Gf,

You'll have to tell me about Stewart Simpsons Quickeners as I ve never heard of them! At least they have a good title!

But you are correct, the original writings have a historic context that if ignored can lead people astray.

I'm pretty sure that VDW was originally a dutcher who after the introduction of betting tax (even the 4% at the course) was obliged to become more precise. Certainly there are light years of sophistication between the original and the later writings.

The other thing that seems obvious, that even after the legalisation of betting VDW would still have to have done most of his racing at the courses. I cant imagine him listening to imaginative commentaries on the 'blower' or reading form vertically, elbowing for his position at the wall-boards!

Serious backers who win are unanimous in their subscription to the 'form book' and VDW would have been no exception, so he would have been limited to its vagaries of content and delivery.

Of course if VDW was a pseudonym for someone employed in a racing publication where such data was collated it would have been much easier for him, as much of the donkey work would have been shared by his witting or unwitting colleagues.

There are a lot of people who if they realised milk came from a cows' tit would be physically sick.

EPI,

you should get the books, you have got this cryptic down to a fine ARSE.

IMPOSSIBLE

it would be giving away the goose

Barney: how about an example of a hidden factor?

Black Cat
Your points 1 and 3 are the same, and all part of consistency.
Capability, IMO, is covered in the sentence in SIAO that VDW drew our attention to more than once, and gave us the criteria to judge it against. Some see it differently, but it is all part of the same in my view.
Probability has much to with how the horse, and its opponents, have been placed.

WP
Some weeks ago, you raised the question of small field conditions races, and I gave you my view, the same view that I had expressed some time previously. Though Guest and others disagreed with it at that time, it is noticeable that they later adjusted their strategy to embrace that view.
Sometimes, though, you can lead an arse to water, but you can't make it think!

JIB
RE-Stewart Simpson quickeners

Horses who having won in good style i.e quickening away from the field in the last 1 or 2 furlongs should be noted when turned out again under either a penalty or simply been raised in weight when the track conditions suit.This meaning a track that is considered tight like Chester or Sandown as opposed to Newmarket a big wide open espanse.
The reasoning behind this is basically horses who run at this type of track are not exerting themselves fully throughout the race because of the need to be constantly on the turn thus decreasing the pace which in turn theoretically means the horse with the weight burden (or class horse)will have sufficiant energy left to demonstrate the previously shown turn of foot.
Bear in mind the writtings of the above named are now some twenty five years old and allthough the principle still works the factors that made such a course fit into his ideas in the first place may have slightly changed the bigest difference being the complete handicap classification of races shakeup.

Stewart Simpson Quickeners

..and there was me thinking that they were something revellers passed around at rave parties.

So its nothing to do with Bart?

LOL

Jib has made an interesting comment;

“Of course if VDW was a pseudonym for someone employed in a racing publication where such data was collated it would have been much easier for him, as much of the donkey work would have been shared by his witting or unwitting colleagues.”

I have just been looking at my copy of Braddock’s guide to horse race selection and in it is some extracts of the Daily Mail racing pages from the 1986 Derby at Epsom. After the jockey’s name is the Formcast rating. The 2.00 Woodcote Stakes for 2-y-o’s, the top rated is rated 78. The 2.30 an all aged handicap, the top rated is rated 78. Finally, the 3.30 the Derby itself, the top rated, Dancing Brave, is rated 78.
I once checked the ratings in my local evening paper against the same races in a national daily newspaper and found the ratings were identical except the evening paper had added on 30 or 50 or something like that to the daily paper’s ratings. The evening paper comes out the night before the daily, so who was copying who I don’t know, but it shows they were both using the same source.

Funnily enough one of VDW’s ratings shows the top rating to be 90 or close to it, regardless of the class of race. Makes you think doesn’t it!

Some of the OAP's i knew or know used Timeform years ago and made a fortune,
1 of them sadly passed away a few months back and in the late forties he gave up his teaching job to be a prof punter and never looked back or i think worked another day bar being a bookie in his life

Thanks to all who have commented on my post so far. I am pressed for time at the moment, but will re-read and respond properly later.

I re-read portions of my copy of Golden Years over dinner tonight. Assuming there is something we are missing, I think that the more complex we try to make it, the further away we are from solving it.

BlackCat

Black cat - quote - I think that the more complex we try to make it, the further away we are from solving it.

read Prominent King again - and again, and ask yourself - Who was he talking to _


A bloody - Novice Punter !!!

No bullshit - no conumdrums - no puzzles -

Just straightforward - "Good Advise" !!!

Don't complicate the job !!

tc

Good for you TC!

I see you have no trouble putting milk on your cornflakes!

Instead of running to the pay-out counter, the punter should go to the enclosure and get close enough to smell the horse that has just won him money. If he so does, he might begin to understand what racing is about!

Trojan

I think Jib said smell the horse not eat it

TC,

Although I agree it was good advice, can't agree with the rest of your post.

I don't think it was aimed at the novice punter, more the punter that would go away and think about what was said.

It was full of puzzles, not the least of which was how is BL well out of it?

It maybe interesting to hear what JIB and yourself make of this example. How do you reach your conclusions, and best of all why?

Be Lucky

Mtoto

Oh - Bollocks !!! -

It was his first ever serious post -
of course - it was aimed at the guy who asked the "Bloody Question" !!! It - wasn't aimed at - "YOU" - or any of the other "HIGH PRIESTS" who have since chosen to make a "RELIGION" out of his Postings !!!

"BUGGER OFF" and talk amongst yourselves about - Your distorted views of his letters !

My readings of his "Letters" are - Just wot - "HE" intended !!!!

A parcel of helpfull hints - which would - "Get the - Novice Punter - "Off" to a "Good Start"

You choose - to - "Turn it into a "Deep Mystery" "

Good Luck to you -- "You will be searching forever" for

"That Which is Not There" !!!

Get back to your "Club" and Stop disrupting this Thread !!! Your "Credability" is "ZERO"



tc

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Tuppenycat,