Dear Guest, I owe you a reply but your posts need to be well digested first. I wouldnt want to do them the injustice of a hasty reply, so please bear with me. I will say immediately that the information that there was a collorary to the Systematic Betting work, that was never published has possible consequences that go beyond your fist consideration of them. Regards JIB.

Investor
You asked which form books were needed to study
the VDW examples.I don`t think anyone has answered
you so i will.If you want to study all the examples in depth then you will need form books
from 1971-1990 .But you may not need all these
to figure out the methods.It depends how deeply
you want to go into the methods.


Regards

Maggsy

At Kempton the races to look at are the 3.05,3.35 and 4.10. In the latter the class/form horse Caqui D'or is consistent and there were valid reasons for his run last time when taken in context. Prior to that he was progressive as he was stepped up in trip winning a valuable race at Haydock. The form is sufficient to warrant a bet today and he will be backed by myself.

In the 3.05 extra care is needed as it's a 3yo fillies race with lightly raced animals involved. On a known class basis Kootenay rates highly but using the speed merit rating her stablemate Red Liason emerges as a possible. Kootenay is proven at the trip already and Red Liason should get it within her class. Both horses have decent form relative to the rest of the field. If the prices permit then a book could be made but it's a no bet race for me.

In the 3.35 colts race again great care is needed. Known class points towards Red Back and Flacon Hill as does speed merit. The latter has yet to tackle the trip where as Red Back has performed with credit over a mile in group 1 company. However his form upon closer inspection is let down somewhat in comparison with Falcon Hills last run. FH had a busy juvenile campaign starting off at the minium trip. Redback also had a busy time starting off at 5f also. It's likely that given the opposition, one of them will win but I wouldn't want to put money on either of them doing so.

At Haydock in the 4.00 the class/form horse is Emperors Magic and the form is relatively good. However there is a doubt about the weight and this doubt is further compounded by a study of the ratings. Interesting to see how Mr Williams' Bold King gets on. No selection.

In the 3.30 race there is conflict between the form horses. Class/form Tensile has to give weight to both Crystal Gift and Plutocrat (who shows signs of having more ability than his rating implies). Again no clear selection emerges.

It doesn't take too long to see that the 3.00 is a punters graveyard with the class horse not seen for a long time, though he did win the race last year. No selection.

At Carlisle in the 3.50 the class/form horse is Flat Top with Occold 2nd. Other factors show them not to have the required credentials but it is a poor race and no doubt one of them will win it. No selection.

Both Newton Abbot races show doubts about the possibles and no selections emerge.

Guest,
You seem to have missed Towcester in your admirable summing up.
Regards,

thanks very much mate,i thought i,d been sent to coventry.cheers investor.

Statajack,

On the subject of Towcester and the recent discussions with regards to the 'Roushayd' method it was interesting to see Two For Joy make the winners enclosure today. Not the greatest price but nevertheless a good winner.

Lee,
I must admit I didn't look at Two for Joy's race but you are quite right.
There were two I backed at Towcester, Phar Jeffen using the consistency method and Zurs using yes, you guessed it the Roushayd method. Zurs in particular I thought an excellent bet but there you go. The Kempton race won by Colourful Life does not seem to be working out too well does it?
regards,

Hi Statajack,

I also backed Zurs, and I felt that he was just as strong as Two For Joy, never mind. You are certainly right about how things have worked out from the Colourful Life race at Kempton, quite strange really.

I was with you also on Phar Jeffern, otherwise that was it for me today.

Guest
Looking at your previous post i also picked some of your selections,As i have only just started with VDW can you check my selections to see if i'm on the right track if you don't mind. They were,
act in time 3.50 N/abbot
sullys hope 2.15 N/abbot
indalo 2.25 Haydock
crystal gift 3.30 Haydock
emperors magic 4.00 Haydock
zurs 3.15 Towcester
clear skies 3.45 Towcester
red liason 3.05 Kempton
redback 3.35 Kempton
flat top 3.50 Carlisle
As you can see not a good day but i don't mind
i'm sure i will get the winners one day.

JIB
enjoyed your posts very interesting please keep them coming.

Lee and Statajack.

I am very surprised you don't understand why the form for Colourful Life isn't working out. If you take the penalty value of the race as the only guide to the class, you are putting yourselves at a big disadvantage. It may have been worth £11,000 to the winner, and it was classified 130 C. The real class was a lot lower than that, the OR of the highest rated runner was only 119. I know you don't think much of using the OR's as a true guide, but it does work on many occasions! Guest appears to have used this form to make CL a class/form horse and you are using it as a guide to see if a horse has dropped in class. Add to the fact the horse hadn't really dropped in class, the horse had only won on good or good to firm on left handed courses why where you surprised it didn't run a better race? This argument is not raised in hind sight I used the same argument this morning to try and stop my partner backing this horse (unsuccessfully), he didn't believe either

Regards

good evening..i also thought PAPERISING a good bet today discounting the last run, progressing until being p/u your opinions would be greatly appreciated regards investor

I left off the race for Towcester by mistake though whilst Phar Jeffen was the clear class/form horse the factors were not good enough for me. At Plumpton Jarro was class/form but again not a bet for me.

At the end of the day my only bet failed to deliver and as usual I have revisted my evaluation. He had the class and the form along with being consistent and the weight should not have been a problem. Perhaps though the trip should not have been taken on trust given that other form horses were proven at at. Interesting to see how the horse is placed in the future.

The other races worked out pretty much as expected from the probables with an interesting point proving true with regards to overaced 2yos not always living up to expectations at 3. This is just one factor that should be considered when evaluating a horses' career. Remember VDW said that on the flat he appraised all horses from 2yos old and pointed out some things to look for.

Michael - Sullys Hope was class/form but had various factors against such as weight. In the NAB 3.50 Killerine was class/form and not far off being a bet, but just one too many doubts for me. Tensile was class/form at Haydock but there were other doubts likewise Flat Top and redback. Kootenay was class/form in her race and close to being a bet also. Zurs was class/form but doubts also for Phar jeffen class/form in his race. You are on the right lines but watch out for factual mistakes ie Killerine/Phar jeffen/Tensile/Kootenay.

Mtoto

I quite agree with your post re Colourful Life. And your reasoning about judging the class of races, which I regard as a major improvement on VDW's, is of course one of the reasons why Caqui d'Or was a speculative bet today.

Using your basis of judging race class, Cd'O's best performance to date had been in a genuine 0-85 (genuine because the highest rated runner actually had an OR of 85). Next time out he ran in what was effectively a 0-90 (a 0-95, with the highest rated runner having an OR of 90), finishing a reasonable 7th. Today, he was contesting a 0-97 and it was therefore no surprise to see him outclassed.

Yet on VDW's penalty value basis, instead of being raised in class in each of his three last runs (including today's), which he most certainly was in terms of the most important consideration -the quality of the oppostion - he was raised for the race on 8/9/01 (from 44 to 214), then dropped to 140, and today dropped further to 108. To adapt VDW's phrase, not so much an illusion of form as an illusion of class!

Mtoto/Fulham.

I can understand why you are making the points concerning Zurs and Caqui Dor but when a trainer maps out a campaign for his horse he is unaware at the time exactly who he will be competing against so all he can do is set targets based on prizemoney. He can have a look at the 5 day stage and make an assessment of the opposition as it stands there and then but he still wont know the exact opposition until declarations the day before and cannot then withdraw his horse without good reason. We alone have the luxury to look at the ORs of previous races and then compare them with the ORs of the horses in the race on the day but the problem is how much time can be spent doing so on a day like today?
All said and done that still wouldnt account for Zurs poor showing, if you care to check you will see the opposition's races were even weaker. I would maintain that Zurs was a good bet and one I would make again in similar circumstances. Unfortunately they cant all win.
Regards,

Guest
Thanks for looking at my picks,Ref killerine all i could say about him was that he was improving,But act in time seemed to me to be proven as had won c class 0-130 all be it i 1999 and seemed to be in good form from last race.
Tenzile was second choice but point taken.
Phar jeffen i thought the weight would anchor him down.
Kootenay yes i see that now ,I looked at red liason and saw that she had beaten 3yos last season and stopped there, That will teach me .
Thanks again its not as easy a i first thought,
but i must admit i'm enjoying it,I did not back any of them because none of them seemed to stand out like i thought they should do.
I hope you won't mind me asking again for your assistance.
Regards

Statajack,

I don't quite understand why you think it is to hard to cope with all the races in a day. I am sure if Guest can manage to assess 10 or more races, we can. I go through the better class races as vdw suggested, although I do put a class limit on the races. I use the mechanical procedure to highlight the class/form horse. My class/form horse. Then have a good look at the form of the c/f horses (to make sure it is not an illusion). If I am happy it is a true c/f horse, and I must say there are not true c/f horses in ever race. I think the word true is important, because I don't fiddle about to make a horse fit. I then look at the form of any possible dangers i.e. the first five or six in the forecast and any ultra consistent horses in the race. I do agree with Guest that just because a horse is the class form horse it is not automatically a bet. I do find it hard at times to see where he gets the class element from, as with Caqui d'Or, and others.
Your point about trainers not knowing the actual runners before the day is valid, but they must have time to asses the strength of the previous races. I find it hard to believe they think that was a £11,000 race, the form must be good. Would they not look at the strength of the horses in the race? The only logical way to do that is by looking at the OR's and the time of the race. I can't think of a better way, can you?

It's all about opinions, but I know you would have to use violence to make me put money on some of these horse that are being suggested as VDW selections.

I have spent all weekend thinking about the Erin, and I can't find any logical way to dismiss Beacon Light as out of form. I can't see he was out of form, and I have read his form over and over. I can see he wasn't good enough to win, even in form,but I can't make him out of form!!

Regards

Bit of a late night tonight and I noticed Mtotos latest post. I hope he doesn't mind me highlighting a section of it and adding a few points.

"I find it hard to believe they think that was a £11,000 race, the form must be good. Would they not look at the strength of the horses in the race?" - Firstly the fact it was an 11 grand race indicates a reasonable amount of class needed to win it, but your adjoining question poses a very valid question that has to be answered in our own evaluations.

" The only logical way to do that is by looking at the OR's and the time of the race. I can't think of a better way, can you?" - Actually I can, but I didn't think of it, VDW did and he told us all. If used in conjunction with other factors such as time,weight,sps,etc,etc a much clearer picture emerges.

The correct answers to Mtotos questions will reveal why Beacon Light was not a form horse going into the Erin Foods.

Mtoto
The only way i can see that Beacon light was
out of form was that he had been dropped in
class on his prev runs (if the class is taken
at face value)being hard ridden lto and not
winning.Recording a lower sf in a lower class
race.Horse`s have form cycles and all the evidence
points to Beacon Light having peaked in race 1608
when he beat Night Nurse quickened and ran on well in a class 85 race.Since that race he had been
on the way down and moving out of form.


regards

Maggy

Morning all,

It just goes to show how easily it is for those well versed in VDW to draw different conclusions. ie - yesterday 5 people who I totally respect couldn`t agree.

For my part I am feeling reasonably pleased with myself because dare I say it I now for the first time feel i`m getting somswhere, ie -

2 selections for me yesterday (paper exercise) namely ZURS and PHAR JEFFEN which I note fits exactly with statajack`s thinking.

I hate to `disagree` with Fulham and Mtoto (who were proved right - well done) but for me Zurs was a strong bet. His last 3 runs in race class 131 - 126 - 121 was in my opinion far better than his rivals. With regards the going the trainer clearly stated after one of his winning runs earlier this season that as he gets older the easier ground suits. Track - the way he stayed on last time suggested todays stiff track would suit.

CAQUI d`OR - I came to the same conclusion as Fulham and Mtoto. That said I believe by the end of the season this one and one other in the race will prove better than there OR.

The race is certainly one to keep replaying on the video. I share Guest`s views in that the placing of C.d Or and may I suggest several others in the race will be very interesting.

Regards,

Maggsy

Your line of thinking re Beacon Light has the merit of a clear logic, and for months that was how I saw things.

But consider this. In the race on 4/2/78, Beacon Light was meeting Sea Pigeon on terms unfavourable by about 9lb compared with those that would have applied had they met in a handicap. In those circumstances, you may feel that Beacon Light's achievement in running Sea Pigeon to a length suggests he was far from out of form - a view supported by the decent sf returned. (And don't forget that Guest and others are applying particular criteria to determine whether from their perspectives horses are out of form: they are not looking at the whole picture.)

Statajack is, of course, right to point out that trainers don't know exactly what opposition they will face at the time they declare their horses to run. But, with respect, that is irrelevant to our purposes. What matters, in addition to the steps the trainer may, or may not, have taken to ready a horse for a particular race, is the opposition the horse finds itself meeting on the day, because that is what the horse has to beat.

Take Caqui d'Or yesterday. Ignoring other contra-indications (fitness and distance most notably), the horse found itself running against better opposition (as rated by the Official Handicapper) than he had encountered before. In that regard, it had done exactly the same last time out, and had failed to rise to the challenge. On what ground, therefore, could it be expected to rise to an even stiffer challenge yesterday?

Of course there was the realistic hope that Caqui d'Or would prove to be more progressive than his older rivals. And at the 6/1 or thereabouts available almost to the "off", and four places, he was a plausible EW bet. But no more.

On the face of things, Zurs was a more promising bet. Taking his runs this year, on 19 Jan. he was beaten 15l in a 0-126, then dropped in class to a 0-121 where he duly finished nearer the winner, beaten 2.5l with an improved sf. Yesterday, he was further dropped slightly in class, to a 0-119, and might have been expected to go close.

However, the key characteristic about Zurs is that at present he's essentially a plodder - has recently been doing nothing at the business end of the race. "Outpaced" from about two out features in the reports of his three runs prior to yesterday, though in the most recent case, after being "outpaced" Zurs "stayed on again run-in".

VDW said that particular attention should be paid to what a horse does, or does not, do at the business end of the race. On that basis, it was an act of courage yesterday to back Zurs in the belief that a small drop in class would enable him to plod past the rest of the field.

[This message was edited by Fulham on March 31, 2002 at 08:33 AM.]