Lee

Thats a bloody patronising post - the kind which destroys this thread !!

I am currently making a series of posts which test VDW's requirment for a decent "Rating" -

These are - I hope a series of -

Mutual = shared, communal, reciprocated - posts

They may not correspond with "Your" views on VDW - but they do follow -"My Own"-

Are you saying that my opinions are not "Informed" ???

note

I had - and backed both your bloody obvious selections - but they were so clear that they were not even worth putting up on the site !!

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

TC,

If you are of the opinion that 2 sets of commercial ratings are an important factor in VDW’s selection process, then yes.

I have respect for anyone that can pick winners consistently enough to make a profit, whether they appear obvious or not.

Have you thought of posting up some selections from the ratings that you use? Perhaps that will shed some light on exactly how useful they actually are at selecting winners.

Lee

if you will take your blinkers off -

you will see that I am currently posting Masseys ratings in the Goodwood Handicaps - and selecting the "Top 3"-

"More than you are doing" !!

Put up your own selections in the Handicaps !!

You can "Dutch" if you want - cos I say that - he Dutched "all" of his Handicaps !!!

I am looking for someone to put forward a "Second" set off ratings to balance "Massey"

Speed Ratings perhaps ???

JIB ???

quote:

---

you will see that I am currently posting Masseys ratings in the Goodwood Handicaps - and selecting the "Top 3"-

"More than you are doing" !!

---

LOL - My blinkers are well and truely off.

How about selecting one from the top three to back.

Call me Mr Pickey, but you are not doing any more than copying, pasting, and posting up results?

PS. Why would I need to dutch when I'm able to select the winner, of the races that I back in, which include handicaps, far more often than not?

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

TC
how many races do you want to do a day
my own ratings will be based on speed which will be up and running soon I may be able to do some for Saturday if I can I will put some on here to balance with Massey if you want I will only do a max of three races as I have not got my database going yet so it will take me longer

have fun

Lee

Yes as usual you have missed "Everything !!!"

All my posts -

Have been placed "BEFORE THE OFF !!!!"

The current series is a frendly competition between johnd and myself as to whether - 3 most consistant - or - 3 best rated - in handicaps - produce the best results

In the end - it may help to contribute to all our understandings of VDW - or - it might all be a load of Bol*ks - We think it is worth playing with !!

We have not yet attempted to sellect the -"Top one of the three" to back !!

A combination of the two - may be the answer !!

"Giz US a CLUE" ???

Select the Bloody winner in the Handicap "Before the Off" - by your own statment you "Don't need to Dutch" - Like us "Lesser Mortals" !!!

We have selected "EVERY" handicap at Goodwood - proove - your invicability - Do the same !! - 'cept - now you tell us - you don't need to "Dutch"

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

TC,

You are either blind, or stupid? Mind you, it took a while for Double Vodka to sink in, remember, the winner of a Doncaster Handicap, which was posted prior to the off, so perhaps it is the latter.

Top Dirham, now then what type of race was that one running in? Kalaman – NO, that was a group 2 winner, an obvious one that.

By the way TC, thanks for congratulating me on my winners today, that were posted before the off, which included Lochbuie, oh yes – a handicap winner. I make that 100%, better than VDW -

TC, Lee,

I dont use ratings as such, perhaps I should, but I fear they cannot disclose a trainers methods.

In younger, or unexposed horses I take great stock of the sires progeny strike rates, in an effort to determine if the horse has been placed to win.

I pay little attention to non winning form (though I take close shaves seriously) except to second guess a trainers next move.

The only rating I feel worth paying attention to is the OR, in the understanding that it is a measure of class and constitutes a battle of wits between the trainer and Mr Smith as to the true value.

Speed Ratings are of course v interesting as it is the fastest horse that wins the race. However its a big jump in reasoning to say that taking weight off a horses back will make it run faster. A horse will only go flat out if connections so desire.

Having said all that Timeform ratings are uncannily accurate and I always pay attention to them when I have access.

Lee -
Double Vodka - Top Dirham ??? reasons - at the time - Not given !!!

re my last Post - Giz us the winners in tommorrows Goodwood Handicaps - " No Dutching" !

I told you todays winners worn't even worth mentioning !!! -They were so bloody obvious !!!

Are you telling me that they were "VDW" selections -- I found them by very "different" routes - all with "Similar" merits !!

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

JIB

I'm prepared for the barrage. Read this earlier today and thought it sage advice.

"Weight can slow horses down but it can never make them run any faster than their own ability allows."

JIB

as ever - your contributions - provide - food for thought !!

I shall go away, - and dig my head into "the books "

no -- not VDW !!!!

tc

NFP,

There have been some good posts about the effects of weight on this forum over the years. Heres one I kicked off sometime ago:

How important is weight when we examine horse performance?
When we talk about weight in horse racing what exactly does it consist of, and what are its consequences? I would like to put forward a few theories concernig the various types of weight and their differing effects.
Firstly in horse racing weight can be broken down into several different categories. Of the horse itself we have the skeleton and internal organs. In an adult healthy animal this should be constant. Secondly we have we have body fluids, stomach contents, fat and muscle. These 4 factors are not constant and their variability must be taken into consideration when we state the final category which is tack, jockey and saddle cloth weights.
An adult horse weighs in the region of 500kg. and it must be understood that the dynamics involved in maintaing that weight and fitness mean the consumption of many kilos of fodder and water everyday. As the horse gets fitter fat will become muscle and the horse will gain or lose weight depending on its starting point and its peak and subsequent decline of condition.
I would like to call muscle "good" weight, fat "bad" weight, urine and excretia "waste" weight and tack, jockey and lead "dead" weight.
Let us suppose that our racehorse has turned 500 grams of fat into muscle, it has lost bad weight and gained good weight though the scales will tell us nothing of this, is there anyone who believes that putting 2Lbs (1kg) of dead weight on the horse will negate the benefit the animal must enjoy?
Lets take another example; our race horse has maintained a complete internal balance and has to his misfortune been made to carry 4lbs more dead weight in his next race. The horse stripped naked weighs 1100lbs that will now become 1104 lbs disregarding the other dead weight. That is an increase of less than 0.4% , as a human example think of putting a hat on next time you go for a walk. If anyone still thinks this will effect the outcome of a race they may like to see someone employed with a bucket to run after the horses on their way to the post just in case there are going to be any last minute changes to the finishing order.
Obviously weight change will catch up with a horse but it has to be macro rather than micro, a horse is a big animal with kilos and kilos of muscle, weight can only be a minor consideration compared to the phisiology of the horse which is the real decider of how fast it is going to go.
At the level of micro weght change things such as the Going, which is not precisely "measured", jockey competence, etc are going to be of much greater consequence

Very enlightening.

I am having some success following horses with a 3lb penalty (blind), obviously gained before the OR can catch up with them proper - your last post may explain why 3lbs makes little difference. My reasoning for doing this to start with was Mr Smith thought the horse was improving and/or had too low a handicap and was trying to redress this - however who is to say the horse hadn't actually improved 8lbs in reality (or was better), I'm probably wrong but it's working well so far

Now if only I could watch make sure they went for a dump before racing....

Lee
You are a severe disappointment!
I sincerely thought you had something to give to this thread, and, until today, you had shown that to be the case.
However, one post which questions a selection; and you go off on one which has no purpose but to prove how smart you are.
You may think this forum has nothing to offer you, your time spent perusing it, without posting, definitely suggests otherwise.
Your reasons for posting are either altruistic or egotistic.
You decide!

TC,

Alternative ratings.

3.15 Impeller, Audience, Pentecost (Pentecost has a class and speed negative)

4.25 Spanish Ace, Royal Challenge, Imperial Echo (Spanish Ace has speed negative but a positive regression model (I think that means it's improving)), Royal Challenge has a slight class negative and a larger win at class negative, Imperial Echo has a speed negative (less than SA)).

5.35 Lord Of The East, High Ridge, Undeterred (LOTE win class negative last run slight negative, HR worse win class negative than LOTE, Undeterred a slight speed negative).

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

JohnD,

My replies were to TC, and TC only, when he asked for reasons why I’d selected the winners that I had.

So let me get this right. First of all the board want pre-race selections posted up, which they get? Second, TC wants to know why/how I selected those horses, and so I reminded him of where the reasons could be obtained from, which he seemingly took offence too, and goes on to question the selections stating that they are obvious, and that anyone could pick them – which begs the question, why ask?

What more does he want? Perhaps I could put bets on for him, with my own money?

TC,

If you’d like to put your money where your mouth is I’ll gladly continue to post my selections, prior to racing, against yours of course, and the winner takes all.

I've had a look at two races at Goodwood from the angle of capability and recent runs (in my own simplistic fashion), in the 2:05 First Charter seems the obvious selection, however it's race times have been slow and there's the problem of Millstreet being off the track for too long to be comparible. In the 2:40 I agree with JiB that Nyramba has the best credentials although it's a close call with Gonfilia. The problem is that although figuring in the forecast none of these horses is in the "consistancy" bracket, there is also no support for any of them from ratings as represented by PM or TS, in short, impossible to reconcile with VDW theory of selection. Perhaps somebody would like to post alternative selections based on ability ratings and all that side of it.

3 most consistent from first 5/6 in betting

2.40G
Lucky Spin
Silk Fan
Lucky Pipit

3.15
Ancient World
Amandus
Unshakeable

4.25
Royal Challenge
Jimmy Ryan
Buy On The Red

7.05 Newm.
Jonny Ebeneezer
Tony The Tap
Desert Lord


Tc
Didn't do them yesterday as I was sans computer, so no point in selecting the races after the event.

Epi
Quick post, as the wife has decided I need to go shopping.
Wouldn't touch the 1st race, in the second I reckon Gonfilia will have too much speed for Chic and Nyramba.