Sun Tsu - Machhiaveli

I Guarantee that VDW read them both + a good few more !

TC

[This message was edited by Tuppenycat on December 19, 2002 at 12:03 PM.]

It is one thing to consider the trainers intentions, but another to think he knows everytime when one of his horses will win.

A trainers life is a very busy one and unlikely to involve hours spent with their nose in the formbook. In the Race Calender yes, but that is a different sort of art.

Anyone who heard Mr Pipe on the phone on Tuesday will have heard him say he is not concerned with study of the opposition. He mentioned the favourite, but was only refering to public opinion.

Today at Exeter in the 2.00 the class/form horse is Mr Markham with Le Cabro D'or 2nd on class/form. There is conflict in the form though and it's a race to leave for me.

The 2.30 has One Knight as the class/form horse and given a price better than 4/7 I will be backing him in this class.

JIB - I have read Pipes excellent biography twice and it does hold many clues as to what we should look for. His form analysis is actually someone elses though and no doubt other trainers do likewise.

The point I was making, as was VDW, was that it's all in the formbook for everyone to see not just trainers. It isn't too hard to work out when they are really out to win with the right horse. Could that not be related as to why VDW said stick to the better races on a card?

There is a myth in racing that everytime a horse wins all the connections have somehow landed a big touch or suchlike. If this were true then no trainer would go bust, no owner would leave the game and stable lads would be living like kings. Ok a bit overdone though maybe, but form and class come before the trainers opinion.

"Concerning Spys " Perhaps ??

Me ?

I`m Just Laughing !

It like watching G class Donkeys running against a "Rock" !

Sad isn`t it.



TC

[This message was edited by Tuppenycat on December 19, 2002 at 02:10 PM.]

It sometimes defies belief,That horses such as one knight pop up in this way,I mean what did it have to beat.

I will give yo another 2 horses to look at,If you feel what i am trying to put across serves no purpose,Or your not interested,Please tell me and i'll stop.Today in the 2.00 at ex firstly Satshoon had good consistent form with obvious negatives,Twisted Logic,Not in the 6 consistent,Infact not in the first 6 in the betting,Looked an absolute no hoper,But it was most certainly one to take into consideration in this race,If i keep posting these you will start to see a pattern,I hope,Before anybody jumps on my back,saying well why didn't you post it before the race,It's purely from an observational point of view.

Investor

Yesterday before racing I only looked at the three Newbury chases, and found nothing clear enough to bet upon, though I was interested in how Tasko would perform.

I therefore only looked at the race won by Paco Venture after the result was known, which is always less than ideal, as (in my opinion) when one already knows the winner one unconsciously over-emphasises the supportive elements. Trying to look critically, therefore, there is no doubt that PV had a lot going for it, but as to it being a 84% certain chance ... no way. For you to generate that kind of figure (ie one with a seemingly very specific degree of exactness) you are presumably performing some kind of calculation, but if the same kind threw up Joly Bay and (especially) Lord Moose, I'd think again if I were you, because it is taking you away from the essential basics. Joly Bey was a form horse, all right, but not in my view a conceivable bet: Lord Moose wasn't even a form horse relative to yesterday's race.

Today I only had time to look at one race before the off, the 2.00 and, rather like yesterday's three chases, there was far too much conflict for me. While I agree that Twisted Logic had some plus points, so did others, but well done if you backed it.

Yes your right r.e lord moose, I dropped a boob iv'e already mentioned why,As to your other point,No they weren't in the same vein,I was a bit too quick of the mark yesterday,As for your other point i.e looking back on races already run,In this case it is plain to see,The whole field is evaluated and it is based on performance,Therefore cannot be backfitted,I didn't back Twisted Logic today as i said iv'e stopped betting for a while on the vdw front,R.e your point on paco venture,Think again my friend.If you do feel you would like to discuss this at a later date.My E.mail is

karensparkes1@ntlworld.com

JIB - Rest assured I never take the form at face value. We have to be far more thorough than that.

At the end of the day everyone has their own take on what constitutes form or class. Trainers also have their own view on these two factors also and anyone who thinks they all believe the same approach to be true is well wide of the mark. Of course it is impossible for the form student to be totally aware of a trainers intentions, but more than enough can be gleaned from how horses from a particular yard are placed to consistently find winners.

It's a complex issue though and not one that can be summed up with wide sweeping views. One thing I do know is that good races are not won by bad horses trained by clever trainers.

Investor - I must admit, it does make you smile when a TV pundit denounces anyone brave enough to back a class horse dropped in class at odds on against no real opposition, but then later jumps up and down about an odds on novice hurdler on the same card that gets beaten. At the end of the day, I'm just glad I have got things back on track after a bad last week.

surely its putting the odds against you backing 8/11 shots,who have not shown they can jump that well?

Investor

Just think what you are saying, ie that Paco Venture would win that race 84 times of of 100, and would therefore logically be value at 9/1 on or better. Next time you find one like that, if you'll put it up early enough I'll take as much as you want to stake at those odds!

Re looking at races after they have been run, I wasn't in any way criticising you, still less implying any form of "sharp practice". We all look at races retrospectively - how else would we learn from VDW's examples. But I believe one has to work hard at maintaining one's critical facilities otherwise there is a tendency just to see those lines of reasoning that support the already known result. Numerous times we see posts on this thread saying, in effect, "how on earth did I miss X"?. The answer, quite often though not of course invariably, is that it was missed because it was only one of two or more possible winners, and only stands out clearly AFTER the event.

Wonder if the following will ring any bells?

CONSISTENT FORM + ABILITY + CAPABILITY + PROBABILITY + HARD WORK = WINNERS.

Regards,
Johnd

Greg - He jumped very well at Chepstow beating a highly rated odds on fav, but made mistakes when upped in class. Nothing was likely to put him under that sort of pressure today in a lower class race than both those contests.

You have to take class into account all the time when evaluating form. The class in which a horse runs or runs against is far more reaching than just where they finish.

Don`t disagree

Lets see you develop the "theme" -

Logicaly !

TC



and we might be getting somewhere.

Class is King !

1.30 Ascot

Wouldn't be too much of a surprise to see Mitcheldean win this at a big price

Investor

I too found Twisted Logic last night and was hoping the price that was forecast in the R.P of 14/1 would be available

I had a very busy morning so didnt't get chance to check any early prices so don't know what was available - anyone know?

I finally got to my PC just before the off but decided that the price at that time was too short so left the race alone.

re Twisted Logic

Yeah

Looking at it - after the event - it is easy to see everything that it had in its favour !

Sadly I missed it all and for that I call myself a "Pillock"

no doubt many on this Thread have already called me that - but- to them -

Up a "Dingo`s Dongle"



TC

john d,
Ive read the formula quite a few times but obviously have difficulty in understanding its full meaning or how best to apply it but thanks for pointing out the factors to consider, it seems so simple now you mention it.

But to complicate things further can each category have more than one way to qualify them ?.