JIB.

Funny enough that is the very same thought processes I used many moons ago. Once you have the s/f you have all you need to know about the horse. The class, what going and distance it likes. Does it prefer left or right handed tracks, which courses. The only thing you then need is sectional timing, to judge the pace in the final furlongs. I have to smile when people say s/f don't work for races other than sprints.

What does worry me though, is this a case of great minds think alike, or fools never differ? :-))

Mr Pigeon.

Surely, a run and a placing are the same thing? With every run comes a placing be it first. 10th, or last

Be Lucky

Isn't there a VDW quote about watch how the trainer places the horse?

Epiglotis.

Yes there is. Some are cleverer than others, even the clever ones get it wrong. It's not the trainers ambitions that win races it's horses. If you can gauge the class of the horse you can see if it wishful thinking on the part of the trainer. The better the judgement, the more chance you have of forming an opinion. I just don't think in this day and age penalty value is very reliable.

Be Lucky

Thanks for the reply and I quite agree.

Mtoto, if it was me first I would hazard the guess that you were in trouble. As the inverse applies I would say it is a case of pearls before swine. JIB

right i see where you are coming from.

it all depends on whether you think that assesing a race is the trick or assesing a horse.

there are different reasons for placing horses, if a horse is lacking in some department - for instance stamina and not seeing out the trip then a good trainer will place it A) against slower horses in a lower grade with more weight at the same trip B) against faster horses ie higher grade over a longer trip c) running it up a hill with the same weight D) running it down a hill with less weight.OR many variations on the above.

These are simple performance enhancing techniques in any running sport. If i wanted to get faster i would have to run lots of short distance sprints, if i wanted to run a marathon I would have to go on lots of long runs to build up stamina. Horses are athletes not machines the trainers job is to get the best out of its natural ability ( 2 yr old method).

no matter what training I did I would never win the 100m gold medal, not for want of trying, but because i am not genetically made up to be a sprinter.you cant make a silk purse out of a pigs ear. its the same with horses.

This is totally different to placing horses to mask their true capabilities ie running a mile horse over 1m3 and 1m4 or placing a class 100 horse against class 230, instructing a jocky to hold up a strong front running horse etc( unless hes trying to give it a finishing kick, which is essential in many high class races).

the only way that I can see to figure it out is to get to know the horse and what its best performances are historically and whereabouts in the peak performance cycle they currently are judged by finishing positions and distances won/beaten by and class of horse competed against and then try to judge why its in todays race and which is here able and ready to win and not any of the above.

hope this is what you mean

Could I ask.

Was Coalition a bet for you yesterday ?

Thanks in anticipation,

JIB/Epiglotis

Selecting which (if any) horse can rationally be backed to win a given race is, it might generally be conceded, a rather trivial activity in the wider context of life. But in terms of the nature of the intellectual challenge involved, I don't have the slightest doubt that understanding VDW's approach to this "trivial activity" is markedly more testing than doctoral research.

VDW gave those interested in understanding his approach a lot of help through his writings, and well over a hundred examples to be researched. But I would be willing to bet long odds on that, at most, there is only one poster to this board who has arrived at an understanding of VDW's approach that satisfactorily explains them all.

While it is reasonably clear that a number of us have made some progress towards such an understanding, it is equally clear that others have as yet barely scratched the surface, while others still (entirely understandably) have no interest in exploring the matter at all.

If, as I believe, the above is a fair reflection of reality, it seems to me to be premature (and indeed arrogant) for us to be discussing modifications to elements of a whole we do not understand. I didn't always take that view, and have from time to time contributed to discussions about modifications. But I now look back on such contributions with embarrassment.

JIB,

In the USA, sectional times are always reported as well as race times, as they give a very important input as to what pace the horse ran at different stages of the race. For those who are not able to watch a race, it provides an mathematical picture as to how the horse ran. Unfortunately, such things are kept from the British racing public even on the AW tracks, though I wouldn't mind betting that someone somewhere does record them. It would be an invaluable aid in predicting future outcomes, believe me.

Oldtimer

Old Timer

You are spot on regarding sectional times, I don’t suppose for a minute that anything will change unless enough people kick up a fuss about it.
The resulting mathematical picture i.e. the pace/position of every horse at the ¼,1/2,3/4 and the distance of a race could be computed far more easily than a text commentary.
And your last sentence sums it up.
Perhaps that is one of the reasons we wont get it,
Well probably not in my lifetime, they wont even put in facilities to weigh horses before a race which I believe every trainer does before he sends horses to a race meeting

Fulham - Your last post sums up one of the main points I have, in my own way, been trying to argue or put across. Lack of understanding has caused some to discard or change elements in VDWs methods. Some have also decided it doesn't work and all I can say is it doesn't work because they don't understand how it actually works. Others want to know how it works and are undertaking the enormous task involved in discovering and learning the approach. The basics are simple but the practice can be quite complex and involving. Modern technology gives us a headstart on certain tasks involved that would have taken up much of VDWs time, but the study still has to be done.

The points in a couple of other posts also highlight something worth thinking about. When information becomes generally available it's worth can become diluted somewhat. Sectional timing is part and parcel of US racing but does that mean there are any less long term losers in the punting quarters? The bookmakers are only too aware of exceptional times and splits in general. The same would take effect over here if we ever get it.

No, it's the information not understood by the betting and bookmaking fraternity that helps give an edge. Yes, I would hope most punters would understand that a valuable handicap will attract good horses, but can they use this info in a way that will glean future profit?

The solution isn't rocket science, but it does need approaching in the right manner as VDW suggested.

Fulham - further to the data I gave for all the Ascot races run this season on the flat, excluding maidens, 12 of the 68 races went to the second rated on ability at the following prices - 13/2, 11/1, 20/1, 25/1, 10/1, 8/13, 7/1, 2/1,6/1,4/1,13/2 and 6/4. Betting them blind and splitting stakes on the two races were there were joint second rated would have gained over 18 points profit at level stakes. Not an approach recommended of course but the combined figures show almost one third of the Ascot races went to either the 1st or 2nd rated on ability rating.

Determined - Yes Coalition was a bet for me yesterday and 7/2 was excellent value. Just what did it have to beat?

Guest,
"Horses like Supremacy will spoil the party every now and then" - apparently so too will horses which are making their seasonal debut after 294 days off like Mesmeric. Its interesting that apart from the negatives detailed by myself, Mtoto and Tony L, that other method advocated by vdw for races with 3 YOs the speed merit rating also pointed away from SV. How many negatives are needed before a horse is not a bet?
Well done with your other winners but...
regards

Guest,

Thanks for confirming Coalition as a bet.

Anybody else come to the same conclusion.


Ability rating,

The figures speak for themselves.

Any other stats` you feel able to disclose will be greatfully appreciated.



Statajack,

Ignoring the time element in Dawn Invasion`s Windsor defeat cost me money as did Scotts View yesterday.

Each race has a different problem to solve. With regards to SV yesterday the winner and runner up were the only 2 I thought could throw a spanner in the works and so it proved.

That said, both had, in the way I read form far too many questions to answer hence I discounted them.

I was wrong but thats life.

There is life at the end of the tunnel because the form of the 1st three will be worth following.

Cheers,

JIB

I'm merely pointing out what I now see as the reality - that to suggest "reforms" to matters one does not properly understand is a strange (and at depth very arrogant) thing to do. I have no reason to expect anyone to agree with me: indeed my experience of life in general is that many people happily spend much of their time doing precisely that.


Guest

Thanks for the additional info.


Regards to both of you.

Hello All,

hope you and yours are well and happy.

Can I ask is Daganya in the 2.45 Curragh a good thing?

I've no intention of betting it so after the event is more than satisfactory if an answer is given.

All the best
hedgehog

I was always under the impression that it was vdw methodolgy that challenged conventional form reading wisdom as I haven't come across anything remotely like it in any other writings about horseracing on this side of the atlantic, indeed only certain aspects are mentioned by US handicappers.
Challenging conventional wisdom in this way also explains the hostility towards something new (even after 24 years) that is not understood or explained to the satisfaction of the masses.
regards,

Barney

You said
“running it down a hill with less weight”
Probaly not related to your post but
What about running down hill humping top weight
There is some logic in the following
Imagine youself with your hands tied to one of the old concrete rollers that they used to roll cricket pitches with. whizzing down Epsoms 5f dash
And how relieved you would be to find that there is a slight gradient at the end
Not as daft as it may seem as an example
As one jockey when interviewed about the weight his horse had to hump down there said
It is probably an advantage
I wonder what the stats are for topweights running at Epsoms 5f dash
You can bet they are better than pontefract’s 5f
Just a thought