TC,

Wake up

By the way yes it is - how about you, how does your knowledge compare?

Yeah - Maybe

Spent 6 years in the jungle in "SARAWAK" in a mud hut - just after the Japs were Kicked out - It changes the way that you look at Life !

Make no secret of the fact that I am "New" to Racing - and that you have been in the game a damm sight longer than I have - I still reserve the right to "Question" - unsubstansiated - "Statements" !!

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

With the greatest respect, Lee, I have to say that, if you were to divulge the "essential, simple key to VDW success" (my words), I would NOT reject the information because it were "second hand".

You sound like a successful businessman, so I'm sure you know that "expertise" can be bought.

For example, Murdoch is probably not an expert on satellite technology, Branston doesn't fly his aeroplanes and Wimpey didn't dig out the footings on his housing sites.

I'd go a little further and suggest that if any of these three were to give the "essence of success" in a one-liner, it would NOT be something out of of some pamphlets that they'd studied better than everybody else.

Of course, I could be quite wrong, but I doubt whether they care!

BTW,I won't ask for the simple essence of VDW, even though I'd love to know it.

Hidden factors rear their dreary heads.

Lee - sorry I do not understand

quote:

---

Nessie,

It would give you everything you needed to succeed – simple as that.

With my selections I could have posted a whole load of spiel about how the horse has been dropped in class here, raced over the wrong distance there, and carried top weight last time, but why? Everyone can read on here, everyone knows how VDW set out the information, and the information is there in the formbook. That is NOT what VDW is about.

---

Yes I can read, yes I have the form books, yes I have VDW books. Yes the information is there.

BUT what does

quote:

---

That is NOT what VDW is about.

---

Mean??? What is the common denominator?

Nessie,

Do not let the fascination of the unknown distract you. Ever since Eve encouraged Adam to try the apple these secrets have a track record of being disappointing in proportion to the fascination they arouse.

Secondly even if all vdw selections have a common demoninator that does not mean that all horses with the same distinction will win.

Of course the common denominator may well be something quite useless. Eg all the winners had a jockey on their backs!

It has to be the trainer

For what it's worth I think VDW is about only betting when it makes sense to do it. That is when everything is in place the complete formula. not just bits of it. As far as I can see the class and form are the main factors, but the other elements are important.

JIB, seems to be suggesting the trainer intention is the main/only factor. He really suggesting trainers just pluck a horses out of the air and says this is the one for such and such race? No, he knows the horse in side out, and he knows the horse has the attributes to win certain races. Our job is to look for the reasons he thinks that, and VDW gave us some examples on how to check.

The common dominator is class and form. He suggested one way of judging class, he didn't say it was the only way. In fact he said here are many ways, but this was a quick easy/simple way.

Investor,

When I say conflict is a cope out, I mean, just saying to much conflict is a cope out. I know some will groan, but what the hell. Wasn't the Erin full of conflict? How many would have just dismissed that race as full of conflict, if he hadn't shown a way to solve it? I except my finding on the race may not be the correct answer, but I'm happy it is. This is backed up by that same answer solving many, but not all of the examples. That for me doesn't prove I'm wrong just he may have used another criteria to solve Son Of Love.

TC,

[possibly does - but it also occurs in dozens of others that "Didn't" win !!]

The question must be would he have made them selections? Many would have made Soviet Song and/or Refuse to Bend VDW horses. I would question if that would have been the case if these folk had studied the examples. Without the form books how much knowledge of the examples can be found? In these examples he had to choose between horses that appeared to have all the right credentials.

Lee,

My idea of the common denominator may be different to yours. Can I ask if you think all the examples were solved by the same method?

Be Lucky

If Alan Berry trained High Accolade and Lucky Story i would never have backed them at Ascot

Rab,

Nice One!

Rab,

Fair enough I wouldn't have backed them either, but for a different reason. I also didn't back Elusive Dream and he has a very clever trainer. He was placed to win in the trainers mind, but it didn't have the class for me.

Be Lucky

Mtoto,

Does your last post mean that by studying its form you have/had a better idea of Elusive Dreams ability/class, call it what you will, than Sir M Prescott?

Sean,

Yes knowledge can of course be bought, however where horse racing is concerned I’m not sure it applies in the same way that your examples show. Nearly every punter in one form or another purchases ratings and statistics, but that won’t get them very far on their own. Otherwise second hand knowledge in horse racing, particularly in the form that it appears on this thread, needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. To that end I doubt there is anything on the market that provides the punter an ‘all in one’ winning package.

Epi,

I wouldn’t expect you or anyone to believe a word that I say in isolation.

Nessie,

The thread goes around in circles talking about horses dropping in class and all that, but we all no what the basics of VDW are and how he judged the class of race, and horse etc. so why bother stating what is there in the form book for all to see? The common denominator that ties everything together has nothing to do with these complexities of form.

JIB,

You’d be surprised.

Mtoto,

Yes, ALL selections were found using the same investigation process, which shows a ‘winner in the race’. Roushayd cleverly filled in a few missing blanks.

“What a horse does or does not do in the final 2 furlongs will give you the answers.”

“What a horse does or does not do in the final 2 furlongs will give you the answers.”


Now we're getting down to it, I feel!

I've noticed for years that bookies and hardened punters only start warching a race from the 2 out marker.

This must be the crucial stretch, I guess. Without sectional times, it's difficult to judge, but I always like the comment "ran on well".
"Lengths beaten" is something I've seen put up by many as a measure, but I'm wary of the easing down and pointless "coming too late with a rattle" that goes on.

Certainly, "ran on well" is a positive, but I'm sure everybody knows that, so we're not quite there yet.

Lee,
Thank you for your replies. I'm a believer in getting good advice; it can save a lot of wasted effort and time.
You've probably given us good directions by mentioning the last 2 furlongs.
This tip could save years of searching in the wrong place, imo.

Sean,

Your reply only bolsters my argument about the lack of knowledge that posters demonstrate where VDW is concerned.

Anyone with the slightest interest of getting to the bottom of VDW would already no that this stage of the race is where the answers lie.

“To confirm what the figures say it is necessary to study the form of all concerned, taking particular note of the class in which they ran, the course they ran on, the pace and going of the respective races, distances won or beaten by and MOST IMPORTANT, HOW THEY PERFORMED IN THE LATER STAGES OF EACH RACE.”

The quote I made is nothing knew, but it’s working out what VDW meant by his reference that’s important, and one will never unravel the answer without the form, simple as that.

Lee:
presumably it can equally be unravelled from the form of Byron and Lochbuie, 27th and 29th July respectively.

Thankyou Lee I understand your reply now.

So The link has nothing to do with form but in the after race comments. Is this correct?

Calling Blackcat

- doesn't this remind you of CD's "Pot of Gold?"

Epi,

Of course, however, having only a limited number of examples to go on will undoubtedly show up similarities that are merely coincidence. The more evidence you have got available the more likely you are to isolate the real reasons that VDW selected the horses that he did.

For instance with just 2 examples to go on you might spot that they were both carrying less, or the same, weight as last time out, however, in reality, by studying the evidence that VDW gave, you will soon realise that this cannot be a factor in his methods - just an example.

Nessie,

No, it has everything to do with form i.e. a horses performance, but not in the way that is touted around on here.

After race comments also have no bearing whatsoever, bar of course stated facts such as the horse was reported lame after a race and such like.