[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lee:
Bio,



To reiterate, it is a horses ability to be able to quicken where it matters that determines class, however, by doing this it won’t necessarily mean a fast time is recorded. Very few races are ran ‘flat out’, but if they were then I have no doubt that the higher the class the faster the time would be, but this simply isn’t how races are run.

Further to your first point, given the course records posted above, and given that 2 of the handicappers that hold record times were exposed and rated 86 and 95 respectively at the time, why then do you think they were not/are not good enough to compete in Pattern Company?

The fact that Patavellian has gone on to win a Group 1 race helps prove the point. Why if he's a Group 1 horse didn't he keep up with Fayr Jag - who cannot now be said to be of the same class?

Lee just getting back to you on last nights post.I am not surprised by the stats you have posted.These races which were H'caps will have without knowing the instances you have quoted been High Class races with quality horses.Many of these H'cappers go on to progress to group company after their H'cap marks make it impossible to win similiar races, pattern races are the only option.I agree with you about quickening at times that matter, and that many group races are tactical-without pacemakers-however the point I was originally making was that any races won in a truely slow time WOULD not be higher class races, as even though some of these are slower run than important H;caps they are still faster than most.
Bio

Hi Bio,

With the examples that I gave of course records I did give some brief details of the record holders history, and what they’d gone on to achieve.

To take the most recent example have a look at Eastern Breeze who broke the course record at Newmarket over 1m 4f on the 3 Oct 03. An 86-rated handicapper (now 95) he has competed in a total of 27 races on the flat/AW, of which he’s only won 5. His best win was his last one when he broke the record in a 0-100 handicap. He cannot be said to have much class when you compare him to some horses that have raced over the course and distance.

The point you make in your post above stating that truly slow times aren’t recorded in high-class races, again is open to debate. In fact you confirmed yourself that a lot of these races aren’t truly run due to tactics, which of course is largely due to the smaller fields that they attract. But some of these top class group races over the ‘classic’ distances are ran at a snails pace, resulting in slow times. However, my 12-year-old dog would stand as much chance of winning one of these races as the 86-rated handicapper, Eastern Breeze, even though he holds the course record.

LEE
Hi, again.
The one thing we are not discussing here though about record times, is the state of the going.
During the summer most tracks watered heavily, now though due to mostly wrong weather forecasts
the tracks aren't watering, and that to me is why Eastern Breeze broke the track record.How many horses really appreciate fast going?If we had a true barometer of ground conditions then I believe that on Good going the majority of racecourses would have the fastest times on this ground by the better quality horses, not by relative donkeys like EB.Firm ground is imperative to course records.Good mind stimulating debate though, without regressing to abuse.Im enjoying it, Cheers
Bio

Bio,

Of course, I doubt there have been any track records broken when conditions are worse than Good to Firm, however, there have been MANY other higher class winners at Newmarket over the distance, on the same, or faster going, who didn’t manage to go as fast? Eastern Breeze is not an isolated example either, there are many low class (comparatively) handicappers that hold course records, who have gone on to achieve nothing special.

Getting back to the original point, which is that ‘class’ is king and NOT speed, I feel that by using the above examples this is backed up adequately. Just because a race is run in a slow time doesn’t mean that a horse does not have class.

That said, when the two factors are combined, and the horse is a ‘form’ horse, then they are worth a second glance.

Lee

What do you mean by 'a form horse'?

This seams to be shrouded in mystery,what make a horse a form horse,is it simply a horse suited to the conditions or is there more to it?

I know I should have studied the 80% thread more closely but could someone tell me what was trying to be achieved on the 80% thread.

Gummy

Gummy

In his various publications, VDW more than once said that someone who had properly understood his approach should be able to replicate what he claimed was his performance - a strike rate of 80% or better, horses at all prices. (There is reason to think VDW meant a strike rate of successful bets, including those situations where he backed more than one horse in a race as "books" within the field, not just single win bets.) The "80%" thread was a vehicle through which a number of board members sought to see how close they could get to the 80% figure.

Hello Fulham,
Did the selections have to selected by using the methods of VDW.
Do you believe that he achieved a 80% strike rate and over what period of time would VDW be talking about to achieve that rate.

Gummy

More specificaly the 80% challenge was aimed at establishing who, if anyone, could make a serious claim to be authoritive about VDW by demonstrating the 80% strike rate that VDW claimed. I began that thread because I was tired of being told that my ideas are incorrect by those who are incapable of demonstrating which ideas are correct. In my opinion the personality clashes on this thread all have their root in the situation where some members claim a special knowledge that they refuse to discuss yet without proof insist is the correct interpretation of VDW. The possibility of progress on this thread has been continually retarded by such behaviour and I hoped to be able to show clearly that those who claim the knowledge have no basis for such claims through their results on that thread. The conclusion of the thread is that of the present members only Pipedreamer can be considered authoritive on any questions about VDW.

Hello Epi,
Did the 80% that was being aimed for use VDW methods to select the horse or was it just a case of posting a selection up with no reason as to why VDW would have selected it.
If VDW claimed 80% he must have used his methods to reach that figure.


Gummy

Primarily contributors were using VDW ideas, Gilly announced his intention to take part using his own methods but didn't do so, my own selections were arrived at by non-VDW means and were, inter alia, intended to provide a control. As the aims of the thread were stated in the first post it would have been pointless to submit selections unless they were relevent to the VDW discussion.

Gummy

The whole VDW business is, at depth, a matter of trust. Does one trust the material, and the claims, or not?

There is, at the moment, no definitive proof that the material was the work of one individual (and, if it was, it seems unlikely on the evidence that his (or her) name was Che Van Der Wheil, writing from Market Harborough). But, having studied the material, and all the examples (over 140) I personally believe that it was the product of one individual - the general continuity is extraordinary for anything written over a period of 18 years by more than one. And all the examples (with just two exceptions given in VDW's very last article and explicitly stated to be found "quite differently from anything I have shown you to date") can be resolved by what is fundamentally the same method.

Thus, I do trust the material and, provided the 80+% claim is understood to cover all winning bets (singles and "books"), I believe it. Although inevitably there would be variations in the short term, I have no doubt that VDW's core method, effectively applied, can produce a long term (say over a year) strike rate of 80+%, understood in the way I've just described.

It is fair to say that, with one exception, those who put up selections on the "80%" thread fell far short. But while that, of course, offers no support to the plausibility of the 80+% claim, neither does it show that when the method is PROPERLY understood and effectively applied that level of success is unattainable.

That 80% is achievable was never under dispute, what was under dispute is the contention that anyone who posts on the VDW thread has any idea of how the method works. In VDW's own terms it has been demonstrated that nobody other than Pipedreamer has any idea, it's as simple as that. If you want to insist that you are correct in your implementation when this is obviously untrue, that is your affair but as far as the thread goes your posts are irrelevent, if you were to be open about your method I'm sure there are points of worth within it and these could be developed/corrected by other members in the manner of a cooperating community. Understand? You are guarding useless "knowledge" and holding yourself back while mispresenting the worth of mimicing your own route of study to others.

"To reiterate, it is a horses ability to be able to quicken where it matters that determines class"

This is too simplistic (where exactly does it matter?) - high class horses have high top speeds over short distances but if they do not also have the stamina to maintain a high cruising speed throughout they will not win many races. This is why trainers enter pace makers in Group races - to attempt to ensure that the top speeds of the rival horses are blunted. If their horse has high speed but suspect stamina then a pace maker is the last thing they need - only an early crawl will suit.

regards,
Robert

Robert99
In my view a top class horse can quicken in mid race end race or whenever,IMO Nayyir is a cracking good horse running over 7F at New on sat.Last year he won the same race easily,I was on at 8/1'£50, I hope they give mer the same this year, as he has so much cruising speed & so much foot he will make Trade Fair look pedestrian.IMO
Bio

GA Hall made a packet just using the first 3 in consistency from the first 5/6 in the forecastbut Roushayd's last three figures were 346.
Can anybody confirm for me if Roushayd was in the first 3 in consistency?


Cheers everyone

Can you confirm that the G.Hall selections were the only qualifiers on the days in question? If not, were they given before or after the off? If they were, please demonstrate the method with some pre-off examples over the coming days.

Jonto


You can find full details of Roushayd's win in the 1988 Old Newton Cup, and later VDW selections but alas not those prior to 1988, on the Racing Post's website.

Jonto,

Why do you assume Mr Hall only used the forecast, and consistency to find the winners? Also no Roushayd wasn't in the lowest 3 for consistency, why do you ask? VDW didn't mention consistency with the Roushayd method.

Be Lucky

Like as not "VDW" was a Welsh man who threw in his university hand on account of an obsession with the horses, he's still writing now.