Barney you are quite right, but they all had a lot more than that in common look at the %.

A clear example is Allude who won very easily. I'm not trying to be a smart arse, its just that looking at things in a table format VDW is easier to see and compare. Anyways I see that not many are interested in it so I won't bother.

WORCESTER, 10 May 2003, 2:05, Cannons Health Club Four Years Old Novices' Hurdle (Class E) (4yo),Winner £3,486.00,2m GOOD, 12 Runners

Allude, ................................................................................................... Form = (15), Av = 23k, Ab = 6k
100% 112A 16f 8/20 Gd Ain 63K (37 days)(g) (** DIST Unpl) ***DOWN in class from A, CHK for improv
3% 80E 17f 2/hd GF Her 3K (54 days) (Chk Dist PLACED)
3% 90E 17f 5/22 GS Exe 3K (76 days) (Chk Dist Unpl)
.................................. (100%)
Our Imperial Bay, ................................................................................................... Form = (21), Av = 3.3k, Ab = 3k
1% 39E 12f 14/29 Gd Don 3K (51 days)(g) (UP in dist, lengths) Same class E, No improv
2% 65F 16f 5/30 Sft Plu 3K (75 days) (** DIST lengths)
5% 99D 16f 6/19 Gd Nby 4K (143 days)(g) (** DIST lengths)
.................................. (8%)
Wood Street, ................................................................................................... Form = (27), Av = 4.3k, Ab = 3k
1% 46E 8f 15/16 Gd Not 3K (39 days)(g) (UP in dist, Unpl) Same class E, No improv
2% 62E 10f 8/9 St Lin 3K (67 days) (UP in dist, Unpl)
4% 47D 8f 9/13 GF Asc 7K (225 days) (UP in dist, Unpl)
.................................. (7%)
Le Diamont, ................................................................................................... Form = (24), Av = 2.7k, Ab = 0
1% 38F 19f 9/53 GF Str 3K (21 days) (Down in dist lengths) UP in class from F, BUT chk figures
3% 77H 16f 14/22 Gd Kem 3K (77 days)(g) (** DIST lengths)
2% 82H 16f 5/13 GS Kem 2K (103 days) (** DIST lengths)
.................................. (6%)

Nessie, it's not that people are not bothered, more that you are posting in the wrong place. I'm sure if you started a thread under General Horse racing, what you are posting would attract a great deal of attention, whereas on this thread you may be seen to be challenging the old guard with something new. Why not give it a try, I for one find it very interesting.

Good skill
Jimmy

Bonus,

I didn`t give this race any attention whatsoever working on the fact that one of the 3 consistent horses namely Bonus, Move It or Hits Only Money would win but trying to work out which one would be too difficult.

Guest looks to have identified the winner reasonably easily and all credit to him.

Did anybody else find Bonus ?????

Any comments would be very much appreciated.

Determined

As you ask, Bonus was the horse I referred to in my post to Gummy on his "VDW selections" thread.

Determined
Read my comments r.e Bonus in my post to mtoto page 498 i also sent an e.mail to an individual on here well before guest put his post up,giving my views on the traits that were there to be seen in Bonus's form,Albeit after the race,But the individual i speak of knows the score and also that Cenkos would not be beaten last night.

Fulham & Investor,

Thank you. Looks like another opportunity missed. I will be doing a full evaluation on this race later today although it will always be so easy after the event.

Well done to both of you for filling your boots yet again.

Whilst I cannot speak for you Investor ( no offence meant and I`m sure you will not take it as such as I do not work that way - keep posting ) but as for Fulham, just from memory

La Landiere - Spirit Leader x 2 - Youllneverwalkalone - Bonus - Grand Passion ?

Just goes to show what hard work can do and no short prices.

You have my total respect and all the very best to you,

Investor,

I thought I had explained in my day to day transactions I am not happy to take relativity into account. As I said it was a tight call re Bonus's class, I can wait there is no hurry. If his last race had been 5 lbs stronger he would have been the BEST HORSE in the race.

You ask why modify the method? I think you are already using a modified version of the original method. VDW himself modified it to help make it easier to understand, and to ensure some form of ability test was used. The first change Fulham tried, to gauge the strength of a races past, and present. I think is far more accurate than using prize money. Can I ask, have you any examples were it put you off the selection, if you had used prize money? I wouldn't have tried using the average OR's to judge the strength of a previous race. I don't find averages work at all, a median would be better. (if you don't want to use the highest). Taking the average is one of the things I have against the usual ability rating.

I have to ask again, if my changes are of little or no use why am I so close to the selections found by Guest and Fulham? I think my way narrows the field quicker than the other method, giving more time to study the short list. (losing none of the quality). I am happy you seem to have the temperament under control (if the VDW selections are your only bets). I had one bet this week, won 11/1. Last week 5, won 12/1, lost, won 8/1 lost (same race), won 15/2. Ok by changing the method I may miss a few, but I think I also find a few at good prices.

Chaz,

Have to admit I missed Mr Baxter. Not sure I would have backed it even if I'd seen it, not a horse I like. There was one I missed at Salisbury on Sunday, did you find it?

Be Lucky

windbreaker

anyone prepared to give any pointers on this horse.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nessie:

....A clear example is Allude who won very easily. I'm not trying to be a smart arse, its just that looking at things in a table format VDW is easier to see and compare. Anyways I see that not many are interested in it so I won't bother.....

---

Nessie, keep it going . Thought I'd cracked it from your first example, then after that I couldn't get the percentages to add up !!!

What about starting a 'Nessie Tutorial ' thread, and run us through the figures, percentages etc., etc.


cheers
Ima
Mug
Punter

IMP

Ok this is the score as I see it. Remember its about class balancing with form.

Damasta 140 PM class C 12k LTO is better than Mr Baxter Basics Exec' and Damas.
Using Mr Baxter Basics as the mark 100% rate the others. Then total up and sort them in order.
Look at thetop 4 does it include the 100%. If yes then look at the consistancy ablity capabilty
hardwork formula.

Mr Baxter Basics is the choice? Well not clear, but no bad. Allude spells it out.


WORCESTER, 10 May 2003, 4:35, Mindon Tiling Orchid Appeal Handicap Chase (Class C) (5yo+,0-135),Winner £8,307.00,(2m4f110y)2m4½f GOOD, 13 Runners Handicap

Demasta, ................................................................................................... Form = (13), Av = 23.3k, Ab = 11.2k
66% 140C 16f 5/18 Gd Chl 12K (23 days)(g) (UP in dist, lengths) Same class C, No improv
0% 01B 16f 4/34 Gd Kem 12K (78 days)(g) (UP in dist, lengths)
255% 141A 16f 4/19 Gd Kem 46K (112 days)(g) (UP in dist, lengths)
.................................. (100%)
Mr Baxter Basics, ................................................................................................... Form = (14), Av = 22.7k, Ab = 0
100% 141B 24f 2/5 Gd Per 18K (15 days)(g) (Down in dist placed ?) ***DOWN in class from B, CHK for improv
0% 01B 21f Pl/91 Gd Ain 40K (36 days)(g) (Chk Dist lengths)
56% 144C 20f 2/1 Gd Ban 10K (49 days)(g) (** DIST PLACED)
.................................. (48%)
Executive Decision, ................................................................................................... Form = (7), Av = 8k, Ab = 6k
62% 132C 16f 3/16 Gd Chl 12K (23 days)(g) (UP in dist, PLACED) Same class C, CHK for improv
31% 133D 16f 3/5 Sft San 6K (63 days) (UP in dist, PLACED)
32% 137D 16f 1/5 Gd Hun 6K (77 days)(g) (UP in dist, + WIN)
.................................. (39%)
Damus, ................................................................................................... Form = (11), Av = 8.3k, Ab = 13k
41% 132C 20f 3/8 Gd Str 8K (28 days)(g) (** DIST PLACED) Same class C, No improv
30% 109D 18f 4/37 Gd Nby 7K (50 days)(g) (UP in dist, lengths)
42% 109C 19f 4/39 Gd Don 10K (70 days)(g) (Chk Dist lengths)
.................................. (35%)

THis explains a bit more. Irish racing doesnt have ABC just prize money. Took a while to type up hope its ok.

LEOPARDSTOWN, 11 May 2003, 4:00, Derrinstown Stud Derby Trial Stakes (Class x) (3yo),Winner £55,844.16,1m2f GD-YLD, 6 Runners

The Great Gatsby, ................................................................................................... Form = (14), Av = 67k, Ab = 8k
37% 99x 10f 4/3 Hy Sai 52K (183 days) (** DIST lengths) Same class x, BUT chk figures
89% 102A 8f 4/6 Sft Don 120K (197 days) (UP in dist, Unpl)
20% 98x 8f 6/5 /Y Cur 29K (210 days) (UP in dist, lengths)
.................................. (100%)
Brian Boru, ................................................................................................... Form = (4), Av = 52k, Ab = 63.5k
100% 114A 8f 1/1 Sft Don 120K (197 days) (UP in dist, + WIN) ***DOWN in class from A IMPROVING ***
23% 110x 8f 2/hd /Y Cur 29K (210 days) (UP in dist, PLACED)
4% 90x 7f 1/nk Gd Cur 7K (317 days) (UP in dist, + WIN)
.................................. (86%)
Napper Tandy, ................................................................................................... Form = (7), Av = 40k, Ab = 6k
64% 102x 8f 4/6 Hy Sai 87K (190 days) (UP in dist, Unpl) Same class x IMPROVING ***
21% 108x 7f 2/hd Sft Leo 27K (195 days) (UP in dist, PLACED)
3% 91x 6f 1/1 Sft Naa 6K (203 days) (UP in dist, + WIN)
.................................. (60%)
Alamshar, ................................................................................................... Form = (4), Av = 22k, Ab = 18.5k
23% 109x 10f 2/½L GF Leo 29K (28 days) (** DIST PLACED) Same class x, BUT chk figures
23% 110x 8f 1/hd /Y Cur 29K (210 days) (UP in dist, + WIN)
4% 83x 8f 1/2 Fm Lis 8K (227 days) (UP in dist, + WIN)
.................................. (33%)
Cozzene's Honor, ................................................................................................... Form = (19), Av = 10k, Ab = 0
3% 65x 8f 7/7 Gd Cur 8K (14 days) (UP in dist, lengths) Same class x, No improv
1% 10x 7f 17/35 Hy Leo 15K (182 days) (UP in dist, lengths)
4% 84x 8f 2/1 Gd Leo 7K (266 days) (UP in dist, PLACED)
.................................. (5%)
Masandam, .................................................................................................. Form = (11), Av = 7k, Ab = 0
4% 81x 7f 2/¼L Fm Cor 7K (20 days) (UP in dist, PLACED) Same class x, No improv
3% 70x 7f 9/6 Sft Cur 7K (49 days) (UP in dist, lengths)
0% 0 0f 0/0
.................................. (4%)

Mtoto,

I had the same feelings as yourself about Mr Baxter but the price was worth taking I thought.

I didn’t look at the racing last Sunday, out of interest what was it that you/I missed?

Swish,because I have read all your posts,and have learnt from them.

VDW mentioned the hurdle method,but didn't expand on it,I was just wondering if any members,have managed to crack it,that's all.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nessie:
IMP

Ok this is the score as I see it. Remember its about class balancing with form.

Damasta 140 PM class C 12k LTO is better than Mr Baxter Basics Exec' and Damas.
Using Mr Baxter Basics as the mark 100% rate the others. Then total up and sort them in order.
Look at thetop 4 does it include the 100%. If yes then look at the consistancy ablity capabilty
hardwork formula.

---

Whoa Nessie.
Lets use Demasta

I can see where ' Form = (13), Av = 23.3k, Ab = 11.2k ' come from.

How do you get 66%, 0% and 255%?
What do they mean?

also

why is

Damasta 140 PM class C 12k LTO better than
Mr Baxter Basics 141 PM class B 18k LTO ?

cheers
Ima
Mug
Punter

Mtoto

Lord Protector

I promised to respond to you on this 20/1 winner Guest named on the thread well before the off on 18/10/02 (as part of a book of four on race).

The old Posts kindly sent me by another member duly arrived (the Post Office taking its time in delivering them), and I've had a good look at the race. While I'm far from sure why Guest selected LP, I offer three comments:

* first, an examination of LP's previous runs makes it quite obvious why Guest concluded he was capable of winning a race of the class of that on 18/10/02, under the prevailing conditions. See especially, but not exclusively, race 2901 on 11/7/02;

* second, I can imagine why Guest might not have been too concerned about LP's two runs prior to the 18/10/02 race. If you check them out you'll see that one was over arguably the wrong distance, and the other was run under extreme weather conditions;

* third, only one of the top five in the ability ratings ranking could certainly be regarded as a form horse - and like our old friend Dumaran he seems to need particular conditions (absent on 18/10/02) to run to his best. Below the top five - all with ARs in three figures - one is hard put to find a clear form horse, and those one does find (Hand Chime, for example) had never run nearly as well as LP at his best.

And there is probably a great deal more to it than I can yet see.

But even on what I've noted, a case can be made for LP, on the grounds of (a) ability (though not, in his case, at that point reflected in the ability rating,) and (b) not having anything much to beat in the prevailing conditions.

Using my current understanding of VDW's approach, the race on 18/12/02 would have been a real teaser for me. Top rated on ability, and well clear of the second, Millennium Force had last time out won a much higher class race over the same distance and, but for the weight, would have been a solid c/f. The fact that he finished 2nd (beaten only 0.5l) was very much what might have been predicted: on VDW's approach, the weight meant he's probably not quite win but he had the form to be thereabouts.

Sorry I can't offer a wholly convincing explanation, but as Guest made clear following his success with Birjand (also posted well before the off), there are aspects he wants to keep to himself, and I expect LP was found utilising one or more of them rather than through my points.

I find talking esier than typing and I got it wrong sorry.
What I meant to say was Baxter had the best rating 141 PM at 18k. this fig is the highest LTO = 100% so the others are sorted acordingly.

Damasta as the best total of % but only the 2nd best LTO 140 at 12k Baxter had the 2nd best total of %.

Time and time again you will see this occuring and bigger the
winners prize money for todays race the more accurate is seems to be.
Then take VDW abilty, consitancy etc and the ave of last 3 races and
it points to the winners or making a book more times than not.

Hope that helps.

Mtoto
I'm glad that you make your'e betting pay In such grand style, You gave out the prices of the winners and losers,Would you name them aswell so i can peruse.

Fulham,

Thanks for your views on the Lord Protector race. I can see he was in with a chance, but for me he isn't consistent in any way. My problem is/was why the change in the way the race was analysed. I have no quarrel with the selection as it was made well before the off. I just wanted a clue as to which method and why it was used in this case.

I have been thinking about Son Of Love and think this selection was part of a book. I can see no way it would have been a selection by it's self.

Investor,

I would have thought I have given enough clues to the way I work. However I will give the selections by name, hope one or two have your 2nd picture profile. In the same order as the previous post. Hugs Dancer, Warrsan, Ketan, Fire Up The Band, Lochridge, and Altay.

Chaz,

The missed horse was Self Evident at NEWMARKET (an improver)

Be Lucky

Mtoto

Obviously only Guest could really answer as to how he analysed the Lord Protector race. But he has made it clear in the context of Birjand and others of that ilk that he has more shots in his locker than standard class/form analysis. I wish I did!

Mtoto
Thanks for giving me the names of the horses that match the prices,I'll enjoy looking at them.

Again you mention Lord Protector not being consistent,And again i'll say the horse is consistent when the form is looked at the way vdw intended,Over the distance,In the class and at the grade,In it's last 3 runs the horse was consistent please think about it.