JIB

Guest prostrate? More likely out and about spending his winnings from In Contrast. (Or sorting out the next VDW cert. for tomorrow.)

I wonder (since he appears trapped in this thread and nothing else is known of him) if in his celebrations he might treat himself to a beer or two or will it be, "two sweet sherry`s please".

All,

I do not have the relevant form book to establish the ability rating of SMART TAR.

Is anybody prepared to let me have ST`s ability rating.

Thanks,

Determined,

55.

Determined

55.

Fulham / Lee,

Thank you but if I`d paid attention to one of Lee`s earlier posts which I`ve just read again during my research on Smart Tar, etc the answer was already there.

Thanks again and apologies for wasting your time,

Gripping stuff this,

If only I could have 6 months off work,

Cheers,

JIB - I reckon you've been watching too much Sky News coverage. However, if you insist on putting some metaphorical war slant on the thread, then surely JohnD has put himself into voluntary exile. Apart from that I don't see how anyone else is on the retreat or out for the count. I hope you look at a horse race in a more objective manner.

3 Legs - Lager sufficed today, though I am partial to a bottle of champers. Unfortunately I acquired an expensive taste for it in my other business.

Guest, I trust you enjoyed your tipple today, I offer my condolences that your other business has left you with sometimes unfortunate expenses, although I can`t fault your taste.

I wish you well in your betting so that occasionally you may indulge yourself perhaps more often.

Profit is entirely irrelevent to the discussion, the "benchmark" has been defined on this thread as a strike rate of 80%, if anybody claims that their understanding of VDW is the correct one they should be able to demonstrate this by producing that strike rate. Nobody on this thread has shown such a strike rate so there is no reason to believe that any of them understand how to make selections in line with VDW methodology. Various people Crock, Fulham, Guest, Johnd, Mtoto, Statajack have by their posts suggested that the important thing is to be setting about things exactly as VDW did and further that they know to a greater or lesser extent how VDW did set about things and can therefore see that others are doing it incorrectly. None of these people can demonstrate by results that they understand the approach, that's all there is to it, there are no degrees of understanding, it's absolute, none of you know. More importantly how will you ever make any progress towards knowledge when you insist on defending your separate little plots of partial knowledge as if this is some kind of competition? Guest: your attitude is an appalling hinderance to progress, I have only just mentioned your tendency to look at this thread in terms of personalities and you come back about me 'siding with someone whose pecentages......etc', get a ****ing grip! I'm not siding with anybody, there are no sides. It seems to me that of you hardcore types the one who is both sticking to the word and being most direct is Statajack, on Saturday taking the approach as he outlined it, without even considering the qualifications of the candidates, gave two losers and one winner @5-1, this is better than the results of the serious students on that day. There's a lot of talk on this thread about having an open mind, this is the ultimate joke as I've never had such protracted dealings with a more hide bound set of unimaginative, closed minded fools. Whether you carry on like this is up to you, as an alternative you could try communication and pooling of ideas after all it could hardly be less productive than this thread has so far been.

Continuing with the simple implimentation as mentioned on Saturday there is only one horse to consider today: Windsor 2:35 Meelup.

Epiglotis

You wrote, vis-a-vis one 5/1 winner from three selections, "this is better than the results of the serious students on that day".

How do you know? I don't know what Guest, Mtoto, Crock, Statajack, Johnd etc backed on Saturday, and they certainly don't know what I backed. Yet another instance of your characteristic of sounding off without the facts?

Have you read the post? Understood it? What people do off the thread has nothing to do with it, look at the horses posted on this thread before the off on Saturday. Basically **** you for you continuous persistent negativity, the horses I put up come from employment of VDW thinking as clearly written without any phantasy form, what do you ever contribute? Patronising bullshit about past events couched in meaningless mystical terms... wonder****ingful. In case you decide to edit or delete your latest crap I append a copy below.


Epiglotis
You wrote, vis-a-vis one 5/1 winner from three selections, "this is better than the results of the serious students on that day".
How do you know? I don't know what Guest, Mtoto, Crock, Statajack, Johnd etc backed on Saturday, and they certainly don't know what I backed. Yet another instance of your characteristic of sounding off without the facts?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 985 | Registered: November 23, 2001

Epiglotis

Interesting to see that, once challenged for sloppy thinking/writing, you start to crack. I think you said once that your family included psychologists. Time to seek some help.

JIB
No doubt your'e an intelligent person,In a lot of your posts you mention doctors and other professional people,And i would be very suprised if you hadn't attended a university of some description.The thing is john,You had to learn your'e trade whatever it may be.To do that somebody had to teach you be it a teacher a lecturer or whatever,also during the learning process you had to study in order to learn your'e craft,And at the end of these studies you either come through with flying colours or fail.

I have always said i'm not purely vdw,and i have also had a pop at Guest in the past.And basically what that boiled down to was a complete lack of understanding on my part ( and i'm not massaging anybody's ego,Just telling it how it is) but through all the abuse and back biting,He's still trying to help.Even his last 2 posts to johnd were helpful,Iv'e got absolutely no doubt in my mind that Guest has helped quite a few on this thread towards a better understanding of vdw,But of course they have done there homework Barney,Fulham,Determined and now myself will all be benefitting from what he has put across on this thread.It is all there to see if one applies themselves or more to the point understand what he's trying to say.The thing that most come unstuck with or don't understand,Is the term FORM The way vdw wanted it to be understood.When the certain factors are found or if they are found there would be a lot of posters on this thread whose views would change completely mine certainly did,But what it made me realise is that guest has been helpful from day one,but this would only be apparent to those who have done they're homework.

Investor

The list does not end with those you've mentioned. I know from off-thread emails that there are at least five others (who perhaps use their time more wisely that you and me, ie post here much less often!) who have accumulated, or are accumulating, the Form Books and endeavouring to benefit from the help available from Guest (and others).

Johnd
I don't know if your'e looking in,Going back to Rooster Booster.You kicked up a right stink about this horse,The distance was wrong the course didn't suit,Fair enough you have your'e opinion.But i'm sure you agree that class and consistent form are very important,But what i can't understand is you saying that QUITO was a good bet the other day,This horse had figures of 0/7 (a bit like your'e tipping challenge figures) at the distance having been placed only once,That must be a contradiction in terms if ever iv'e seen one.

Fulham
It doesn't suprise me that there are others,I'm just glad that i carried on and didn't give in,Which i very nearly did,you and i both know that the methods work well,I often wish that the doubters could see it in the right context,As i'm sure this would change theyr'e views.

Can anybody guide me to the page where guest gave a rundown on gaye chance.

Your red herrings are boring and unperceptive, address the issue, what's your stance on Meelup?

I`m going to back it e/w