GrahamHepburn/Johnd.

Re Hussard Collonges, I can only guess at the trainers thoughts, but I think he isn't worried about the OR. The Gold Cup is the target, if he wins, or even runs well the OR is out the window. I think the idea is to give the horse as much experience as possible against good horses. If he had won along the way so much the better, but nothing lost. I noticed he was even entered in The King George, Kempton is certainly not his course. I don't think he has been given a hard race this season, just pushed enough to learn a bit.

Be Lucky

Statajack - yes, but VDW clearly says "two methods of rating" or "rated by two different methods".

The key here is the use of the word "methods". I wouldn't call using press handicap or speed ratings a "method", would you?

Guest,

I would agree if the rating were just that, but what if they were adapted to express more than the bare facts? i.e. not just the bare s/f, but with something built in for class. A little like the postmark figures you used.

Be Lucky

thanks fulham for your advice i will try these contacts, do you have any idea where to get get back copies of any form papers for the dates mentioned many thanks, grundy

john duncan

quote:

---

Originally posted by Guest:
Statajack - yes, but VDW clearly says "two methods of rating" or "rated by two different methods".

The key here is the use of the word "methods". I wouldn't call using press handicap or speed ratings a "method", would you?

---

Guest

I disagree with you on this point. The compilers of these ratings presumably take a fair time to form their ratings, and use a method to reach their figures. Speed Figures and Handicap Ratings are two sets of fixtures which rate horses using different methods.

How good ratings are is another matter. However the compiler of a set of ratings surely stands or falls by the accuracy of them. It is up to the user to select sets of ratings which he feels give an accurate measure of races.

Rob

Rob - The point is that VDW later suggested using some other form of ratings such as handicap or speed sets from the press. These were to be used as a further guide to the horses chance in the given situation. If I was going to just list todays RP ratings for horses, I would hardly be applying a method, would I?

Mtoto - Yes, a good point. But nobody has yet addressed the reasons VDW made a definite distinction between the term "rating" and "ratings". He was telling us he used his own methods to rate horses he looked at. Now what might those methods be?

If someone tells you that they are not saying anything for the sake of it and that everything they have stated has been carefully put across in a way that some may think things of unimportance, should we ignore his advice on how to interpret his statements?

Guest

If you used the ratings from the Racing Post you wouldn't be applying a method directly, but someone else must be applying a method to arrive at those figures. the figures themselves are formed by using a method of rating. VDW may have formed his own ratings, but he also used ratings available in the press. In his article 'The Missing Link?'(pages 19-22 of 'The Ultimate Wheil Of Fortune') he uses rating from the Sporting Life and the Daily Mail. I'm sure the compilers of those two sets of ratings used sound methods to arrive at their figures, as the two compilers were well respected.

We could even say that it's a method if the ratings compiler pulled numbers out of a hat. Not a very good method, but a method nevertheless.

Rob

I'm glad to see you're asking questions, always a good idea if you want to learn. I can answer your first one, VDW himself didn't "just" use the two ratings, rating the runners is part of the method and VDW says more or less any two ratings will do as long as they're compiled along different lines.

Grundy

The only place I've used is the British Library Newspaper Library at Colindale, North London. There is a recorded message on 020 7412 7353 which has info. about opening hours, etc. (The Library also supplies photocopies of newspapers/parts of newspapers by post.)

guest good to see you back on the board,in the passage regarding sunset cristo,van der wheil mentioned silver buck, another captain,does his mentioning of these horses have any factors which are relevant to your evaluation process, i remember a very informative sports forum page entitled, pack up betting if you arent, getting betting right, by gr taylor,where he mentioned roushayd desert orchid, mark of esteem, using the winner in the race, evaluation from i believe systematic betting by van der wheil,also a further letter by mg kent,entitled class must be the starting point for all evaluations, mg kent mentioned a method using jb list of horses called quality bets bring home the bacon, i would very much welcome your opinion on these, many thanks grundy,

john duncan

Epiglotis,
Exactly!

has everybody sat down now? LOL.

Guest

I have given a lot of thought to the other ratings. Of course I can only guess but I think the items below are the basic ingredients, what he didn't give was a detailed recipe.

{To confirm what the figures say it is necessary to study the form of all concerned, taking particular note of class in which they ran, the course they ran on, the pace and going of the respective races, distances won or beaten by and most important, how they performed in the later stages of each race}.

Most commercial rating will have some of the above included as vital ingredients, but not necessarily in the right amount/sequence, but better than nothing.

I do agree with Statajack that this very important part of the method doesn't get the attention it deserves. I except we will never come up with the exact formula, but then perhaps we are meant to find our own. Missing Link?

Be Lucky

Re Ratings
Loathe as I am to go over ancient races, VDW wrote, in his Pegwell Bay example "HAD THE GROUND BEEN HEAVY, I WOULD NOT HAVE WAGERED ON HIM!" ( His capitals - not mine).
It is reasonably certain that he came to the above conclusion by the reading of previous form, and not by use of ratings. Ipso facto, the final decision must always come down to the reading of form!

Johnd,

I agree about Pegwell Bay, he also said if the race had been at Cheltenham he wouldn't have backed Wayward Lad. Why can't those factors be built into his ratings?

Be Lucky

Ipso facto, I agree with John D. Ratings dont tell you a horse's physical preferences.
However, why on earth does vdw mention them so often throughout his writings? Why does he mention just how different 2 ratings can be in "Spells it out"? Why should he say we should use 2 ratings "which are compiled on different lines"?
VDW obviously didnt know his arse from his elbow on this subject so lets just ignore this aspect of the methodology- Guest does!
Rating and Ratings are indeed 2 different things as Guest says but when Dave Edwards or Dave Bellingham are compiling their ratings for a race they are RATING horses. VDW used 2 methods of rating horses, the finished product is RATINGS-"both methods showed Beacon Light well out of it and his last race had been a hard one." I dont know about anyone else thinks but this implies to me a combination of form study and ratings confirming what each other appears to be saying.

Three more questions;
Would people say vdw was a cautious person or one prone to take chances?
Secondly, what rating(s) method did vdw use to confirm his view that Roushayd was improving as he was being upped in class?
Thirdly, what do phrases like "the horse gets ratings support" or "the horse doesnt get ratings support" mean to people?
regards,

This is the forcast for the ERIN,

beacon light 1/1
decent fellow 5/1
mr kildare 5/1
prominent king 6/1

AS we know lots of people on the board use systems- most of the good ones revolve around peoples opinions of one kind or another,

speed figure
post mark
handicap rating
selection box most selections

It is inconcievable that a market shaped as such was not influenced by all these factors.

How else can the favorite be 5 points clear of the second in the market.

Ipso facto, while that is the in word, THESE ARE NOT HIS METHODS OF RATING.

also,

I bet VDW got sick of people asking What are your methods of ratings?.......What are your methods of rating ?..........what are your methods of rating?..........what are your methods of rating?.

After a couple of years of this he must have realised he was dealing with a load of thick T****, and just told them to use "any ratings" to shut them up.

Barney

With respect, the figures you quote may have been a forecast for the Erin, but only one of several.

Perhaps the most authoritative was the Sporting Life's, in which the first five were 6/4 Beacon Light, 7/2 Decent Fellow, 6/1 Prominent King, 15/2 Meladon and 8/1 Mr Kildare.

Rating and Ratings were, in the eyes of VDW, two different matters. He actually said so in his own words. Unlike some of what he was telling us this is a point that was actually spelt out quite clearly but obviously still got missed or misinterpreted.

Fulham,

As you’re aware Pagan Sun is a different kettle of fish to the majority of VDW’s selections and therefore takes some sorting out. It revolves around elements that are pretty much isolated to this type of horse race though. Sorry for not getting back to you before I went away.