Fulham.
Thanks v. much. I appreciate it.

Further to my post about yesterday's 2.20 at Doncaster, again today all three grade B handicaps were won by one of the first four c/fs, though in the case of the Goodwood race I would not regard it as at all inappropriate to argue that a "marginal" case was also a form horse, in which case the winner was the 5th in the c/f ranking.

3 races, 13 horses to chose from...............with my luck, I`d never make the 80% sr.

IIIs

You might if you attended to the fifth term of VDW's equation, referred to in one of my earlier posts today.

Dr Fulham,

Thanks, I`ll bear that in mind.

Good night.

And still the bored twats continue to make their pointless wind up posts

All messages on this thread are now put in a queue for moderation by myself before posting.
Only postings concerning VDW will be allowed through the queue which will be checked regularily throughout the day.
Once this thread is back to normal the moderation queue will be dropped.

Gummy

IIIs

On the subject of Hard Work, in the first chapter of his "Systematic Betting", VDW wrote:

"Far too many punters ... believe picking up a daily paper during their morning coffee break and quickly scanning the cards is all that's needed to find winners ..." and

"Don't be misled into thinking the life of a successful punter is easy, far from it, he has to work hard under an extremely strict discipline ... The successful punter evauates unemotionally and with no thought of finding THE WINNER. His evaluation when complete will tell him IF there is A WINNER in a race. At this stage he again evaluates the prospects before coming to a final conclusion. This all this takes TIME an ingredient to successful punting that can't be dispenced with. Something for nothing is a myth ..."

One could characterise these as "motherhood and apple pie" remarks, with neither novelty or substantive content. But, leaving aside the question of who really does make significant money through VDW, have you and anyone you know regularlymade significant money through betting without putting in Hard Work?

I am intrigued as to why you would want this thread to survive
Especially when you are on another board with only say 30 members of VDW fanatics which is carefully controlled and shall we say disinfected of sceptics/non believers

Is there a problem with the new board
Is it too sterile
I would think that you Fulham will now be in your glory
When you no longer have to worry about discussing things on a public board that you are "not comfortable with" and can openly display youre skill and judgement before the race.

I do really know the answers to the above
I can see both sides of argument relating to abusive posts
And why they occur

Some of the VDW clan are arrogant and patronising
trouble is they have nothing to be arrogant about
After all
to be an arrogant git you have to have done something to be arrogant about
They have done nothing,not on here anyway

However

The constant poking and prodding from 111 is starting to irritate even me

And JIB I would have thought you would have been more intellingent than to support him in his worthless wind up quest
Even if he is a mate

Common sense should rule everything
Some abusive posts are well deserved
Some are not

Just my opinion OK
And if you dont like the punctuation and spelling

Tough

illiteracy is not a crime

Boozer

This may sound naive, but why on earth would I (and, I assume, Mtoto) NOT want this VDW thread to survive and indeed flourish? I've gained a lot from it (and hope, in turn, others may have gained from some of my posts). I'm sure Mtoto feels the same.

Contrary to Johnd's allegations, there was no conspiracy - just someone sufficiently fed up with the abuse and disruption to go to the trouble of setting up and alternative, and inviting a number of us to join. Once it was a going concern, naturally I - and I assume others - advised some other Gummy posters of its existence: by then, regrettably, matters on this thread had gone so far that most were not posting here anyway.

The other board is fine, and some things can be discussed somewhat more openly because it is not a public board, and members have confidence that the proprietor will never make it public. But there have always been other VDW-specific boards, as a post of mine a while ago detailed, one with nearly three times the membership, and they have co-existed quite happily with a thriving Gummy VDW thread. That, to me, seems the best possible situation.

There is, however, no denying the fact that, at the moment, the majority of VDW posts are being placed elsewhere. Whether that will change is open to question. I would guess it depends partly on what happens on this thread from the abuse/disruption point of view, and whether there is in fact any real interest in matters VDW by members who are not currently members of the other board. (Every so often VDW rears its head on other boards, eg RSUK, and one or two enthusiasts post, but there is never any wider interest and the relevant threads die a death. It may be that that is now the situation here.)

May I say that the other board does not consist of VDW "fanatics". There are certainly some members who, like me, have put a very great deal of time and effort into studying VDW's texts and examples, but also others who view VDW as just one of a number of possible approaches. Similarly, it would be quite wrong to characterise members as being immune from scepticism: Mtoto could hardly be called a card-carrying VDW conformist, and he is not alone in being sceptical about aspects of VDW's approach. Neither, in my view, has scepticism per se ever been of concern to VDWers who post here.

You suggest that I may be more willing to post selections etc to a non-public board than a public one, and that is quite correct. But the point of the board is not to afford me or anyone else the opportunity to display their skill and judgement - but to provide a place where those interested in VDW's approach to learn from each other in an environment of civility.

Boozer,

I hesitated before I answered you post, and Fulham has beaten me to it. I agree with what he says.

I don't want to keep going over old ground, but I did think Johnd should be answered. I have know you a for fair time from other forums. How is telling an old friend about another forum poaching?

I would like to see this thread flourish again because I think it is a good way to get other views on VDW. I do worry that people can get blinkered when there isn't a chance of new thinking. As I've said before, most even the novices have an idea of how the basics work it is the finer points that have to be sorted. Who knows the answer may come from anyone, that person may by the next person to join. I do worry we may not be able to see the wood from the trees.

I may be wrong but a couple of years ago I thought counting form figures was crap, so did you. I have now changed my mind, what is the point of the horse having the ability if it is not consistent? At least with a consistent horse you have more chance it will run to it's ability. Interesting that now I have come to that conclusion, many seem to be ignoring it.

Such is life

Be Lucky

Boozer

You say 'some abusive posts are well deserved'. Abusive posts are not 'deserved' nor are they welcomed! They serve no purpose other than to put people off reading the thread, but then again maybe that's the aim for one or two.

On the other hand critical posts are welcomed, particularly constructive critical posts. If posts are considered 'arrogant or patronising' then criticise them but don't abuse.

Rob - slightly world weary

An article about the necessity of "negative evil": http://realmagick.com/articles/85/1185.html

Patronising arrogant posts are abusive
When posted in full view of 200+members on this board dont you think.
Or is trying to make somebody look small while trying to make themselves look big in front of others acceptable

Why do you all ignore the ROUYSHAD can't you see it is a way to a fortune coupled with plenty of time and effort?
You all are so stuck in your ways that you ignore the most important thing VDW ever said.
I have sorted it now (after a long time) I made 30 points over the last 4 weeks.
If this message is deleted this is the last you will ever hear from me,
Cheers
Swish

Boozer: well said.

One thing that seems to have been forgotten on this thread is that VDW is not a "method" for selecting winners, it's a "method" for favouably reducing the number of runners for consideration and thereby putting the odds in the bettor's favour, after this the selector's individual ability to assess the relative value of form comes into play, the matter of judgement is not confined to the decision of whether or not to bet. In a word there is no "idiosyncratic interpretation of form" and working down through the "class/form hierachy" is misguided.

Another point of contention has been the distinction between "winner of the race" and "winner in the race". The meaning is that we dont know before we investigate whether or not we will be able to decide which horse is likely to win ie we should never approach a race with the idea that it will be soluble, instead we should be investigating races looking for a race in which one horse stands out from the rest, this is why "when everything lines up", and not just bits, we can consider a bet. Considering the amount of time required for race investigation it is clear that this is another reason to start with small fields rather than high "class".

Boozer

Patronising and arrogant postings could be classed as abusive. It's possibly semantics, but the main point is that it would be nice to see some sensible discussion on here instead of one or two reasonable posts interspersed by member's spats.

Rob

We at least agree on that

So

Fulham

Your answer to Nessie regarding the Missing Link was most Interesting
If you are thinking on the same lines as I am
Would you not label this particular method as more of a System?