Fulham
I was quite chuffed when statajack put up what he considered horses that were worth consideration,And i had already found them,Afterall they were winners in the race,Or had potential to be,Has did Spirit leader.I personally wouldn't back 1 horse in a 27 runner handicap,And i think you incredibly brave to put as you say " a substantial amount " on the horse,I can't understand people who shy away from 5/4 shots in a 7 runner,Yet lump on at 14s in a 27 runner handicap,I'm not for one minute doubting you i just feel there was need to make a book.I personally didn't play not in that size field,There was enough without it.

5.22 Feb 11th - "This Thread"

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

The " 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 !!!!

On what grounds?

there is a world of difference between factual evidence of inability to handle any surface and speculation of what may aspire.

as it happens she had performed well twice on good/yielding, both times in class 110 races,

Johnd,

you seem to have a similar problem to mtoto, with regard to this race, you saw 129 - vdw saw 510, mtoto saw g1 - vdw saw 238.

Johnd,

I hope you do not mind me commenting on your recent exchanges with Fulham.

I had a brief spell corresponding with Fulham several months ago.

I found him very helpful and most certainly honest.

There is no doubt he is well on his way with regards VDW and with the greatest respect to everyone posting on this thread I`d very much like the betting accounts of Fulham, Guest and Mtoto.

I think I`d be rather pleased with myself.

Cheers,

Grundy,

The book CVBaker mentioned was Riches from horses by Steve Ahern and also Betting To Win by Supernap.It took me many years to acquire them both.If you are hoping, as I was, for some sort of revelation or revolutionary thinking contained in them then I think you would be disappointed.

In my opinion there is much more of value in VDW's own writings,this thread and Gummies board as a whole.

hi statajack, could you contact me many thanks grundy,

Investor

What you say makes a great deal of sense, and we've all seen on this thread that Guest regularly makes books in races like Saturday's.

On occasion I do the same, but basically I prefer to wait for opportunities where I can find one horse that I regard as a good thing and, where the price permits, back it each way. This sometimes means long waits between bets - this calendar year I've only had seven VDW bets and one information-based one - but it is how I feel most comfortable.

I know that many think EW betting is, generally speaking, not good value, and whenever I've looked back on a longish sequence of bets I find that I'd have made more if I'd backed win only. But I feel more comfortable sacrificing a degree of profit by splitting the stakes for an EW bet, and thereby eliminating significant losing runs.

I also agree in principle with what you say about short priced selections. Its just that at the level I bet I've yet to achieve a strike rate which generates worthwhile profits. If I could achieve a markedly higher strike rate, and felt comfortable about betting at the level of some of my friends, it would make a lot of sense.

bream, thanks for the info, i agree the wealth of knowledge, on this board,through comments, discussions, is by far the best, members, such as fulham, statajack, mtoto, guest, johnd, lee, barney, determined, really putting the effort and time to evaluate racing using van der wheils excellant methods,and utilising all of their skills, to assess races, keep up the good work,grundy

Fulham

If you had mentioned the e.w beforehand,I wouldn't have posted that on the board,It wasn't meant to belittle you spirit leader was certainly a good each way bet so well done.

Investor

I can assure you that I took your comment as entirely straightforward and in no sense snide.

I don't know whether you've seen anything by Colin Davey, a bookmaker and, by all accounts, a tipster not to be dealt with. I've seen one of his booklets, and there is one thing in it that does make sense to me:

"Most people from my experience have a psychological limit to their betting staking, beyond a specific amount tends to make many people feel very uncomfortable."

Never mind the grammar, I think his meaning is clear, and it certainly applies to me. And my preference for EW betting when odds permit is part of that.

I have a friend who is a professional, and he has been known to bet on one day what I would stake in a season. But even he likes the assurance of eliminating the long losing run by EW betting and, like Kevin Booth of ISIRIS, often backs EW at prices like 5/2 and 3/1, where I almost invariably back win only.

Time constraints often due simply to the amount of racing on a saturday mean I can only do the numerical pictures for each race, leaving those races where nothing clearly comes through. Looking at Spirit Leader today, its interesting to note that in a similar vein to Paxford Jack, SL had the not insignificant amount of 18lb less physical weight to carry (and that despite running in a 51k race LTO). Well spotted Fulham!
Which bit of flattery brings me nicely to my question:

Fulham,
As you are conversant with all VDW's examples, could you tell me how many of them (by whatever method-consitency, Roushayd, Rivage Bleu etc) were not in the top 3 for the consistency rating in their respective races?
I know we differ slightly as to our interpretation as to exactly what the missing link is, so the answer might go some way to resolving this.....
regards,

Your last couple of posts are very revealing
Your E/W approach and comments brand you as

Completely lacking in confidence

Dont give up the day job you would never hack it as a pro

The pressure of earning a living from backing horses would be too much for you
as once you are alone with your proffession you no longer have a comfort zone i.E the day job

Forget the dreams of professional backer

you cant do it
You are in fact a Big Wimp who has no business even thinking about backing horses as a proffessional

Never mind though I am the same
And I would never have hacked it either unless I was forced into it

that goes for 99% of the members here

The only Difference between Yourself and I is/are

I would be confident enough (over a period of time) to post selections before the race without any of the various excuses that you come up with for not doing so.

Having 18lbs less physical weight to carry in a handicap from Lto usually means
The horse in question is now meeting superiour horses OR wise and is Now OR wise Raised in Class
out of form or not there are Still

Superiour horses in the race Based on OR of Course

Statajack

Just to clarify what you want, do you mean the top three within the field? And do you mean bets or selections (eg for the 7 March 1981, just Little Owl and Sunset Cristo, or Kenlis, Gaye Chance and Wild Gamble as well)?

Whichever, I have the material to hand to answer your question relatively easily, and will be glad to do so. But tomorrow I'm off to Leicestershire on a VDW research mission, so it will be at least Thursday before I can respond.


Boozer

I have never at any time suggested I was, or have aspirations to be, a professional backer. I am a self-employed historian who enjoys his work, and would not give it up to be a professional even if I was psychologically suited. But unless one is a David Starkey or Simon Schama, which I'm certainly not, historians' earnings are relatively modest. Hence the need to supplement earnings by backing horses.

[This message was edited by Fulham on February 11, 2003 at 10:05 PM.]

Fulham
Funnily enough it was a colin davey mailing that got me interested in racing i.e factor 4,I also went to one of his seminars (i knew no better then)There were 130 people there at 475 quid a shout and that was the first day of 2 nice little earner for the scheming you know what,But iv'e come on a long way since them days thank god.

Investor

One of my friends, and a contributor to this thread, also attended a CD seminar and by all accounts he is a nasty bit of work as well as a tipster to be avoided. From what appears in the booklet I've got - "Colin Davey System: As Presented to participants at one of Mr Davey's seminars" - it seems that he knew something of VDW's work and incorporated bits of it in his own approach.

Perhaps we should consider offering some genuine introductory seminars on VDW's approach. At £475 a head that would pay even better than Spirit Leader!

Barney,

I wish it was that easy. If I was only looking at the Group 1 status I would have gone for Scolardy. That would have made your posting a bit harder, Mtoto saw Group 1 (530) VDW saw 520. No, there is a lot more to it than that, not least the reasons I gave about Spirit Leader's size.

Also if that was/is the way I work I would have gone for Marlborough in the 3:35. Instead the bet was Valley Henry, if I went in for cheap shots, the reply would be VDW saw 880 (Group 1), Mtoto saw Group 2.

Johnd,

I have to agree with Determined about Fulham. He is helpful, and above all honest. If he says he backed Spirit Leader I don't for one moment doubt him. I have seen a few of his post race posts, and I can see the logic of his thinking. I don't always agree with his ideas about VDW, the same as I don't agree with all Guest says. Rather than be abusive towards each other wouldn't it be better to listen, and hopefully learn from each other? It's just I can't see that we will ever learn if we don't ask questions. That's the hard bit, to ask the question without sounding confrontational. I know, I'm still trying!

Be Lucky

MTOTO
I agree,in the main, with your post.I don't think I suggested, for one second, that Fulham had not backed the horse. The thing that rankles is that is that he chosen to push it down our throats, after the race, as a racing certainty. If any contributor to this thread thinks a horse is such a good thing, then surely they should have the balls to say so before the race.
I posted my thoughts before the race, so did you, Lee, and others, they have my admiration, anyone who says what a good thing any winner was after the race deserves all the scorn they get.

Fulham
I really do not intend you any harm, but surely you must recognise that posting selections after the race, no matter how well meaning, will leave you open to the kind of invective that has passed between us. You have much to contribute to this thread, but it does your credibility no good at all to restrict youself to 'after the race' evaluations.

Boozer
One day we will have to meet, and you can show an 'Old Pro' how to get pissed at 9.45.

[This message was edited by johnd on February 12, 2003 at 12:34 AM.]

mtoto,

yeh i suppose so, i had both cenkos and marlborough.

Fulham
On Saturday I didn't look at the race beyond the size of field, I can look in detail at three or four races of small fields in the time it would take for such a race, I will also be more likely to find a clear selection in any of those smaller fields so I follow VDW's advice to consider probability and ignore races with such large fields. Before Thursday I will have a look at, at least, the seven you mentioned.