I see what you mean about every site having one Mtoto, if I'd have realised what Epiglotis was just here to ram useless pieces of non information down people's throat then I wouldn't have bothered replying to him. It's very hard on UK boards to have a discussion and move forward with that kind of loony knocking about, best ignored imho.

Your point abot Doyen just brings up another problem that punters have to come to terms with, horses running below form, without explanation, even when trainer intent is to win. Just part of the game.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mtoto:

You try to make out the original members of this thread think they are superior and look down on the rest of the forum. That is complete rubbish, many of them/us have helped others in many ways. TC has just spent hours compiling stats on the c/ratings, forecasts, etc. This has already been done by others and the results of many combinations are readily available. To get these stats the only thing one had to do was show a real interest in VDW, and a little hard work.
Boozer
"Flattered you think I am logical, but can't understand why you think I changed the way I work would not also be logical. The reason was purely because I analysed my bets and found by sticking to the consistent horses (and improvers) I increased my profits dramatically. As you know I never used to take it (consistency) into account."

Mtoto
The results are readily available, but obviously not to you?

It is entirely feasible that Doyen ran in the Irish Champion stakes for the simple reason that they thought Sulamani was the better prospect for the Arc.
Had he won, the 10f gp1 on his CV would definitely have increased his stud value,and it gave them the chance of winning both races.
He lost, but that is highly unlikely to alter anything.

JohnD,

The results were available, they just didn't include my first filter. As I have said I don't back a horse just because it is consistent, I don't back them unless they are. Slight difference.

Suppose I could have taken your stance, and said this isn't right, it doesn't agree with my thinking. Sit down, and do it again correctly this time 'my way'

I suppose I don't have enough braincells to understand the posts from Epiglotis and Investor, but I felt there were some valid points raised by Ectoo, Mtoto and Johnd.

Besides super-intelligence, it does appear that, to be one of the few who can understand VDW properly and never divulge his "secrets", a booklet- reader must also possess a haughty disposition, that, to all intents and purposes, comes across to ordinary punters such as myself, as a sign of drug/alcohol/sexual abuse/-fuelled mental illness.

I hope this is not the case, or our "Holy Grail" may turn out to be no more than a can of worms. Hardly worth the effort to find, unless we want to use it like in Viet Nam in the sixties.
Use it for what? Jacking off. Not entirely satisfactory.

Right, I've told you the use of the can of worms, now, can anybody define "consistency" for me?

It seems that the simple last three finishing positions (a la Charley Anderson) is definitely NOT the answer.

Any addition, anyone?

In the 3.30H, Kind is consistent and improving. Has yet to show anything like the class to win this, but there are questions against all the other principals, so could prove up to it. Wouldn't be a bet, though.
In the 4.15 at the Curragh, Red Bloom appears to have been prepared with this in mind. All Too Beautiful should give her most to do.

Mtoto
I give in.
Epi does have a point, though!

Epi does have a point, though!

in regard to what John?

DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT really should beat Dubawi today. Still improving and wasn't suited by the slow pace last time.

been away a few days,just had a read,the best postings on here for many a month,well done with funfair tc,didnt bet in the race myself

Seanrua,

CONSISTENCY

I can only explain how I look at the problem, and why I come to those conclusions.

VDW put up his stats, he didn't have RSB so he had to do the work the hard way. I have no idea if his stats are based on every race, or confined to the ones he studied. He said they were based ONLY on the last 3 form figures.

For me this says.........

He didn't cherry pick, and only take races where the conditions were favourable.

Why bother to look for consistent horses...

Again this is only my thinking on the subject. Consistent horses are easier study and understand, because they run well most of the time they are more likely to conform to their profile.

What is a consistent horse.......

I personally don't think a horse has to be in the lowest 3 on the c/rating to be called consistent. I know VDW said take the lowest 3 but then he shows examples where he didn't. My thinking right or wrong is if a horse can finish in the first 4 in it's last 3 runs it is consistent. That gives the horse a c/rating of 12. I use any rating of 12 or under as being the rating for a consistent horse. VDW did select horses with a higher rating than this at times, but then the horse was in the lowest 3. I wouldn't, but that's me.

Problems with this.....

As folk love to point out trainers will not allow horses to win all the time. Fair enough, but if the horse can still run well when everything is not in their favour isn't that a plus factor? I can't see that much can be learnt about a horse until it is put into a finish, so why bother to run a horse that stands no chance what can be learnt? When this happens I think it more often because the trainer has over estimated the horse than other reasons.

Solution......

Stick to races the horse has proven it can handle the class of opposition. The top races I think all the horses are going to be trying when they go in the stall. The lower class races I look for the horses going for the top prizes in that class. They may be able to win that race but really struggle against better class horses.

Again, never back a horse just because it is consistent. Do the work, find the selection based on logic, then the final part of the puzzle. IF it's consistent back it, if it's not leave it. Yes, you will miss a few winners. Don't let anyone tell you the prices of consistent horses are always short they are not.

I wait with bated breath to see how others look at the problem.

Be Lucky

Ectoo,

On breeding the Singspiel colt Rowan Tree looks the best of these.

Cool it Epi and stop the abuse to other members otherwise your head will go in the same basket as Barney's.

Gummy

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnd:
In the 3.30H, Kind is consistent and improving. Has yet to show anything like the class to win this, but there are questions against all the other principals, so could prove up to it. Wouldn't be a bet, though.

---

Thats a pity JD
Bloody good winner

Mtoto,

I quote from your last post:"I can't see that much can be learnt about a horse until it is put into a finish, so why bother to run a horse that stands no chance what can be learnt?

Like the classic trials at Chester?

Jib
The big group 1 in ireland,Dubawi 11(1) a sprog of the great Dubai Millenium

The big one at hamilton Kind 111 wins at 8/1,Like Johnd d i couldn't back the horse but it doesn't detract from the fact that when they have the form to back up the consistency rating theyr'e never far away.

Investor,

405H Lauro -448 bts Magic Sting -321

345P Dolzago -139 bts Forever Dream -221

We could go on all day like this!

Jib
Please will you read my posts properly,I said."when a horse has the FORM to back up the cons rating theyr'e never far away"Also vdw gave us certain races ie top 2 penalty value from principal And the top penalty value race from other cards,He never said to go through the whole card did he.Being as you have put them 2 up the 2nd top penalty value race at hamilton was won by Windy Prospect Guess what 221.Of course we can go on all day like this,But if you stay with the top class races where the Good consistent form is it is a different story altogether.

P.S i'll pay the postage,It won't cost you a penny,Ah goo on.

Investor,

Put them up, just as you have described, for a few days and lets see how you get on.

As for racing in general, ectoos stats look like one of those chinese executions to the general theory of consistency, but lets see your version of it before we carry the corpse away!

but Dubawi didn't have the best form
Investor and neither did Kind

If you want to argue form in Debawi's race then Democratic Deficit had the best form on offer

Kind was 11 lb below the best horses in the race, can't see that being the best form.

Is this pointing out after races the "form" horse when it clearly isn't.the main purpose of the thread?

It's a bit sad chaps really, instead of trying to prove that VDW is great by holding up totally illogical thinking after the race,it might be better to discuss beforehand.