hello there .. sorry about your misfortune yesterday,ive just spent forty minutes typing only for my post to be lost,bloody interactives useless,so i,ll have to be brief i,m stunned you backed four losers yesterday, they all seemed good but surely had factors against especially lord o all seasons i.e uttoxeter and of course andy,s birthday which was a bet using a method iv,e used for the last two years.just being constructive with no wish to offend.regards investor...p.s statajack,bensam,lee would you give your views please.

Ive been away for a short while and in the meantime theres been some interesting postings, especially concerning Adiemus,Colourful Light, Lord of all Seasons and a Piece of Cake. A quick look at the numerical picture alone should confirm that these horses were not bets and a further look at the form would have confirmed this in every case. In Spells it Out it really is spelt out, provided you follow ALL the procedure. It wasnt until 1981 that the ability rating was made public, yet G.Hall still managed to find four vdw good things without it. How?
No one has mentioned it but there was a 12/1 winner at Bangor which had all the neccesary attributes but alas I failed to spot the withdrawal of Thyneandthyneagain in time.If anyone cares to check they will see what I mean. T&TA's withdrawal put a whole new complexion on the race so the winners are still there if we try hard enough to find them.

Hedgehog- Gunther McBride was not a winner in the race for either the RP chase or the William Hill Nat Hunt chase. In the latter case he may have been dropped slightly in class after recording his best SF but there is a world of difference between that and the Roushayd method. He was not being placed to win and furthermore had to carry 8lb more weight plus a 17lb OR increase. A similar situation also proved the undoing of Copeland in the county hurdle after ostensibly being dropped in class after recording his top SF against Hors La Loi. Does that help?

Barney- betting in 0-60 races puts you in an area where strokes must be pulled and coups landed as a neccessity for paying the bills. Betting 3 yos against older horses at this time of year is also a dangerous game to be playing, well spotted regarding Nassau Night and I know that "trainers handicap their own horses" but whether NN was the class horse, the form horse or whatever-in the long run you are putting the odds against you. You can laugh at me while you spend your winnings if you want.

Regards,

If ignoring Young Dalesman` last run when falling at M.Rasen yes I do see what you mean.

Regards,

hello there.. through inexperience iv,e only been evaluating top two from principal,and most prize money from others,i didn,t even look at the race,i,ll learn do you evaluate them all because that was a sore thumb excluding t,andt..regards ABSOLUTELY GUTTED.

I haven't been using the vdw methods for as long as Guest and in some respects I'm still learning them. However, I would like to think that I know most of the relevant factors that need to be considered, and can therefore see why the selections that Guest put up, were considered goodthings by him. I thought Adiemus would win but declined to back it because of the price. I backed Colourful Life and Piece of Cake but not Lord O'All Seasons.

Regards Statajacks comment of them not meeting the requirements of the numerical picture as in the ''spells it all out'' article, this maybe true. However, they certainly met the requirements of the very first numerical picture vdw gave us namely, three most consistent in first 5/6 of the betting forecast, the same one Mr. Hall presumably would have used. I've never counted them, but there are many methods vdw wrote about and several of them are variations of the consistency method.

Hello All,

hope you and yours are well and happy.

Statajack - I'm not sure. I thought I had spotted the investor/statajack winner in a race pattern but I need to check again. Thanks for pointing out some negative examples.

All the best
hedgehog

Well, a very interesting weekend.

Now some questions.

Stratajack.

Do you think it is possible for two people that understand vdw to have different selections. As you know I have asked this question before, and the answer was no. By some of your previous posts you think Guest has a good understanding of vdw, and you certainly have. So what went wrong this weekend? From reading your posts I think my method is very similar to yours if not the same. One last question are you the guy that used to write to the RFU under the pseudonym of Class/Form.

Guest.

May be I didn't word my question re class/form horses very well. I know the equation is class in form. Using your method on occasions the class, and form seem to be dropped in favour of consistency, without the class and form. When, and where did TTR prove (using your method) he had either. None of his wins where in the class of the race. The only form in that class or better, was a defeat, and some would not rate it as good form. I don't see how you can call him the class form horse using your method, consistent, yes.

Max.

Very impressed with your filters. One question, do the jockey filters often change the decision on weather to bet? I use a very simple statistical filter as a cross check, but don't included the jockey. Working on the principal the good trainers only use jockeys they think are up to the job. If you think otherwise, and could give some examples I will think out it.

Regards

Hello All,

Statajack - Thank you. I hadn't spotted the thing you highlighted. I was using another pattern I had found. Unfortunately Copeland has completely flumoxed me. As far as I can see it fits.
No, I just checked again and it doesn't fit. Thank you very much.

Now all I need is the factors and I think I've got at least one of them.

Thank you very much again.

Well chuffed.
hedgehog

Mtoto - To answer a couple of your questions, whilst the proper workings of VDWs consistency method should be the same for everyone, it doesn't allow for human error of which everyone can be guilty of without due care and attention to detail. Here are some related points.

I always review my evaluations, win or lose, and upon inspection of yesterdays findings I found some oversights and some irritating errors. Firstly, the race Statajack mentioned at Bangor did indeed go to the new class/form horse following T&Ts withdrawal. It wasn't a race I looked at in great depth though anyway. The trainer also withdrew the class/form horse Nosam, leaving the winner Mickthecutaway as class/form, but as I had already decided to leave Nosam I failed to look again before the race.

Lord Of All Seasons was the class/form horse, but unproven with the weight. The opposition was not great though, but Andys Birthday proved his pre race status of false to be infact true. A Piece Of Cake was a selection using another method, but not using the consistency one. Flat Top was a form horse, but I failed to note a glaring tell tale sign very reminiscent of the one I also bungled with Japhet at Cheltenham. The point is that whilst these things went undetected by my error, they were there as facts beforehand to be found, not made up after the event. The fault was not with the methods procedure or basis, but with my incompetence on the day. Colourful Life had the requirements but was part of the natural failure rate. Adiemus also had the credentials on paper and only narrowly failed to deliver. Away from the method, it is my opinion that had Shane Kelly ridden the horse the result would have been different, but that is another kettle of fish.

So I would say, no it is not possible in theory that anyone using the same factors and procedures would come up with a different selection in the consistency method. But, yes if they make a factual error in their evaluation.

As to class/form , it is a simple equation really. We are looking for a horse in form with ability (class). Magic Combination was not in form. Maceo appeared to be in form at face value but an inspection showed it was a false impression. Through The Rye was in form and thus having the highest ability rating of the form horses, he was the class/form horse. It doesn't matter that he hadn't won a race of such value before. All that matters are the horses engaged. A thorough study of the form showed that also, Mytimie was perhaps better than his current ability rating. At the prices a 2 horse book was the answer.

Max - The principles in the method are class and form. Colourful Life didn't fail because of the trainers record at the course. It didn't stop another class/form horse winning there on Friday in Carrick Troop. The point is, if everything else in the equation looks right, I wouldn't not bet because the trainer only had a small strike rate at the course any more than I would not bet because of the draw. Most trainers have poor strike rates overall and what their other horses do at courses have little bearing on the outcome of future races there in my view.

I have packed in hcp hurdles because I aren't very good at them, but now I have read what you all have had to say, I shall say this:
THROUGH THE RYE and YOUNG DALESMAN were absolute certainties! I wish I had looked at those races now,
Yours
Swish

Guest,

I apologise for the bad Saturday you endured. Unfortunately, your selections coincided with mine and even VDW is not strong enough a method of selection to overcome the curse of also being the choice of 'he could not pick the winner of a one-horse race'.

It was a rare occurrence and is unlikely to be repeated I promise you. You see, even when I actually stumble on to the right selections by sheer accident, it still won't work for me!

Good luck all you VDWers, I'll try and steer clear of your horses in future. But better than any of Max's filters is of Oldtimer picks the horse then you can be 90%+ certain that it will lose.

Oldtimer

Guest,

I apologise for the bad Saturday you endured. Unfortunately, your selections coincided with mine and even VDW is not strong enough a method of selection to overcome the curse of also being the choice of 'he could not pick the winner of a one-horse race'.

It was a rare occurrence and is unlikely to be repeated I promise you. You see, even when I actually stumble on to the right selections by sheer accident, it still won't work for me!

Good luck all you VDWers, I'll try and steer clear of your horses in future. But better than any of Max's filters is if Oldtimer picks the horse then you can be 90%+ certain that it will lose.

Oldtimer

Hello All,

hope you and yours are well and happy.

Oldtimer - I know the feeling only to well!

Guest/Investor/Statajack - Many thanks for your help. As a result of what you have said I think, and I could be wrong, that I understand the unexposed form method as well.

Thank you again for your help.

All the best
hedgehog

Oldtimer
If your really that bad at picking winners
why not lay them on Betfair,you would make
a packet.


Maggsy

good afternoon..glad to be of some help,please bear in mind i,m also new to vdw,infact iv,e only just purchased his books,my research has been done through clues on this thread, and going over five months r.p,but well worth the effort..cheers investor

good afternoon everyone.. i know theyv,e been mentioned before,but would somebody remind me which form books are required to evaluate the horses mentioned in the articles.thanks

Hello All,

Investor - you helped a lot. Don't put yourself down. I've found that there are plenty of people who will do that for you! I've been interested in VDW for years. I only wish I had the learning curve you have displayed.

All - 4.30 Newcastle

This is a departure from the method I normally use but here goes.

1. 3 Consistent horses in first 5 of BF
Chergan(6), San Francisco(8), Junes River(12)

2. 4 highest Ability
Donnybrook(63), Pillaging Pict(60), Stonehill(44), Chergan(42)

3. In form horses
Chergan, Donnybrook?, San Francisco

I'm getting distinctly mixed signals about Donnybrook. Hasn't won in 2 seasons though has positive aspects to form. I'll consider this out of form.

4. Class/Form horses
Chergan, San Francisco

Now here is were I'm stuck. I consider that one horse has unexposed form, the other is a potential winner in a race.

Of the two I pick Chergan. Though a win by San Francisco will not suprise me. This looks like a race for making a 2 horse book. If the RP Betting forecast is a good indicator then you could get about 6-4 on the pair.

I wonder if I'm making the same mistake I did when I thought The French Furze would win. Time will tell.

All the best
hedgehog

Maggsy,

With my luck if I did that they'd all start winning!

Oldtimer

what,s your e.mail address mate,if you don,t want to give it i understand.cheers

Hello investor,

If your profile is correct I'm envious.

I'll be in touch.

All the best
hedgehog