Guest,
I was under the impression that most ratings which weren't based on time were based on form. Its not really the ratings per se that I'm interested in, but how things all link together.

While we are on the subject of ratings, if anyone has RSB they might find it interesting if they were to test the success rates and profit/loss figures for consistency ratings at the various forecast prices.

Epiglotis,
It must be terribly hard to guess the context of some of the quotes on this thread without access to the books from which they were taken. It speaks volumes about your positive attitude that you are willing to undertake this task to help us all.

Epiglotis

The sentence to which you refer was not about strike rates, but about finding six "class/form" horses from ten, rather untypical (from a VDW selection perspective), races. As a matter of record, all six won, though VDW expressed the view that only two of them should have been bets.

VDW was quite explicit on strike rates. After referring to his methods of "narrowing the field" (confining attention to the first five/six in the betting forecast and within those to the horses with the three lowest consistency figures), he gave two references to strike rates:

"The method I gave produces 85% to 90% winners Flat and jumps, year in year out", and then the slightly fuller

"...using this elementary method your field of vision will be restricted to a narrow area full of potential and if you fail to achieve a minimum of 80% success evaluate your reading of Form".

And its the final part of this second piece that flags the difficulty.

Thanks for the enlightening reply.

Fulham - Using the definition of form horse in the way I believe VDW actually showed us, around 70% of all races go to a form horse. Of course there can be any number of form horses in a race, but as VDW said to bet anything but a form horse is going against the odds. The form element was used as the basic platform in methods such as those for Grannies Pet, Misty Spirit, Contradeal,etc and form coupled with speed in the method that gave Desert Hero,Bregawn,Gaye Brief and Badsworth Boy. The latter method was only briefly outlined but a few clues were given such as split second and the fact that all bets were in the principle race of the day. Another filter on this method was use of the extensive selection box given in the old Sporting Chronicle. This was far more expansive than the modern day RP selection box and VDW obviously had analysed the long term results of the numerous tipsters involved to find a profitable area. All horses were in the three most consistent anyway so the selection box part isn't essential today. It will always come back to establishing form in the way VDW saw it.

Guest

Thanks very much.

Oddly enough, yesterday I looked retrospectively at better chases in the early part of last NH season, and got a result in the high 70%s for those, but intuitively one would perhaps expect a somewhat higher percentage for such races than across a much wider sample.

Regards.

Fulham,
That quote in your recent post is a favourite of mine. As are these two which go some way to explaining my recent posts over the last week or so:

"The vdw approach is a method not a system, which produces a numerical picture based on relevant factors thereby creating a picture from which it is possible to determine if there is a winner IN the race not OF the race."

".... it was shown how and why each element had been chosen to fit into the method. calculating consistent horses, ability ratings and everything else provided you READ WHAT WAS THERE. The last in capitals because it was all there although a vital factor, call it the missing link if you like was not deliberately pointed out.
It is there for you to see and it was not covered up, but until you approach it in the right way.....once you find it everything will be so clear that you will wonder how on earth you could miss it and you will have the same horses as myself."

I dont think he was referring to how he defined class either. "How on earth could you miss it?"
Hmmmm.
regards,

Statajack

Yes, you've quoted a telling, if perhaps slightly tongue-in-cheek, passage by VDW.

i dont get it, what was where?

Mtoto/Barney

Some up there not pleased with you

The golden Years 1981 Part1

Bottom of the page

Mtot/barney
Have computer problems Kepps shutting down so had to post as quick as possible

Statajack/Fulham - It is interesting to read how others interpret the articles VDW wrote and also his many significant quotes. The last one you both referred to holds a different key to my mind.

When VDW wrote the article containing "Once you find it everything will be so clear...." it was early 1985 and he went on to say directly after that paragraph "...Complete lack of temperament and absolutely no idea what constitutes form or else he would have seen that in every, repeat every illustration the winner was the class/form horse. These were Little Owl,Sunset Cristo,Gay Chance and Kenlis.....you will see everything is true when you find that missing link."

Move on to late 1988 and he wrote in the article "The Myth Of The Missing Link" the following "A variey of excuses has been used to mask failure with my methods - the 'key' , the 'last piece of the jigsaw', the 'missing link' all come down to the same thing.Many create the initial numerical picture and say they are stuck and don't know how to select from the three probables."

"First of all let me repeat what I said in March 1981, when giving this method in full.... to confirm what the figures say(numerical picture) it is necessary to study the form of all concerned, taking particular note of THE CLASS IN WHICH THEY RAN..etc,etc"

"Perhaps I am guilty of assuming most were more conversant with form than appears to be the case."

"The class in which a horse runs is a vital factor and many times I have suggested watching how a particular trainer places his charges."

To my mind, VDW was spelling out the vital factor that was there to see and not covered up, but also leaving us with still more to think about and discover for ourselves. I have said before that he gave us the tools, but didn't explain the exact ways to use them.

Today in the principle race at Chester the class/form horse had factors against. Of the 4 form horses the best form had been shown by Funfair Wane and the eventual winner Royal Quarters.

At Lingfield in the 5.10 the class/form horse had a lot going for it.

going by what you have said in last post it seems ive been looking for something thats not there,as far as i can see the missing link is hard work , as in cross checking all the form.
I don't know if it's me but looking at it in my own way it seems to easy as vdw said it's all there. When i get a chance i'll put up a race with the c/f horse and reasons for choice I hope it comes out o k.
michael.

thanks for that boozer worth another readim going to have another look at the "stonewall certanties" as well i think

i was going to mention it this morning but i couldnt quite feel happy about it for some reason'
that stone put me right off and dixie dancing looked the one to me, of the form horses with marjurita a close second.

Guest
I May be wrong but
I fear you are spoofing if that’s the word
What about SP’s
And why were Zamandra and stray shot the only ones to back

[This message was edited by boozer on August 29, 2002 at 09:05 PM.]

fulham/statajack

do you think read what is there but is not pointed out are the ratings?

guest,

when i study a race and get beyond the numerical picture there is very little to read.



read means read not look at more numbers, well in my understanding of the word

Boozer - Sps have their part to play as just a small cog in the machine. There are more important factors to consider first, but they are a consideration.

If I was to state why I think Zamandra & Stray Shot were taken then not only would it have to be an extensive post in order to go into specifics, but also a foolish one. Anyone who has followed the thread and read all of VDWs major articles should have the ammunition to go to war with and more importantly be able to decipher just why those 2 horses were taken and the other 4 left on that Boxing Day. You will need all the available info for those races though. This can take a long time to compile but present day races should take not nearly so long. The reasons for that should be obvious if you think about the required info.

Barney,
I'm not talking about ratings per se as I explained earlier, but how everything matches up.

Guest,
I am familiar with those quotes as well and I agree with everything expressed, but why didnt he back Kenlis and Gaye Chance then?
regards,

Guest

Bullshit
not intended in a derogatory way
but
Spell it out what you know or think you know
I doubt whether it would make much difference to peoples undesrstanding or increase their
Understading of the vdw method
And it would not take all that many words
And would open up the debate

Do i see it

Maybe
the more brains that are employed on the problem the better

As vdw said some of us
Have beeen novices for longer

After all this is a collective thing
You are here and I am here to see if anybody has something that the rest of us have not

Spell it out

Barney

No, I don't. I think VDW was referring primarily to how he assessed form.


Guest

Further to your 8.18 pm post, I should be interested to know whether it is your view that determining whether a horse is in form for a particular race is ALWAYS an objective matter, or do you take the view that it is sometimes one on which folk could legitimately disagree? (Not that I would disagree with the judgements I'm assuming you made today.)


Boozer

With respect, its not clear to me that "bullshit" can be other than derogatory! Again with respect, you are being very naive.

Fulham - I certainly agree with VDWs view that form or the establishment of form is open to interpretation, though there is a lot more uniformity doing things his way. So many will make judgements about a particular horses previous run or runs by saying it ran a good race because it was placed or even won. Judged on what you may ask ? Whilst I fully appreciate most people don't have the time to go in depth on the form book as VDW did, they could at least hold their hands up and say so instead of guessing as so many tv pundits do.

Boozer - How can anyone say what my answer to the Stray Shot/Zamandra would entail unless they already know the answers themselves. Asking the question suggests they don't. I agree even a detailed analysis would still bypass many, but I'm not about to put the theory to the test. In truth I have gone into more detail about certain races than I have personally ever seen elsewhere but no one has yet posted to say they have seen the light for want of a better term. I must confesss I am bemused somewhat that so many are still missing the main point of how the methods are used in practice.