Please listen to me for a minute.

You know that we both respect each others posts.

I don't really know how the vast majority of VDW posters do with their betting etc, (probably never will).

Personally I think they are on the wrong track, and , until proved wrong I shall never think any different.

But I will say this!

And I have said it many times before.

Mtoto does know the answers.

He has proved it to me.

I have combined his knowledge with mine and I am, in general, breaking even or showing a decent profit every week.

I have never met Mtoto, but I have gathered he is a gentleman. He could shoot half of these down on his knowledge alone if he felt like it. But instead he likes to gently probe and shows far more respect than I do at times.

When I went to York other Saturday you know i got MAYCOCKS BAY (25-1) and VINTAGE PREMIUM (20-1).

The truth IS I would not have got these without what Mtoto showed me.

I did not think they were certainties, I aren't pretending that, but i did think they were OUTSTANDING value for money.

Mtoto did not tell me in advance, in fact he has NEVER named me a tip, but he certainly showed me how to use speed figs better than I knew before.

HE REALLY DOES KNOW JIMMY, honestly.

You know me well enough now to know I don't talk bollox.

The other VDW chaps who don't believe in speed figs as being a main criterium, well they are the ones who choose to ignore what they are being told. Mtoto is telling them all the time (and everyone else) but they don't listen.

Also (and this is the BIG one!)!
Weight does not matter but OR'S do.

Mtoto knows it, I know it, Greg knows it.

Let's look at this!

Barney rose to our challenge the other day and tried to pick a winner at Chester. As we know he got none right because he doesn't believe in speed figs. (also he went for one drawn 15 in a 15 runner race, CHESTER DRAw, is almost always low, occassionaly middle but NEVER high).

As I have said a few times I would take a betting challenge against anybody on this thread because a) they have never proved a thing and b) the majority dont think speed figs matter,

I must admit, though it does give me entertainment.

Replies,
Let's have 'em
Swish

Dont get upset, nobody's doubting your sincerity, it's just that you maybe a little delusional in this matter. Which, considering the length of time over which you've been so close to the subject is nothing to be ashamed about, after all if your dentist tells you that you have periodontis you dont leave the surgery in a huff just because you brush your teeth everyday, do you? Personally I'd like to thank you for taking the time to create your little hints and nudges, however, one thing puzzles me, you say that the only way to understand the method is to study the original examples. This suggests that the same hidden factors can not be observed in contemporary racing, which would further suggest that the method is of no practical use. So I'm going to assume that this was merely a slip on your part and that in conjunction with your most recent hints the hidden factors will become plain if I study the selections that you gave during the Cheltenham Festival. Please tell me if I'm on the right track.

Epiglotis,
What are you wasting your time for? There are no hidden secrets so why ask for clues to them? Im off to the Times Timekeeper thread for some real 2002 action and then I'm going to try something called the Dawson method, which I believe has been doing the business for longer than VDW and with no time wasted studying form or any of that nonsense. Life's too short - you could find yourself up the amazon without a paddle and an empty betting account tomorrow, so why worry?
regards,

Thanks, I'll consider your advice.

Statajack, have a nice journey, I think you might enjoy it as travelling is said to broaden the mind. JIB.

What you have said above is exactly the point I am trying to make. As we both know Barney is new to this, a few months ago he was dutching the first two in the betting and thought he had discovered a goldmine, then he moved to probability and retreiving on faves, hoping that probability would show him the longest losing run etc, then he discovered VDW, and thinks it the best thing since sliced bread, god alone knows what it will be next year. But, and it is a big but, he is at least learning how to read a form book. This time last year I doubt if he had ever seen one. At the moment he is the one most against speed figures and official ratings, he'll learn. As for Mtoto, I've never said a bad thing about him and I enjoy reading his posts, it's just a shame he chooses to post on this thread. As I've said to you before Swish, if you are good why not take credit for it, what's this big deal about giving all the credit to some forgotton,if he ever existed, dutchman. It is to Mtoto's credit he is doing well, he should accept it as such, as should Guest. VDW is a joke perpetrated on us by The Handicap Book and Tony Peach, and there are no hidden secrets. Do you think Phil Bull and Alex Bird had cracked VDW. People who are willing to learn to read form and study racing have been making a living at at since before VDW was born, and there are plenty of people making a living at it today who have never heard of him.

Do you even have a betting account. If not, based on the knowledge you have shown on here, I'm sure plenty of firms would be willing to oblige, they are always on the lookout for mug punters.

Jimmy, wasnt that the one with Leslie Crowther?

He was a better comedian though.

Jimmy, someone should teach him the secret (popular word here) is not to take oneself too seriously.

Guest,

I agree entirely with your discussion of the prospects of the main contenders in the Gaye Chance race, but still wonder whether the conclusion you draw - the same as VDW's in the "Spells it all out" article - is the only reasonable one.

You are saying that GC was the probably winner, but that one couldn't discount Fauloon, and there were a couple of others with bits of chances. In those circumstances, I can't regard Epiglotis's suggestion as an unreasonable alternative to a no bet (though his specific option was not, of course, available to VDW at the time). But an EW bet was an option and given that GC was a virtual certainty to place, at least, at the price available such a bet was virtually certainly one to nothing, with a decent probability of collecting on the win part.

But my real point lies elsewhere, and is do you and others who have studied VDW's examples see there as having been significantly more doubt about Gaye Chance than, for example, Baronet and Love from Verona, both of which VDW referred to as "good things" with therefore, I think, the inference that he regarded them as good enough to back?

A betting account Jimmy? What a novel idea! I bet if I gave your name as a reference they'd let me open one with unlimited credit too wouldn't they?
J.I.B,
After reading the prose style of your "autobiography" I would say the charge of taking ones self too seriously is one that should concern you slightly more than it should me.
regards,

[This message was edited by statajack on July 24, 2002 at 08:14 AM.]

Guest

It`s sad that you think jokes are pointless.

111
.

For once I sort of agree with Jimmy on something. There are no hidden formulas or magic combinations to unravel, just a better understanding of how class and form come together and actually effect the outcome of a lot of horse races. When I say I am not "spelling it all out" I simply mean I am not drawing particluar attention to certain factors. These factors really should be obvious, especially from some recent posts, but VDW didn't highlight them in quite the same way. In short he gave us the tools but didn't actually give us a detailed manual on how to make best use of them. Members can say, "well how do you know your interpretation is correct?" and fair enough, but my understanding of how to interpret form comes up with the same selections as VDW without "fiddling" the figures or cooking the books. And the principles still work today. Of course there are changes always affecting racing, but class and form remain the same factors. As far as I know money still makes the world go around and so it does with racing.

I have never said speed figures have no value, in fact they form the basis for several of VDWs methods, but they were not the golden key or magical answer to how VDW split the probables within the method that gave Prominent King or Roushayd. Both these selections, in fact every selection he gave, was finally based on class and strength of form. He used speed figures in different ways and within the Roushayd method is was to measure fitness and improvement not just ability or superiority. You will find tons of examples that throw up a qualifier who has the best speed figure and has attained an improved rating on it's last 3 runs when raised in class, but most of them lose as demonstrated by those who chose to list every qualifier and follow their success or otherwise.

At the end of the day, racing became my full time occupation some time ago now and it took years to sort things out properly. Swish is a man who rarely seems to agree with my posts, but he is adamant Mtoto has shown him the way. Well that is all good stuff if Swish is now making consistent long term profits, but surely his strike rate can not be better than Mtotos if he is using the same gameplan?

The reason people find fault with VDWs basic platform of consistency and ability ratings is that they haven't figured out how to use them properly not because they don't work. If there is anything approaching a key or key word then it is relativity (as often stated but seemingly ignored). Relative to what you may ask ? Well that should be obvious.

Epiglotis - Yes, the same process as demonstrated for Gaye Chance will throw up the selections given for Cheltenham, Aintree and the Derby along with Millenary and Feet So Fast. It will also show that Mistletoe was a good bet at Uttoxeter.

The world is full of little people who have never been anywhere or done anything, they attract names like Twatterjack.

Jimmy.

You ask why do I only contribute to this thread. I have always received an answer to the questions I have asked here. I have posted to other threads, and asked questions. The last time I tried I received one sensible answer and many not so sensible. JIB tried to start what could have been a very interesting thread, the response was poor to say the least. Before you ask why didn't I join in the thread if I thought it was of interest, I had more important things on my mind. I don't know Statajack from Adam, but I don't understand why he is coming under attack from you and your cronies. His only crime appears to be he answered in the same sarcastic tone you use all the time. That's not to say I agree with all he says, but the only way to find out the logic behind his thoughts. Is to talk to him. This is why I have tried to get some dialogue going with Guest. My only concern is because I don't agree with him, it looks as if I am trying to belittle him. I'm not. I read his posts many times, I THINK, I understand what he is saying, I just can't agree with his interpretation of vdw. If you went to a party and walked into a room where a discussion was taking place would you really just start taking the piss because you didn't understand, or agree with what was being said?

Good skill (try some people skills)

i made a big mistake a while ago by declaring guest had lost his credibility,i was wrong,it was my lack of understanding the reason i now know this is because i acquired the books for a paltry 30 quid,you may think that,s not paltry well believe me it is when you understand what guest has been posting lately,the pit is really bottomless,if you do acquire the books read systematic betting,racing in my system,till your eyes are sore,there really is nothing hidden,guest has given me a massive nudge in the right direction for which i thank him..

Guest.

I have to ask this question, why do you persist in giving the impression I take the s/f at face value? I have said many times I don't take ANY rating at face value, be it top rated or not.

You say the Gaye Chance example shows the same factors as all the other examples including your selections. I can only agree, using the facts as presented by yourself (I don't have the form book for this race) I would have come to the same conclusion as vdw, the most likely winner, but no bet. I also agree the examples from Prominent King through to Feet So Fast all have the same profile. They all work for me as well. As I have said before we agree many times, but why do you discount my ideas. We even agreed the Millenary was the most likely winner, except I think he had disappointed too many times to warrant a bet. I have come to a conclusion about Son Of Love that could make him a bet. Although I can't ask the man to confirm, so I will just have to wonder if I have found the right answer. I'm now going to work on Love From Verona, this one I think is going to give me problems. You mentioned Roushayd I make him work using my method, with one important adjustment. I do agree if you just use s/f and a drop in class many fail. Using the factors I use, not that many fail. In this example vdw didn't mention the ability rating, but it works using the same formula I use to judge ability. Can it all be coincidence?

You also ask is Swishes strike rate better than mine? I expect Swish will answer for himself, I will just say I will not back some of the lower priced horses so if it is, I'm not surprised. Last week I highlighted Palace Affair but didn't back it because the price was to low

Be Lucky