Guest

I hope we have not heard the last of you. You are too intelligent not to be able to talk more about vdw without giving away to much. You also didn't answer my question about the possibility of vdw seeing the same flaw as myself in the form of Majed. As I said before if this example was forwarded by vdw, would you say, wrong, it doesn't fit with how I understand it. More importantly would he.

Fulham said he had been helped by you in the Rifle Brigade example. I don't know what helped him. Maybe a little piece of the puzzle that fell in place for him. I can't see how that helped all in sundry. If we talk, a little piece may fall in place for some others, but it will only mean something to the few that are trying to learn. So how about it Guest, Fulham, Bensam, (you obviously have a lot of knowledge) Crock, Hedgehog,Swish, and anyone else. Keep the thread going and WE MAY ALL LEARN SOMETHING. If it's not a system, what have we got to lose?

Regards

Hi Mtoto

I'll tell you what fell into place for me re Rifle Brigade from one of Guest's postings.

One of the problems I had had with the Rifle Brigade race was that it was RB's first run of the season, over a distance 4f more than he had tackled before. Guest pointed out that, if a horse had sufficient margin of superiority, the distance wouldn't be a problem, and inferred that nor would not be being at peak fitness.

That led me to explore how Rifle Brigade, with an overall VDW ability rating of 7, could be viewed as sufficiently superior to Alaskan Prince (ability rating 21) and King Pearl (ability rating 23) to warrant Guest's comment. Another hour or two with the 1977 Form Book and the answer was clear.

I must say that revisiting these old VDW examples in, I like to think, much greater depth than when I looked at them in the past, is proving very worthwhile. Not only because of the insights one gets on how trainers operate, but also because of what one learns about how VDW judged risk. I don't think ANY selection I've studied recently has been without has been without superficially plausible risk - Beacon Light, for example, SEEMED superficially to be clearly better than Prominent King in the Erin, and Rifle Brigade's lack of a run and proven ability over the distance seemed superficially to be disqualifying factors. But what I've found, with Guest's help in the Rifle Brigade race, is how to push on beyond those seemingly plausible risk factors which could easily have led to the conclusion "no bet", and to work out how, ON THE FACTS IN THE FORM BOOK, VDW was able to regard them as very much less of a risk than superficially they appeared to be.

Perhaps I could offer a further example, from a race I don't think has yet been discussed here - the 1978 Greenham, won by Derrylin which, like Rifle Brigade, VDW described as an "outstanding" bet.

In his race before the Greenham, on 1/4/78, Derrylin beat Newski a neck at level weight, the same terms on which the two contested the Greenham a fortnight later. How could VDW be sure that Newski wouldn't progress more than Derrylin for that run, and overturn such a very small margin? (Especially as there was no suggestion that Derrylin won on 1/4/78 "comfortably", and as Newski raced much less often as a 2yo than Derrylin he could perhaps be viewed as much less exposed.)

The answer is, of course, that VDW could not be ABSOLUTELY sure that Newski wouldn't be able to turn the tables on Derrylin, for he never claimed to be infallible (eg over Broadsword). However, I believe that there is clear evidence in the Form Book that led VDW to be able to regard the probability of a reversal as so small as to make the bet an "outstanding" one.

Not, of course, that Newski was the only problematic feature of the Greenham!

Cheers.

Hello All,
I have a question, which I have asked before, its about LTO CLass.

If memory serves VDW used LTO CLass as a rating in "Betting the VDW Way". Also the Roushayd example shows a class drop. I've used LTO class in the past but it fails to catch the up and coming horses. What is the significance of LTO Class?

All the best
hedgehog

Mtoto - Just to address a few of your questions , I have the following responses.

The class/form horse will not win every race it can be isolated in. What VDW said was that to continually go against it would push the odds away from you. It is up to punters as to if they accept his definition of class and form for that matter. I have seen it suggested that ORs would prove more reliable than prizemoney these days , but logically I don't see how. The official handicapper is offering nothing more than private handicappers other than his opinion. A short interview on Channel 4 at Cheltenham on Friday regarding the cross country chase would have shown just how much his opinion comes into it. Prizemoney in the main does prove a useful guide because when possible the better horses will always go for the better money. Yes there are a few races with very restrictive conditions that offer a big pot for the lesser animal, but as this is not a system, but basically a balancing act between class & form , any discrepencies will be highlighted and dealt with in the evaluation process. What I can offer in answer to your Majed question is that I am sure , as night follows day , that VDW would have seen Majed as the class/form horse in that race.

You seem a bit unsure as to how Fulham found anything of use in what I said about Rifle Brigade. As far as I can tell , he has gone away and studied the form involved in that race in depth and I congratulate him for doing so and finding some new points. In a way , a lot of VDWs ideas were based on trends and research. Some of these trends appear to go directly against the crowd and it is in this area that success is forthcoming when the various trends and facts are identified and understood. There are inumerable ways to find a winning edge and many can be cross referenced to confirm findings.

Finally , it has again emerged that far too many are prepared to sit on the sidelines waiting to jump on board the bandwagon once all has been revealed. Again , I must restate that all will not be revealed because anyone who has understood the finer workings of the VDW methods comes to realise the true worth of them. Anyone seeing fit to write a book or manual on them obviously does not understand how to implement the ideas else why the need to seek more profit ? The same question goes to all those expensive tipsters out there. The motivation has to be greed surely? It can't just be for egotistical purposes.

At least Mtoto , you have engaged in debate and layed your ideas on the line. Judging by the number of hits on the thread , there are plenty out there interested but unwilling to do the same.

To Fulham and others of a similiar stance , keep on working and researching VDWs selections and writings. There was much between the lines and I could spend all day citing examples from his quotes. Sometimes his pointers were brilliantly disquised but you'll only find them if you read with an inquiring mind.

A new year approaches and it's a good opportunity to take stock and ask some serious questions. If it all amounts to a guessing game then you are missing some vital factors.

In any event I wish you all an enjoyable christmas and a fruitful new year.

Mtoto

An after-thought to my previous post, stimulated by Guest's latest.

If one takes VDW's work seriously, (and I've only recently realised what seriously means in this context), it seems to me that the only way to proceed is to assume that, with sufficient work and understanding, all his examples will make sense. That, at least, is the way I'm proceeding. It may, of course, be the case that (as with the Rifle Brigade example) it will take a hint from Guest or someone else who has already travelled that path before the penny drops in any particular example, but that they all have pennies there to drop (with appropriate effort) is something about which I am in no doubt

Further, if I'm right, it is now quite clear to me that the hope that someone will "reveal all" is not just unrealistic but, more importantly, impossible. Unless I'm completely mis-reading the situation, there is no way in which someone can be "trained" to successfully apply VDW's approaches. Rather, my belief (and hope!) is that, by the personal poring through of the examples (and, of course, the articles themselves) the possibility exists of getting an education rather than a training, so that one will be much better fitted to tackle current races, recognising each as an occasion for research rather than the application of a few easily-learnt rules.

Anyway, that's how I see things at present, and its an attractive prospect!

I think that you are being a little unfair to people who,as you see it,are sitting on the sidelines.

Not everyone has access to the races and form books of which mention is often made.

Although i can fully understand why current races are not discussed.

I am currently awaiting delivery of my own vdw library and hope that these, with your help, will help to intensify the light that you have already shone on the dark mysterious world of horse racing.

Perhaps then i will grow to love and understand
prominent king, rifle brigade and little owl.

Guest.

Pleased to hear from you again. I do agree about the people that have written books on the subject. For that reason I have never read them, and for that matter I take Tony Peach with a pinch of salt, I wonder if the original letters have been "doctored" to make them more "interesting" for the general public. This I will never know, there has been talk about copies of the original letters. After seeing them, they are just someone's thoughts on what the important elements where MEANT to say.

I understand what you are saying about the official handicappers opinion, but don't agree with you when you say his opinion is not worth more than any other private handicappers. I went to a lecture given by Mr Smith on handicapping, he is a very knowledgeable man. When it comes to judging the worth of a horse I would be more inclined to except his view, than a trainer with his rose tinted glasses.

One statement you made, made a lot of sense to me. After studying a few of vdw's examples he to me, was looking for value. They all seem to have a live danger in the race, but could they (the danger) be beaten? After much delving through the form book, and applying a liberal helping of logic, the answer in most cases was yes. It can never be proved but I will always wonder about Majed.

Fulham.

On reading Guest's posting on RB again, the only thing I can see is the reference to a champion miler taking on a lesser horse over a longer distance. RB may have been a lot of things but a champion he was not. Consistent yes, proven no, to back this horse would take an act of faith. There is nothing in the form book to justify backing him. The only other reason could be a trainer trend, but even the best of them have only about a 20% strike rate. Trainer trend, by it's self is not enough to make this a good bet. I wish you luck if you are going to try and solve all the examples, you will need all the form books for the relevant years and the previous years.

Hedgehog

To me the class of the last race is only relevant if the horse ran a good race. The fact a horse ran in a classier race last time out by it's self proves nothing. Trainers run horses in races for a lot of reasons, how many horses run in the Derby with no chance. They are there to satisfy the owner's ego. If a horse is dropped in class after a good run, in theory it should be able to reproduce that form in an easier race. The race should be easier because the competition is weaker. It will be if you use grades as well as penalty values to judge the class of a race.

I would like to wish Gummy and ALL of the members of this board a happy Christmas and an even better new year.

Hello Mtoto,

Thank you for the response.

I was wondering if VDW used the Class of a previous race as a measure of the opposition the horse faced in that race. Better horses run in the better races.

This would then link with comments made in this forum about the odds a horse had. An odds on horse in a lower class race must not have raced against much opposition.

Is this sensible reasoning?

All the best
hedgehog

Hi Mtoto,

Yes, but clearly Guest wasn't intending to be taken literally. I took it as a hint that where, under certain conditions, horse A has proved himself to be palpably superior to horses B, C, D etc, he can confidently be expected to confirm that superiority under APPROPRIATE different conditions. Had the Rifle Brigade race been over 6f, rather than 1.5m, for example, I doubt that VDW would have seen him as an "outstanding" bet, given King Pearl's performances over that distance.

I think the trainer issue is relevant, too. If you study Hindley's record, it is apparent that he was a dab hand at getting a 3yo ready to win first time out in the early weeks of the season with, as far as I can establish, a markedly higher strike rate in that regard than even the best current trainer.

I'm sure VDW didn't select Rifle Brigade solely because of the trainer's characteristics. In my view, he was also clearly the real class/form horse. But I don't doubt that VDW would have known about the trainer's characteristics and his selection would surely have been even more confidently made with that knowledge.

The official handicapper's opinion is obviously more important than any other ratings used in racing as it goes towards dictating the outcome of over half the races run in this country. The marks themselves are important in vdw's calculations either directly or indirectly as can be seen in the Canny Danny example vdw made much play about, however, it would appear that he relied soley on prize money to measure class.

Although I do not know all there is to know about vdw's methods, I can assuredly state that it is possible to attain at least an 80% strike rate and that's without using multiple betting. Last month I had a run of 10 winners at all manner of prices, something I would never have dreamt of before being aquainted with the relevant factors needed to use the methods successfully.

Once those learning have found these requisite factors, the next hurdle to overcome is applying them to each qualifying race, which have their own unique problems to solve. From what I have experienced, not many grasp what others, who, it has to be said, have gone out of there way to try and put across. I don't know what the reason is for failure but this, in my opinion, is the only saving grace that the methods are still worth anything today.

In the main I agree with Guest's comments with regard to those jumping on the bandwagon and it is difficult to see how you can compromise between them and those willing to pull their own weight. I have nothing against those who really want to learn but there is only so much pie that can go around.

Seasons Greetings to one and all.

class of last race

in my opinion, for what its worth,the value of the last race is proportional to the horses progress.

consider a 15000 race

if a horse wins at 2000 then 6000 then 10000 we do not know how good it ultimately is,as its rating rises it gets more weight and then we assess its performance in the past race.

if a horse is placed at 13000 wins at 10000 placed at 20000, we know how good the horse is and the last race is guide to its current capabilities then we asses its weight.

hi all, can anyone help me with which form books are needed for the vdw examples?

thanks
tubs

Hello all,

Tubs - I think the question should be "of all the VDW examples which ones provide most benefit if examined in detail?"

All the best
hedgehog

Hedgehog

I think ALL examples are important, there is something to be learnt from all of them. When I started I gave most of a quick glance, some I could see and understand, others I just put down as luck on vdw's part. After all some didn't even comply to his guide lines.

Prominent King and Rifle Brigade are two that don't appear to follow the "rules" Although to be fair at the time I didn't know the ability rating wasn't introduced until later. The more you study the examples, the more you learn about vdw's understanding and knowledge of racing. I can now see why he went with PK and RB, but to be honest understanding his logic does not mean I would have ever backed RB. In that race I would not have backed against RB, I would not have bet. PK is a different matter, I am still not convinced Beacon Light had "gone over". He was a class/form horse with a flaw that showed me even at his best he was in for a very hard race. After studying this race I didn't even make BL the main danger.

Bensam

I think that is the main reason the vdw methods are still working after all this time. In the end it boils down to vdw's opinion's. Some times our opinion is right, but other people read the race differently, although still based on logic and possibly using the vdw methology. If the bookies are doing their job correctly there will never be wipe out.

Regards

with regard to this race did VDW often come to the conclusion that it was a 'RACING CERTAINTY' based on the numerical picture alone, are there other examples purely of the numerical picture?

Barney

You are labouring under a misapprehension. Although VDW certainly described Little Owl as a "racing certainty", he didn't do so on the ratings platform alone. He specifically said, in relation to this example, "To confirm what the figures say it is necessary to study the form of all concerned, taking particular note of class in which they ran, the course they ran on, the pace and going of the respective races, distances won or beaten by and most important, how they performed in the later stages of each race". And personally I believe he applied that to all his examples, ie he never selected simply on the basis of the ratings platform.

thanks fulham

i dont have the form books to look at the race in detail

thats why i need current exmples to look at

Barney.

Before this thread started I would have agreed that there wasn't a lot of examples to look at. Thanks to Guest I think you have plenty of recent races to look at. Go back and read the posting carefully, I think you will be surprised how many examples have been given. I will go as far as to say I have never seen so many recent examples in one place. You need to go through each race and see if you agree with the interpretation of the vdw horses. As vdw can't give his selections all we all can do is try to find our own, and try to see if they match with the selections he did give us. If the fundamentals, consistency, ability, and class. That is apply the basics, the finer points of reading the form will come in time. Still coming in my respect!!


Regards

Guest

In relation to the Rifle Brigade race, you helpfully pointed out that, if the difference in ability was marked, the higher class horse was very likely to win even if not proven over the trip.

The circumstances in the 2.05 today were, of course, in many respects very different to the Rifle Brigade race, but one aspect had similarities, namely a clearly higher class horse than the others running over a distance about which it could be argued there was an element of uncertainty.

Unlike Rifle Brigade, who had never run over 1.5m before the race for which VDW regarded him as an "outstanding" bet, Cornish Gale had run over today's trip (2m). But the evidence to date seemed to point to him much preferring rather longer. Indeed, apart from the run where he was pulled up due to a wind problem, the only times he had been out of the first three were on two of his runs over 2m.

I am wondering whether you judge that Cornish Gale was a decent VDW-approach bet today - on the basis of his margin of superiority off-setting a perhaps shorter than idea trip. Or, given his hitherto undistinguished record over 2m, would you have seen it as a bet to pass up?

I'm still very much finding my way, and took the cautious path today. But at the prices available earlier in the day I would certainly have backed it had the race been over 2.5m or thereabouts.

Any comments you feel able to make would be much appreciated.

a winning horse is often sent up in class next time out frequently over a longer distance and these horses should be treated with caution.

horses which show form and are then dropped well in class and down in distance are worth looking at more than once.

WINNERS ARE OFTEN PUT IN WAY OVER THE TOP NEXT TIME AND THEN DROPPED TO COLLECT AGAIN.