4.20 Lingfield

Of the 3 most consistent and 4 top ability from the 1st 6 in betting f/c only OLIVIA GRACE is common to both.

Looking at her form I feel she has an excellent chance today, ie -

1st run of season over 6 fur`s - Wolves - carrying 9-11 in 0-95 (93) , value £8112.
9/4 fav` from opening 7/2 against good experienced h`cappers.
Prominent 4fur`s, weakened fnl` fur`.
***** carrying 7 llbs less today with top jockey booked. Postmark figure recorded was not far off best therefore with normal improvement plus less weight she can only show significant improvement.

She has the beating of P.Chief. D.Mystery - best on ability but badly drawn & will need run.
Palawan I agree has been placed to win but is he against a better class rival open to significant improvement ?

I`M NO EXPERT BARNEY BUT THERE`S MY THOUGHTS. WHATEVER THE RESULT TODAY I`LL HAVE LEARNT SOMETHING.

NB - trainer of OG had a similar scenario last summer with Boelyn Castle which duly obliged at from memory 14/1.

Regards,

apologies all vdw fans for butting in,i know nothing of vdw,olivia grace today,you made a point it is carrying 7lb less than its last race,but my thought on this is this,yes it is carrying 7lb less but this is only because top weight in this race is a 7 pounds better horse than the top weight in ogs last race,or is still the same has not been dropped anything for a 5 lb beating last time out,not saying it cannot win they are just my views,apologies again all vdwers

420l

i thought there may be more detail as mizhar is also placed to win,2nd last before one,now with 7lb less against the 2 principal rivals and after a stamina inducing 7f,which it never had a chance of winning,may not have as much put in as palawan but who knows???

Determined,
In my own opinion speed figs are VERY important although they do not stand up on their own.

Guest,
Well done for trying to help Determined with his own insight to the races. I don't necessarily agree but that's not the point I am delighted you are "joining in" as it were.

All,
In my opinion what Greg says is very important also, you should take heed.

Greg,
When you along, with others helped me with my handicapping question, I was firstly grateful and secondly surprised, because you have never said a lot about your betting. Anyway great to see you all helping to build pictures for everyone even though, there are things we may disagree on.

Barney,
Good to see you having a good crack also.

Just to finish Guest may (or may not) agree with some other things we say. He does not want to reveal all. Now he is putting (in my opinion) a more positive contribution, I respect his wishes.
Cheers All,
Swish

looking back

wasn't gunther mcbride the winner in the race the same as copeland and ideal du bois bury???to name but two

Evening all,

I`ve been up since 5.00am so its my bedtime. Just had a quick look back at some of the recent messages on this thread and the one titled `Given a chance by the h`cpper`.

I`ve been backing horses mainly in h`caps for approx` 20 years ( last 10 quite seriously ). Many winners have been found, many priced at double figure odds so I`m doing something right.

I`m now reading mixed messages, ie - weight doesn`t matter or does it ( yes as far as I`m concerned ), speed isn`t a key or is it ?

Looks like its back to basics for me.

VDW said hard work is necessary. I`m a great believer in `the more you put in the more you get out` but how much is necessary ?

Good night,

that one is difficult to explain for me also as the turn around in weights was significant,ahh well they cant all win,back to the drawing board. Perhaps there is a hannibal who can explain that one??

Good morning all,

Early to bed early to rise. If it wasn`t for this bloody decorating I`d be spending 5-6 hours today trying to work out this speed, weight business.

I want to go and watch yesterdays racing as I haven`t seen it yet but very quickly on the subject of weight,

Golden Goal - I was convinced the extra weight would matter but it clearly didn`t.

But it did matter with Canny Danny, Best Mate, Wahiba Sands, Banker Count (Haydock) didn`t it ?

Haven`t I heard somewhere before extra weight will eventually slow a god horse down yet it will not make a slow one run any faster ?

No doubt weight in the `class` will have some relevance.

Maybe by the end of this next week Greg will have taught me alot more about h`caps because I do know I still have alot to learn.

***I`ve just come across an example from my bets last year, ie - SMART PREDATOR won a very competitive 5 fur` York h`cap on 16/05/01 carrying 8.03. Value £19012. 0-110 (B). OR = 83. Won with something in hand.

On 02/06/01 at Musselburgh. Value £17400. 0-95. (C). SM carries 9-11. OR = 89.
21 lbs more to carry plus 6lbs incrarse in OR.
SM in good form, down in class. I kept telling myself all morning surely he cannot win with all this extra weight. I then thought this is one hell of a big strong horse running over only a very short distance therefore I eventually came to the conclusion to make the investment.
I watched the race several times and to me the weight in that final furlong proved decisive.

ANY COMMENTS WOULD BE VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.

Regards,

did it win its next race when returned to the class in which it competes?

Morning Barney and all,

I`m supposed to be decorating. I`ll get bloody shot if I don`t get on with it.

Quickly though, I`ll come back to your question later.

With my back to basics head on I`m going to study the runnings of the following 3 horses during the year 2000.

From the notes I have all 3 improved their OR throughout that season. In doing so they all recorded decent timefigures in good class and were placed very cleverly to win valuable h`caps carrying less weight.

GIVE THE SLIP - MURGHEM - ELLENS LAD.

I had reasonable investments on GTS in the Ebor and EL 24/09/00 ( RACE NO` 4612 ).

Yes I`m confused but some of the time I feel I know something. What will I achieve when I put in more hard work ?

THERE ARE MANY FAR MORE KNOWLEDGABLE PEOPLE THAN ME ON THIS BOARD & ANY COMMENTS FROM ANY OF YOU WILL BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.

Back to the bloody decorating,

Regards,

The answer to your question.

Smart Predator after his Mussel` run was put in way over his head, ie the 6 fur` Wokingham.
Whilst over wrong distance & outclassed SM showed up well at the 5 fur` marker.

Next run at Donny in class B 0-100 rated stakes, value £10539 carrying 8-10 he won priced 11/2.
I should remember because I invested and in doing so won back the money I`d lost at Mussel` with a little interest.

**** he looked to be `the winner in the race`

Regards,

it seems like he dids then

when you look back at these races do you think the trainer is bringing on the horse or trying to fool the handicapper???

by the way i'm doing the kitchen betwwen posts

Determined/Barney - One point to bear in mind re Golden Goal is that the race was a conditions event. On the better weight terms it could reasonably be expected that Silence Reigns should reverse the placings. There was a doubt though, as expressed yesterday, due to a number of factors. Firstly, the Kempton race was a drop in class for both horses. Secondly, the trainer pulled off a similiar feat in last years running where Crocadee defied the penalty. Thirdly, Kempton is less of a test than Sandown. Again there were further factors that cast a doubt. I have said many times that if it was just a case of isolating the class/form horse then the game would be far too easy.

Had Golden Goal been say 3/1 last time and won a shade more cosily then the evaluation could have thrown up something more solid. As it was, there were doubts about Silence Reigns definitely turning things around especially at such short odds. Interesting that the class/form horse defied his penalty in the Gd2 Novice hurdle on the same card. It is all about balancing out the various factors and knowing how certain things are affected in certain types of races. Handicaps are different to conditions events.

Horses like Smart Predator appear to run below par, but it is often a combination of training methods, subtle trickery and the way that form really pans out, especially in handicaps. They are not machines, but they are more consistent than many think. It is often an illusion.

hello guest

nice to see you back,are you saying the other novice was a bet???

Determined.

I'm reading your posts with interest. Many of your selections are matching mine, so I think I know how you work.

Smart Predator... I still don't think the weight stopped him at Muss. I think he bounced, in the previous race he recorded his best ever speed figure in a top grade handicap. I am very wary of horses next time out when they have increased their s/f by a big margin in higher class races. I have read that it can take up to six weeks for a horse to get over it effort involved. I have this theory right or wrong, they don't run the best horses quickly. If they have given their best, it takes time to get over it. Look at the horses that do well at meetings like Royal Ascot, etc., how many seem to fail (bounce) if they reappear quickly.

Give The Slip.... In the Ebor, exposed another flaw in the weight system. You cannot generalise, and think weight is the answer to bring horses together, it often fails. Weight for age, and sex allowances often don't work if the horse is good enough to hold it's own. The handicapper said GTS was the best horse in the race, and some rule that has little logic, says inferior horses have to give him weight!

Guest.

I would like to thank you for going into detail before a race. Long may it continue, hope more will follow your example. I still don't agree with some of your thinking, I made Golden Goal the class/form horse, and expected him to confirm the form. I think he won the last race easier than the form book shows. I can't see how you made the winner of the grade 2 race the class/form horse. I am still studying the 2 examples you tried to help me with. I think I am coming to grips with LFV, but in doing this I am starting to wonder about another (possible) misconception of the guide lines as interpreted.

To end I will ask again do you think vdw would still use penalty value as the ONLY guide to class and ability? Given the changes that have happened in racing over the last few years. One of which appears to be handicaps are formed from the top, i.e. the top weight carries a set weight 10st on the flat. In the past it appears that some handicaps where set from the bottom pushing the better horses out by giving them impossible weights? Just a thought.

Regards

Dear All,
As a lot of you know I totally agree with some things vdw said and disagree with others.
Anyhow I think you will all enjoy reading this. It is taken from MARTIN PIPES biography, published 1992.
Bob Hawkins is a professional gambler who made his entire income betting. Back in 1975 he started betting with David Pipe who was a bookie (Martin Pipe’s father),
In the same day Hawkins backed a 33-1 winner and a 25-1 winner. D. Pipe could not afford to pay him out there and then so offered to pay by cheque. Whilst the cheque was being sorted they got talking and Hawkins admitted that his winners were not whims or fancies, but obtained by hard study of the form book. Pipe’s dad realised no one would put that sort of money on big long shots so a long conversation ensued, and Pipe asked Hawkins if he would be interested in helping his young trainer son, Martin.
From this Hawkins joined Martin Pipe and became his chief advisor, even telling him whether or not to buy certain winners of sellers. Hawkins would weigh up future opposition and tell Pipe where to run his horses to advantage. (CAN YOU IMAGINE WHAT A COMBINATION THIS WAS? WE ALL TRY AND SEE OR GUESS WHAT THE TRAINERS IS UP TO. IN THIS CASE THE PUNTER WAS TELLING THE TRAINER WHAT TO DO SO EVERY TIME THE PUNTER KNEW EXACTLY WHAT THE TRAINER WAS UPTO!!!!!!!!!!! YOU CAN’T HAVE A BIGGER ADVANTAGE).
Any way they would deliberately run horses over wrong distances and going in higher class races. He writes about a horse called Mayumbe, in 1976, after several runs.

“Another outing at Ascot over half a mile less saw Ron Atkins back on board for a fair fourth behind the subsequent Cheltenham Gold Cup winner, Master Smudge, confirming yet again the horse’s proper mark. Once established, the pattern is glaringly obvious. A huge drop in class, back to the right distance and our money slowly spread out amongst the bookies at lowly Plumpton on his next start and our plans were smoothly executed once again.”

A classic example of what VDW said about seeing the WINNER IN THE RACE!

Now amongst the many other things Hawkins says he says the following, which appears to me to contradict what VDW said about seeing how horses finished over the last 2 furlongs.

“An inherent danger to racegoers looking for future winners is the false impression gained when noting fast-finishing placed horses. Often they are running through beaten rivals, benefited from educational tactics or were only put into the race after the principals had flown. Many horses look impressive in those circumstances, then are found lacking on their next outing when asked to get into the thick of things”

This book is a great read and would say to EVERY punter to try and read every racing biography they can, especially by the bookies and trainers themselves.
Well I hope you enjoyed reading that and no doubt it may arouse some questions and controversy,
Yours,
Swish

Anyone backing Golden Goal yesterday would have been taking a big chance. VDW was not about taking chances and elementary scrutiny of the form would have resulted in the race being left alone. Was there more to come from Golden Goal or was Silence Reigns good enough to win on the revised terms? Choosing either option means taking a lot on trust so the race is a good illustration of a situation were there is no "winner in the race".

The more deeply I study VDW's methods then the more convinced I am that VDW's advice to 'listen to what the trainer is telling us' is one of the greatest clues to how to treat a weight rise.

As an example in last weeks Eider Chase at Newcastle, I thought THIS IS SERIOUS the clear class/form horse. I thought it one 'to let run' as it was carrying an extra 16lb whilst moving up from class 330 to 370 and consequently wouldn't bet.

In hindsight (wonderful thing ) then the fact that Charlie Swan was prepared to ship him over from Ireland should have told me that he thought it a fair mark, without doing any damage to his already allocated Grand National mark when he won.

Finally, I would like to say welcome back to 'Guest' with the insights that he is prepared to offer alongside the valuable postings of Statajack, Lee and others then I'm sure anybody with the will to work at it will uncover much of the VDW methodology.

Cheers

Mtoto/Barney - I'm not saying that Giocomo was a bet, but it was the class/form horse albeit with some factors against. He had the highest ability rating and was a form horse. Novice hurdles have to be treated with extreme caution especially where a lot of the field are lightly or unraced. Again though the form of Giocomo holds a clue to discovering the generally unknown factors.

Re LFV/Strombolus - Bear in mind what VDW said regarding 4 horses who won in the same week namely Crown Matrimonial, Ascencia, Diamond Edge and Parkhouse. The were all top rated on ability and consistent form horses showing the ultimate balance given other factors. However a sound wager does not have to be top rated on ability. It is the balance between class and form that shows us the good things. It is also true that this balance will very often show us probable but not virtually certain winners and it is these horses we have to be wary of. It does mean missing a few winners but also missing many losers.

In answer to Mtotos question re class/ability I would say VDW would probably hold the same view now as then. There is more to some aspects of VDWs ideas than meets the eye and one shouldn't be put off by their apparant simplicity.

Statajack - I agree fully with your view on Golden Goal/Silence Reigns. There were really only 2 possible outcomes and had the odds allowed I would have availed myself of them.

Swish - The quote from Martin Pipes biography is a very relevant one and I can also vouch for the books worth and interest to others. As Mr Pipe says himself in the book, he is not fiddling just bending the rules slightly (or words to that effect). It is well worth reading such books about trainers.

The point made about apparantly fast finishing horses is also a fair one, but again don't be fooled by the apparant simplicity of certain VDW statements. There was always more than meets the eye with the wise Mr Van Der Wheil.

Dear Guest,
thankyou for being the only person to make a comment on the Pipe article. I knew for certain you or others would come back on the final 2 furlongs analysis,
I knew you would say there is more than meets the eye and there probably is but one must take into account that Bob Hawkins made a million backing horses and then advising M. Pipe to also become a very wealthy man so he was no idiot,
yours
swish