TC,

If VDW was indeed as described, I would have thought if he went to the W. Indies he would choose one of the Dutch islands or Suriname (Dutch Guyana) which at that time was a v pleasant place, though it is currently a shitheap run and goverened by the cocaine cartels who import armaments for their various guerilla movements and export their cocaine with impunity.

Mark Thatcher might have had more luck there!

no it was on a bus with his dad for a good night out at the dogs - at Yarmouth i think - anyway he sponsored the top race - and gave the winning tip

"For christ's sake open your eyes."

Thanks for that, Investor.

I must apologise for having eyes only for the VDW race of the day (except on the Stale Crust and Dripping " thread).

I'm just about to check results of my bets at Wolver and check out tomorrow's racing.

Thanks for all your help.

Have however - also been to his "Private" box at Newmarket - and had Champagne and Caviar with H.Cecil and Ray Cochrane !!

Ray incidently is a fascinating and realy nice bloke !!

They say - judge a bloke by his shoes - Henry's were "diabolical"

Epi
Evens or better wasn't stipulated at all,A decent price was the end result.Get your facts straight,If you can't get that right what chance have you got of piecing the rest together.

Seanrua
You seemed to be ending one of your posts that i thought was aimed at me,With the sentence Dickhead,I was just returning the compliment.If it wasn't aimed at me i apologise,It may be worthwhile addressing your posts to the person you intend to insult.

Colin says - you are "wasting your time" looking at the likes of - "Roushayd" !

Investor: If the author of VDW cant even organise a convincing soubriquet what chance of him cobbling together a decent system?

investor

"Dickhead"

A remark directed at himself !


seanrea - possesses a quality that you singularly lack - which is the ability to recognise his failings - and to laugh at them - realising that - his intellect - will eventualy prevail !!

Ectoo,

Ok which is the one horse that is held up as the profile? By saying this a can only be assumed you have never even bothered to look at more an a couple of examples. If you look at the first example why did he select that horse? The favourite was consistent obviously in the forecast. There were at least 3 other horses with that profile so why PK?

Don't just have a general rant about it. It should be very easy to just pull the basics apart.

Nessie,

When you first asked about the common denominator I said for me it was class and form. I took it you didn't agree.

The first thing I do is look at the class of all the runners. I don't use the a/rating suggested. I use another one he mentioned in the literature, and then adapted using some of his other reasoning.

TC,

Why does it matter where the ideas came from? Surely the important thing is are they logical? I still don't think Peach knows enough about racing to have written the articles.

A Parasite

Perhaps Investor realises that his intellect will not prevail.

Sorry epi

had to look it up

sobriquet, soubriquet

noun {C} FORMAL


a name given to someone or something which is not their real or official name; nickname:

Mtoto -

No it doesn't matter where the ideas came from - and yes - they are Logical -

Why else would I work to keep the thread going ??

Having said that - they are not written - "In Tablets of Stone" - and

I get "Pissed of " with those who say that they are !!

Years ago I read "Edward de Bono" - and - ever since - have adopted - "Lateral Thinking"



Send Gummy a £20 note

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

Guest -

Thanks for your analysis

can't see much wrong

-

But
-



The comments regarding "Pawnbroker" - compressing the weights - I find most interesting tho !!

Back to "Trainers Intentions"

does VDW cover this ???

TC,

I 've been trying to demonstrate how trainer intention can make form worthless. Look how it made a monkey of 10 year stats.

When using the 10 year stats for the Cambridgeshire the first whittling down I did were the horses drawn 1 to 10 (no winners) So out went Spannish Don (drawn 3) with the first swing of the axe.

Pawn Broker lasted almost until the end but no 7 yo had won in the last 10 years and he was at the absolute upper end of OR and weight.

BUT I didnt spot the weight compressing angle/trick, Elsworth pulled the wool over not only over my eyes but also over everyone elses as well!

Trainer intention has to be the single most powerful effect at work in horseracing, the proof is all over if you open your eyes to it.

TC,

Afraid so, I wouldn't have bought it up as I expect some will think I'm trying to score points after the advent but here you are letter 49.............

[Consider also that a trainer will leave a high weighted horse in a race to prevent another charge suffering from raised weights. (You should ponder why the high
weighted horse was entered in the first place).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by epiglotis:
Johnd: Does this "1. The common denominator is a factor introduced by Lee, so he is the only one who could give you the answer." mean that you also dont understand what Lee means? What "direction" do his clues point in, IYO,?

---

Epi
Whether I do or don't understand, again, is a question that could only be answered by Lee.
I do think there are clear pointers in his posts since he introduced the concept, and I have made certain assumptions from those leads, as I am sure others have.
However, it would be churlish of me, whether accurate or not, to attempt to lay bare that which he obviously wishes not to.
The posts are there, they are all quite recent, and there aren't that many of them. Personally, I think they are a useful guide as to where he is coming from, and certainly worth at least a second look.

Consistency

If I was to ask a VDWer if consistency was a good thing he would probably wax enthusiastic about its merits. He would of course be referring to form figs and more specifically good form figs.

However consistency is by definition the 'reproduction of similarity'. A horse that always comes last is consistent and in these days of betting exchanges a VDWer has to accept that this is a good thing if you are a layer. Quixall Crossett 0/103 was arguably the most consistent horse of all time.

Lets imagine a 5f sprinter, XYZ, who in his last three races, which were all grade B hcps, always finished within 3l of the winner but whose finishing positions were -265. Is XYZ consistent or not? Especially if he is now top weight in a grade C hcp?

Common sense suggests the horse has been running consistently well in a class a little above his own and is now dropped to win. But the VDW method, as upheld by too many of our contributors, says XYZ is not consistent.

Lets move away from form figs, indeed away from the horse altogether. Lets look at the trainer. Surely if you uphold the value of consistency as a good thing it cannot be anything other than the same when applied to the fellow who is responsible for preparing the horse to run.

M Johnstons’ horses have made a consistent profit at Ascot, over a hundred points level stakes profit. As these horses have had all types of form fig configurations, using our intelligence which of the two consistencies , form fig or trainer, takes precedence over the other?

J Gosdens 21 x 4yo+ runners at Newbury have also had all types of form fig configurations but none of them has ever won. Obviously like Quixell Crosett it is easier to be negatively consistent than it is to be positively or constructively consistent but that doesn’t negate the usefulness of the trait.

What is urgently lacking is not a qualitative appraisal of consistency but a quantative one. In simple terms which consistent traits are more telling than others and even more importantly how that information is best understood.

VDWers take the childish option of taking just one form of consistency and ostrich-like dismiss its other manifestations and their consequences with vague acknowledgenments in the form of quotes of generalizations made in twenty year old pamphlets.

Quantatively consistency has to be evaluated in terms of sire stats, a horses’ record at specific distances, goings, class, a trainers record at course, choice of jockey, meeting and race amongst other aspects.

Jib
If you would care to examine M Johnston's Ascot record in a little more depth, you would find that over half of those profits were generated by just 2 horses; Mana D'Argent & Royal Rebel, both highly consistent horses at that track.
All based of course, on nothing more than is in the form book.

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

Seanrua,Ectoo (And all the other knockers)

If you think VDW has nothing to offer, why are you here?
If you think you understand VDW better than those who have studied it more depth, where is your evidence?
Cynics are 10 a penny on this thread, constructive posters are a rarer breed, yet it runs to almost 17,000 posts. Why?