Epiglotis

The purpose of working through the old VDW examples is not to achieve a 50% strike rate. It is in the hope of making progress from my present level towards the 80-90% strike rate of which VDW wrote, and which I personally believe a few others are achieving.

And we are not here talking about dozens of odds on shots, but about horses at all prices. For example, yesterday lunchtime one contributor to this board (not me), more than once commended by other posters here as well versed in VDW methodology, posted in a more private VDW forum Got One Too (won 10/1) as a strong bet in the 2.20 at Ascot.

Hello All,

Fulham - thanks for the pointer to this race. Yesterday I did not evaluate this race but now wish I had. Here is how I saw it.

2.20 Ascot B H'c Hdl 2M0.5F (101)
1. First five in the betting forecast
Orsuno, Benbyas, Regal Exit, Rooster Booster, Got One Too

2a. Five most recent runs
Orsuno(5), Irish Fashion(5), Lisaan(7), Polydamas(14), Got One Too(21), Benbyas(29)

2b. Horses that run well when fresh
Moving on Up, Veridian

3. 3 most consistent from first 5 in betting forecast
Benbyas(3), Orsuno(6), Got One Too(7)(3?)

4. 4 highest Ability
Lisaan(112), Benbyas(91), Got One Too(75), Moving on Up(66)

5. 3 highest winning class
Lisaan(183), Benbyas(178), Got One Too(155)

Common to lists 1,2a,3,4,5 or 1,2b,3,4,5
Benbyas
Got One Too

Form for Benbyas
14/12/01 Cheltenham C H'c Hdl 2M1F (178) Good
Won by 2.5L carrying 10-12, now 10-13
Made all, hard ridden approaching last, ran on gamely (7-1)

28/11/01 Wetherby D Nov Hdl 2M (39) Good
Won by 1L carrying 11-4
Made all, hard pressed from 2 out, stayed on well under pressure (100-30)

03/11/01 Wetherby C Nov Hdl 2M (56) Good
Won by 0.75L carrying 11-0
Made all, kept on well flat, held on towards finish (6-1)

Form for Got One Too
22/12/01 Ascot B H'c Hdl 2M0.5F (580) Good Fast
5th by 17.75L carrying 10-7, now 11-3
Led 2nd, ridden and headed 3 out, soon outpaced (10-1)

01/12/01 Newbury A GII H'c Hdl 2M0.5F (155) Soft
Won by 4L carrying 11-0
Led, clear from 1st, steadied 4 out, driven along 2 out, stayed on well run-in (11-4)

14/11/01 Newbury D Nov Hdl 2M3F (39) Good
Won by 8L carrying 11-3
Made all, clear 2nd, pushed along 2 out, unchallenged (3-1)

Form selection
Got One Too

Reasons
Got One Too has been running at better courses in better class races, the Nov Hdl form is much better than Benbyas and a line through Tikram shows Got One Too is the better horse.

Supporting evidence.
Distance winner
GII Hdl winner at a GI course
Best LTO speed figure(matched by Regal Exit)
Speed figures improving in increasing class
Won carrying 11-3
Won on similar going

Estimate of fair odds - 4-1

Bet Got One Too at better than 4-1

Result Got One Too 10-1.

I hope this has been of some help, I know it helped me.

If anyone would like to comment on my method I would be very grateful.

Reference Point - the 2 short priced favourites at Warwick. I make it 3. Seebald, Classified and Stormez. Which of Seebald/Classified should I study?

All the best
hedgehog

when every one can work that out before hand it's cracked.

something i would like to add

20k,stayed on well not reach winners,=15k,on bridle on ran on strongly,=10k,tracked leaders comfortably,=5k,made all quickend clear eased down.

Hi Hedgehog

I only looked at the form of the races last night, but Seebald, I would have thought, was the certainty (with no plausible rival), while Classified was the most likely winner but (with two plausible rivals) not a certainty.

Hello All,

I've just had alook at the 1.55 Leopardstown and think Lyreen Wonder is a good bet at better than 5-2.

Now here's the curious thing. Lyreen Wonder's last race was a handicap hurdle in which it came 2nd by 4.5L giving the winner 23lb.
LW has not won a hurdle since 1998.

So why put the horse into a race it's not going to win with 11-13 on its back? I think the trainer is going for the 1.55 L and the last race was to improve on LW's speed.

Anyone have thoughts on this?

All the best
hedgehog

hedgehog read my last post and apply it to

lw
mtas
rr

fulham if classified had any threats im reading it all wrong

There has been lots of posts recently which clearly show how seriously or not certain people take the task of finding winners. Swish has made his challenge to Reference Point and it only demonstrates his true temperament where racing is concerned. Can I ask Swish , do you bet to make a profit or to be proved right ? I can also answer your question as to why I personally contibute to this forum and it is the same reasoning I gave before , though once again as usual certain readers just simply do not read what has been written. VDW gave us his approach to racing out of generosity knowing that only those who truly worked at it would discover most or all of the answers. I know we live in more selfish , dog it dog times where most people are just looking for an easy buck and if I was likewise inclined I could make easy money by exploiting others desire to find that elusive winning system. But I would be shooting myself in the foot and spoiling it for others who have figured out the methods VDW gave. If your challenge is taken up, Swish , I do hope your selection process doesn’t produce the kind of selection you put forward for the Victor Chandler Handicap Chase which seemed to suggest you were taken the initial numerical picture at face value. Good luck though.

I have never said that VDWs way was the only way and neither did he , far from it. So to Mtoto , as I have stated before, if you are finding 80% + winners then whole hearted congratulations you have cracked it , so why look to VDWs methods for more ? You state you have found a recurrent theme in VDWs selections, but don’t say what this theme is. Fair enough I don’t expect you to broadcast valuable ideas , I wouldn’t also , but you assume I don’t consider this unknown theme even though I haven’t revealed the way I evaluate races in full , far from it again in fact. So how do you know my full thinking on the game ?

You continually call into question the methods of measuring class and ability that VDW gave by suggesting the Official Handicappers opinion is a better guide. Surely then the man would be better off by backing his own judgement with hard cash and keeping his compilation figures to himself by going on his own. Official handicappers are of course forbidden from betting so he would have to leave his job first. Something I have been able to do incidentally thanks to VDWs views. As said before , the ORs do influence the outcome of many races but they are not the ability of a horse.

With regards to the betting market , I also said that false betting could be put to good use for the future and this is based on research not hearsay. Again it is just another factor to consider and if you think I am going to lay bare my findings on the subject then you are mistaken. Contrary to what some are suggesting , I have offered some clues to help the few who really want to get to grips with the methods. From reading certain postings , I’m sure some people have gained something and I am not remotely bothered by others that goad who can’t understand the real intent.

To Tommyboy , if you have read and understood everything of relevance within the VDW books in just one day then a very well done. Just be aware that many others before you have assumed likewise and gone on to realise that whilst it is not a garden path , it is a very long road even when you take all the right turnings.

Barney

There were two other horses in the 2.00 Warwick which had shown the capacity to win a race of that class. One had already done so. On my reading of their performances, they were unlikely to have beaten Classified, but they were not implausible.

In the 12.30 there was not another runner who had achieved anything like that which Seebald had achieved in his last two runs.

Its that difference which, I'm suggesting, distinguishes the true "cert" from the "most likely winner".

The idea that doing the donkey work of examining each and every example that vdw gave should lead to a ''complete'' understanding of the method(s) is a little hard for me to buy. While I agree that vdw never wrote anything just for the sake of it, personal judgement is bound to be dominant when trying to make a single example fit the broader picture.

Take Justafancy for example, somebody said that common sense would isolate the winner from those closely rated to it. As some of us know common sense or judgement can vary markedly from one person to another. Indeed if you were to believe everything written by those who speak authoritatively about this subject, their ideas are so varied that it would be physically impossible to implement all of them to finding those good things and there's a case for too much wood to see the trees. One might say half the ideas are rubbish and while there is a good case for that, there is no way of proving some of it as the vdw letters and articles were a guide not a solution.

Personally, I am happy with the method(s) that I have found with some guidance from others to which I am grateful but I take the view that adopting the style of a Trappist monk and tediously collating ALL that form would not be that rewarding and would send me nuts.

Regards teasing people, well there's no harm in a bit of banter as you know Swish which reminds me, does anybody know the name of the racing consortium that approached vdw offering him money for his services?

well done hedghog!!!

ill have aa in the next

Hedgehog. Congratulations on your pick at Leopardstown. Presumably your selection there was worked out in much the same way as your analysis of the Ascot 2.20 race yesterday? Sorry, but I have not been following the VDW saga.

regards. John

It seems to me at least that all VDW was trying to do was to teach us how to gain a better assessment of how to read form. Especially in the numbers game to form a picture article. It then appears to me that VDW attempted, for want of a better word dumb down his ideas somewhat in his spells it all out article as it was obvious to him that what he had put across was not being understood by the majority. There are many systems out there which are based on the VDW methods such as Binghams work and Colin Davey's system. These all work to a certain extent and will show a profit if used correctly but it depends on what you want out of them. Many of VDW's past examples would not have been found be using these systems as they would not have been found using his spells it all out article. I guess at the end of the day it comes down to time available if you are lucky enough to be a position to not have to work then you can take the task of winner finding more seriously than someone who works a 9-5 job. It is a shame that in the world in which we live in that those who know feel that they have to keep it to themselves but to be fair to people like Guest who can blame him what is in it for him to reveal all to us? He and people like Moto are trying to help and maybe we should accept the hints and nudges in the spirit in which they are given.

M.0.M

Guest.

You are a great one for talking about facts, but as I have said before you have a tendency to make up your own facts.

I have NEVER claimed an 80% strike rate, here or any where else. If I could achieve that, it wouldn't be a reason to sit back. I try to look at everything with an open mind, and would never stop trying to improve.

You say the OR isn't a guide to ability. I put it to you it is a better guide than the value of a winning race. Look at the Leger, in that race you had the winner of the Ebor. Using penalty value as a guide to ability, that made the winner of that race a better horse than the eventual winner. Absolute nonsense, look at the OR's of the horses involved in all the races. This is not a one off occurrence, if your mind wasn't so closed, I could show you literary hundreds of cases.

As for the recurring theme, you have made it very obvious in your posting you have discounted the factors involved. Unless you are writing one thing, and thinking/working something completely different

Also, I do hope Reference Point doesn't take up Swish's challenge, he will be on a hiding to nothing. A lot of Swish's posting are to be sociable, don't read to much into them. If it became serious I know where my money would go.

Regards

I’m sure Swish knew the answer to his last post whilst as he was typing it. Betting on horses is my living, I’ve never given out tips to anyone, and I’m not about to start now, particularly for nothing.

If I have learnt just one thing from this thread it is that others and I can rest assured the methods that VDW so generously shared will remain invisible to most. Attitude and temperament will see to that.

Hello All,

Barney - nice one. An 8-1 beats a 100-30 any day of the week!

I was wondering when you posted the race comments against class if that was a general pattern. I don't think RR spoils the pattern, the horse is not running to its potential yet.

Guest - I'll go back over your postings to find the hints. I'm sure it will be effort well spent. I would be grateful if you were a bit more explicit about the significance of previous race odds though. If not, well I can understand why not.

All the best
hedgehog

hedgehog

i thought that rr was going to do it today with the yard inform.

weight moves the horses up and down the scale.


i got 12/1 on aa

Sorry I got your name wrong earlier. I have looked at your posting with the examples you gave which Swish kindly put up and have noted that you judge improvement and and ability by the speed figure the horse records. Am I right in persuming that you favour the Roushayd approach to winner finding? I noted that in your examples, take the Reel Buddy one, you noted the improvement in speed figures 55 to 66 (topspeed) at this point even though he was being dropped in class from a group 3 to a listed handicap, the 5f in the group 3 race was far to short for him at this stage in his racing life and was upped in trip to 7f then he was dropped a long way in class to a 0-100 (C) handicap where he was topweight 9-7 (weight=class) running over 7f once more and off the same OR of 100 winning at 9/1 co-fav Yes I did back him. How am I doing so far?

M.O.M

I'm interested that both Guest and Reference Point leave a space after an apostrophe.

Guest
you say that those betting large amounts and
winning wont be allowed to.How much do you
consider large.£500to £1000 isn`t a problem
if your betting oncourse and even off course
there are bookies that will take large bets.
and you can always spread your bets around and
have £50 with lots of bookies.Its easier now
than ever now there isn`t any tax to pay in
the betting shops.Many offcourse bookies will
limit your stakes but there are always a way
round a problem as VDW said.


Maggsy