Why was Little owl a certainty
and Sunset Cristo only NEARLY a Certainty?

fulham you said that spirit leader was, ;a good bet bordering on the outstanding; did you not feel there were very conflicting elements in this race as johnd highlighted,, you mentioned a collegue, stating that non so was the 2nd class/ form horse, but this horse was not in the top 4 ability rating,... could you expand on your evaluation for me,,,thanks grundy

And into which catagory would Stormez fall?

Boozer,

It took me a while to try to work all these out and I still dont know that I am 100% right.
But if it helps, I found that it was to do with the relativity between the last three runs and the conditions of the race under inspection, always starting with class.

Have you looked at Zilzal?

It was very similar to spirit leader when viewed in that way.

Hope this helps.

virtual certainty, based on its chase form

Barney
If your post above refers to Stormez, thanks for the reply.

Grundy

I've really nothing to add on Spirit Leader. Depending on how one viewed Copeland, either a 2nd c/f, well clear on ability of the 3rd, with everything in its favour, to be backed against a c/f out of its depth at the weights, or a c/f well clear of the 2nd c/f ...

For me, there was no conflict in the race. Just the "ordinary" risks inherent in any race (but obviously numerically greater in Saturday's field) vis-a-vis incidents in running and the possibility that a horse seemingly out of its depth (such as Puntal) MIGHT show more than the Form Book suggests was likely.

As regards Non So, imagine the race was a match between him and Spirit Leader. From the way VDW assessed things, both were form horses, but SL had a much higher ability rating (170 to 102); had good, consistent form in higher class races, and in my view was well suited by the conditions. At the weights, logically there was only one winner.

Somebody said it was healthy or was it helpful
So here goes

3 Negatives in my view that I would like other members opinons on.

Spirit Leader

1.Never Raced on ground as fast as this never mind won on it

2.How can Non So be compared to Spirit Leader using ability Ratings when Non So is only a 5yo and Spirit Leader is a 7 yo who has run in twice as many races
Its nearly like comparing a 3yo and a 5yo on the flat one has plenty history the other hasn’t had time to get any history

3.Spirit Leader 10lbs out of the Handicap?

fulham many thanks for your reply, well done picking this horse, your form evaluation was spot on with this race,, i think it benefits all members to evaluate races , to gain further knowledge,

barney, you mentioned zilzal, as an example comparing with fulhams choice in the tote handicap, i recall zilzal being in systematic betting,,, werent these horses based on the roushayd method?... i would welcome your opinion, .thanks grundy

Grundy,

you are right it was in systematic betting.

re analyse the race and put them in order see what you find.

then figure out why all the others appart from the first and second were not considered, by some, to be in form for that race.

Ps. a clue, we had all the same shit in the big pegwell bay discussion a month ago.

[This message was edited by Barney on February 11, 2003 at 12:54 PM.]

Boozer

A question about one of your three points.

You wrote "Spirit Leader 10lb out of the handicap?"

My Post suggests she ran from just 1lb out, and in that regard was marginally better off than Non So. But perhaps you have different information.

Yes I think you are right it was more of a question than a statement
Must be Raceform error as the Raceform declarations have her running off 122 for Saturdays race which must be wrong
She must surely have a penalty for winning the Sandown race

FULHAM
Your words not mine, posted at 3.57. Saturday.
"All the rest were well below this 7, and well out of it on class"......"Leaving 4 for serious consideration". None of the above gave any mention of Non So.
By 8.32. that evening you had Non So as the 2nd/3rd c/f horse.
If you can prevaricate so much after the result is known, how do you expect to believed about your clarity of thought before the race?
On a more serious note, Boozer has raised a very interesting question about Spirit Leaders ability to handle the ground, perhaps you or Barney could enlighten us?

Barney,
your earlier post was exquisitely succint and as i've been trawling through the earlier postings on the thread i've noticed that though you use few words, they speak volumes. Thanks Barney and everyone else who have contributed to, for me, a really educational thread. With the knowledge I have gained from this thread and many others on Gummy's site i've had a few bets of late (after a long lay off) and I am showing a profit. I have "lurked" for too long and when my next interpretation of a good V.D.W. bet comes along I will post it with my reasoning and look forward to your comments. Thanks again to all.
regards
Peter

Johnd

VDW often wrote "read what was there". Until I saw some posts on here, including yours, I never really understood why he wrote that, but now I do.

If you look at my posts on the Spirit Leader race, you will see that there was a group of seven horses miles clear of the rest on VDW's ability rating. These comprised, for me, the obvious point of departure, and only if no form horses were among them, or the form horse(s) among them were unsuited by the conditions, would there have been any need to consider lower rated animals.

As it happened, there was, in Spirit Leader, a clear form horse among the group of seven, well suited (in my opinion) by the conditions. Given that the other possible form horse in the group - Copeland - was plainly out of it on weight grounds, Spirit Leader was the clear and obvious choice. Anyone opposing her was simply ignorant of the core elements of VDW's thinking, and it is good to see that Andrew and Barney both found her, too. As VDW said, when the approach is understood, we all find the same selections as he would have done.

As to the going, what on earth was the problem (no pun intended)? Few indeed are the horses incapable of running to form on good ground. The chance that Spirit Leader would fail to perform on such was trivial. Had the conditions been extreme by contrast with what SL had proved she could manage - hard, say - the situation would have been different, and the bet more chancy. (But there again, at 14/1, one might take the view that chances of that kind were factored in.)

Your difficulty is that I was able to set out most of the thinking on the Spirit Leader race because, as it happens, the judgements about in-formness were relatively straightforward, and I doubt that those without an understanding of the "missing link" had any difficulty in seeing that three of the seven were clearly not in form. The race was, in fact, a classic example of the straightforward application of VDW's two core considerations.

You have given up the effort to understand VDW's approach, for a reason I understand, and are pursuing your own approach. Good luck to you and, judging by your results as shown in the tipping competition table, you are going to need it. Personally, I'll stick with the tried and trusted.

FULHAM
Your dementia seems to have taken over again, you forgot to mention that all your brilliant appraisal came AFTER THE RACE. Perhaps now is the time to take me up on my previous challenge.

Johnd

Try reaching a conclusion from the following facts:

1) I am on record as consistently arguing that the core of VDW's approach was "class/form";

2) I have shown, in some detail, how those two concepts applied to the Tote Gold Trophy on Saturday;

3) I have offered to provide you with proof of a significant part of a (in my terms) substantial bet on the horse.

The logical deduction?

And you know I'm not bluffing on (3), as if I was unable (when the Tote pay out) to provide you with that proof, my position as a member of this board would be untenable.

Fulham
Not much detail about the meaning of 'form' in 2.

Epiglotis

As you know, I'm keen to encourage self help, so here are two questions:

1) even without knowing how VDW assessed in-formness, would you wish to argue that any of the three horses from the top seven in the ability ranking that I suggested should be discarded immediately as "out of form" warranted serious consideration? If so, make the case and we'll discuss it;

2) turning to the remaining four, relative to one another, which in your opinion had the best form prior to Saturday's race, and why? Again, if you address the question seriously, I'll discuss it seriously.

I appreciate that, living in Japan, the old Form Books would be expensive to get, so I could not reasonably expect you to address similar questions about VDW's examples. But with the Tote Gold Trophy, all you need is on the RP website.

5.22 Feb 11th - "This Thread"

Fulham anounces that he has the secret of "The Missing Link" -

The "Holy Grail" of all VDW followers !!!!

quote:

---

as it happens, the judgements about in-formness were relatively straightforward, and I doubt that those without an understanding of the "missing link" had any difficulty in seeing that three of the seven were clearly not in form.

---

hoo bloody ray !!