegations were laid against them.this resulted in the pair being warned off.michael returned to his native poland soon after and no more was heard of him.eric on the other hand remained in the country resurfacing as no other than edward van der wheil racing tipster cum author.it is rumoured that in 73 a mr edward van der wheil appeared before hounslow magistrates court charged with attempting to obtain a pecunary advantage,namely failure to pay an outstanding hotel bill in eastbourne.from the limited knowledge i have of the legal system i gather that a warrent had been issued some weeks proir to the eastbourne incident relating to the dissaparence of funds from the desarr racing syndicate set up by vdw in london the previous year.

whatever the old rogue did get up to he at least gave us all something to enjoy and debate for years to come,whatever his motives.
i would not buy a used car from him though or make him treasurer of the christmas club fund at work.

From the above quote I still don't see where it says he died pre '83.

If memory serves me correct wasnt there something strange about the communications that were made ....something about a third party or a relative or something....I cant remember now I will have to see if I can find them.
Regards......

BRICK

it wouldn't surprise me if it wasn't michael his brother

???

max

you say he resurfaced has this info been obtained from the public records office?

rumured to have been charged?was he found guilty as this also would be a matter of fact and public record.

i can only tell you what i know,i am not prepared to speculate on events that i do not know the outcome of.wether or not he was found guilty i do not know,i have shared with you all i know.

i am not bamber gascoigne.

Whilst Max didn't specifically quote a date for this supposed death episode, he did say when the articles were advertised so unless this Connerchie customer had the gift of second sight, he must have been implying his subject was dead.

To be frank, it surely seems more likely that the Polish brother called Edward decided to cash in on VDWs reputation to try and pay his way. He sounds like a real chancer and unlikely to have spent his time writing to Sports Forum if there was little in it for him. It's all very tenious stuff though. What is probably closer to the truth is that VDW was a known pro within a tight circle of racing associates. At the end of the day it matters little really, because his methods do work to this day.

Am I right in thinking that your saying that the Polish brother Edward was not the real VDW but was impersonating him ???
Regards.......

BRICK

Mind you it then starts to get complicated doesnt it because then in 1995 Michael was impersonating Edward who was impersonating VDW who might not have been the VDW who wrote the articles / books but just a well known name in racing circles.

It makes you wonder

BRICK

What has Bamber Gasgoigne got to do with it?

the missing link perhaps?

I am not so sure that Decoy could have been discarded so readily.It is mho that if Decoy could not be taken, then she could not be opposed either,unless you are prepared to operate at a higher risk rate than vdw was prepared to do.Unless of course you Dutched,difficult at the prices.
There were a number of factors present,that meant Decoy had to be a serious contender.

Crock,

Sorry, you didn't get a better response to your posting today. The thread seems to have been taken over, by the doubters. Funny they seem more interested in unfounded rumours.

The race today had for me, some of the flaws in the ability and consistency ratings. With Proud Boast she was awarded a 10, for being beaten just over 3 lengths, when 12th of 17. By the same token she has a better ability rating than Chookie Heiton.The purpose of this rating is to gauge which horse is the best. I can see no way she has proved she is a better horse than CH. CH has beaten better horses, has a better win strike rate, and has consistently run in better races. Barney, I mention this as an example of why I think the vdw formulas can be improved on.

I made Patsy's Double the c/form horse, but he was rejected because of the ground. I made CH the most probable winner.

Also if a few of you look at the unadjusted s/f's of these 2 horses, I think you may be surprised how little difference weight makes.

Crock raised a good question, re the distance of this race. I have also noticed there are only a few 2 year olds examples, Although vdw says if the horse has less than 3 runs you repeat the last placing to give a figure. I can't find any examples of this procedure producing a bet, in any of his examples. That's not to say there aren't any, I may have just missed them. Or are they only used to stop other horses qualifying? Wonder if Guest has any thoughts on this?

Be Lucky

Crock,

I did back CH at the availible 9/4.

I didn`t respond to your question regarding sprint distances deciding to leave it to those more versed.
I note that Jock Bingham evaluated several sprint races in one of his books.

No 2yo races however.

Cheers,

hi mtoto,

i also had pd c/f and ch 2nd.

the point you made re ability rating is a valid one and i looked at its four length 12th.If that had been a four length sixth it would have become the c/f horse.On the other hand that race shows its limit of ability.

i am almost sure that vdw did say that these placings should not be taken at face value as there was a world of difference between a fast finishing eighth and a last place sixth beaten out of sight, but i am sure you already know this.

iknow that you asked guest about 2yr olds but i have an opinion, I expect its much the same reason as to concentrate on chases rather than novice hurdles.Its not that they cant be found but just that their progress can be unpredictable and that the depth of their capability not fully plummed.