The last 3 races at Ascot on Friday have 3 class/form horses but only one would make any appeal as a bet, if the odds somehow were bigger than 4/7.

2.40 Baracouda is super consistent and won against much better class than this lot, but unless the bookies get generous he will be too short to bet. Big surprise if he doesn't win though in any case.

3.10 Chicuelo is class/form and whilst there is only one real opponent in the shape of Galant Moss and the weight spread is not that much,he is unproven in a handicap with such a burden. No bet.

3.40 Puntal is class/form and consistent but there is conflict with 2nd class/form Foreman who has been in better races and against better horses. Puntal is no odds on shot by my claculations. No selection.

Does anybody find this race interesting I'm going for the fav. I think this might be a prep race for the Irish horse. FAv very consistent and if we dismiss the second fav evens is a steal.

Titus

hI tITUS,
I wouldn't dismiss the second fav if I were you,
Cheers
Swish

Your arithmetic seems to be faulty. 100-84=16, 100/16=6, 5x16=80 therefore Investor could expect a small profit from 1-5 up.

do not look at official rating like you are,what official rating a horse beat etc,it should be looked at differently.its about finding horses well hcapd,not what ratings they have beaten.

I know you have spent an awful long time,Trawling through past races,(vdw examples)There have been numerous bets this month,That fall in the same category as paco venture,I stick by what i say r.e this horses chance,I'm obviously looking at things in a different light,I'm not ignoring class form,or any other factors,If you disagree on the 84% chance i said this horse had,Then you must also disagree with a quote from vdw.If a horses credentials don't add up to 95 To 100%,It should be left to run,How do you interpret that.

Epiglotis


You are quite right, thanks.


Investor

It is a matter of interpretation, but I think you are confusing two quite separate ideas. First there is the idea of a horse's chance of winning, and second there is the extent to which the horse meets VDW's "specification" as a likely winner and bet.

As to the first, the downside of an 80%-90% strike rate is a 10%-20% loser rate, and this reflects the inevitable risk in racing: the very best horse can be brought down by a faller, be baulked at a crucial stage, have an "off" day due to as-yet-undiagnosed illness, etc.

As to the second, from VDW's examples it is surely possible to distinguish those where everything (that we have been able to identify from his writings as relevant) is present, and where there are possible question marks, ie the horse has never won at (or indeed near) the class level of the race in question. I think VDW's comment to which you refer means don't back probable winners unless nearly everything relevant is present.

And in discussing his examples, VDW not only distinguished between those to back (like Little Owl and Sunset Cristo) and those to be left (Kenlis, Wild Gamble etc), within the first category he clearly distinguished between the relative "strengths" of the bets. Thus Little Owl was a "racing certainty"; Rifle Brigade an "outstanding bet" (though he was running for the first time in the 1978 season and had not yet shown that he could get 1.5 miles, so some elements were not absolutely in place); and Sunset Cristo a "good bet".

Little Owl, as a "racing certainty", was arguably the "strongest" bet VDW discussed, yet he wanted odds better than 3/1 on before he regarded it as value. You are surely not arguing that Paco Venture was a "stronger" bet than Little Owl?

Greg how do we know when a horse is well handicapped is it more to do with the weight being carried in the CLASS from race to race? & have we then to use official ratings as a guide then in coalition with this?.

Titus - The novice chase at Uttoxeter creates a bit of a conflict for me. Whilst I expect No Need For Alarm to win after balancing everything out, Native Scout was out of it's depth last time and is good enough to potentially throw a spanner in the works.

Unless Baracouda goes off above 4/7 I won't be betting today.

SCENT OF VICTORY 2.15W

CHUICUELO 3.10A

Luck to all

Now at least we're starting to mention horses were the interpretation or point i am trying to get across originates,I'm not saying that Paco Venture Was stronger than little owl,But it was most certainly an outstanding bet,You've obviously looked at Pegwell bay,Did you eventually conclude this horse was a good thing.

on MITCHELDEAN in the 1.30 asc.TOULOUSE LEURTREC also holds very good claims against the likely fav in the 12.45 utt.

he has never won a handicap of any kind even over hurdles, this is in itself enough to prevent it being a bet, in this race, from a vdw point of view.

with the other one I think the trainer was suprised by his reapearance run and then upped him quick to have a look, he didnt disgrace himself, but this run over further with a bit more weight could be to get him ready for a crack at another decent race.


The third in the other race probably paid more than a win in this so why is he coming so low?

Investor

I haven't finished with the Pegwell Bay example. I'll let you know when I have.

Swish Guest

Thanks for you replies left well alone in the end.

titus

Well 2 from 5 and a profit,That's what it's all about,I thought you were brave to go for chicuelo,Especially with the way it performed lto,But anyway well done for having the balls to put your selections up,From my point of view i would't have backed any of them,And i think you made another mistake to add to the 2 you say you'd already made,By taking old feathers over paco venture,If you do leave the thread have a good chrimbo,And a prosperous new year And take care.

i'll speak to you in about 2 years time then,lol.

The only horse i would have contemplated backing today (outside the obvious ) would have been no need for alarm,But i agree with you r.e native scout,A good look at the form tells you it was in with a good shout,I'm still not utterly convinced the nicchols horse would have won anyway,How did you view it.

I noticed the other day there was a discussion on this thread about how trainers place their charges and their estimation of how good their horses are. I recently posted Puntal on the notebook thread as a normally reliable source confirmed the horse as being champion hurdler material according to all at Pipe's yard. However good Kopeck may turn out to be, coming 2nd in a G2 hurdle is not quite champion hurdler form. Apart from their old handicappers who can run to a certain mark and have well defined preferences which are there for all to spot, just how well do trainers really know their horses?
Not as much as we suppose is my guess.
regards,