Hello Swish,
Can you let me know either by post or email if you recieved the data. Unfortunately my PC crashed in a heap soon after emailling it to you so I'm not sure if it was sent.

all the best
hedgehog

Dear Hedgehog,
Yes have just received data, thank you. At first glance I do not see how it is relevant. Are they all top speed last run? If not, you miss the point. However I have not had a really good luck yet,
Yours Swish

Hedgehog

The race in question was the Erin Foods Champion Hurdle, the 3.35 at Leopardstown on 18/2/78.

Hi Hedgehog.

The date of the Prminent King race was 18/2/78

Would it be possible to send me the record's as well? I would like to check that I have been looking at the same races.

Have you ever given any thought to finding other ways of judging consistency, class, and ability? It was along time ago when vdw offered his ideas and while I agree they are better than nothing, a lot has changed. Information is far easier to collect and analyse.

I am thinking the lines of are all 2's and 3's worth the same, should 5th beaten less than 3 lengths not be worth more than a 3rd beaten 6 lengths, etc. In short I would like to hear any logical ideas that may be used to improve on the original ideas. This applies to anyone who is interested in vow, any ideas how to improve on what we where given. Or even why the original ideas don't/won't work.

I have now gone a week without a bet, but good bets can be like busses and policemen, none and then 2/3 at the same time!

Regards

Hedgehog

Please send email to our good friend gummy, ask him to pass it on to me with your email address and I will see what I can do for you. Completely
off the record you understand!

Marchwood

VDW present whereabouts!

Someone told me recently that the Dutchman was still alive but in a poor state of health, living in a private nursing home. I will look this up and see whether there was any other information!

Marchwood

Hello all,

Fulham and Mtoto - thank you for the date of the Prominent King race. I'll get the form for that as soon as I can.

Mtoto - I'm sorry but I haven't looked at ways of judging class or ability other than those suggested by VDW. To be honest I haven't got to grips with them yet. I do remember something about beaten lengths by Peter May. This may, no pun intended, be of benefit.

As to the data I have provided for Swish I'm happy to give you a copy however it is a subset of the paper records I have for last year.

Swish - all the horses were peak by Topspeed, that is the last run was also the best.

Marchwood - I will send an email to gummy with my email address. I have already sent a number of emails to the group owner signed hedgehog but no joy.

To any and all - I have been re-reading the Golden years of Van Der Wheil and recency of last run is mentioned twice. Marchwood has mentioned this before. Has anyone got views on this?

Thanks for the help
All the best
hedgehog

It seems to me to be excessively vague to say the first 5 or 6 in the betting forecast, looked at in this way there is clearly a big disparity in relevence between a field of 8 and one of 16. An interesting statistic recently posted said that nearly 90% of winners are at odds less than the number of runners so why not consider the horses forecast at odds of up to the number of runners regardless of the number of horses this may be. The same with the fitness, to look for the 5 with the most recent runs ignores the disparities between races where for example 8 have run within two weeks and races where only 3 have run in the last three months. The point with a recent run is that the horse is more likely be performing at a similar level to that of it's last run than if it hasn't run for a couple of months or so, depending on the horses age. Ideally all the horses that come in for consideration will have form that is recent enough to make comparison meaningfull. On the question of general fitness I suggest the trainer's performance is more relevent than the number of days since the last run.

Ask yourself these questions...

1) Just how much time have you wasted trying to figure out VDW's methods.

2) How many of you are anywhere near making a profit from your betting.

Now, think on this...

1) Stop wasting your time chasing rainbows looking for a magic formula.

2) VDW's so called selections were always detailed in hindsight, he never took up a challenge of providing selections in advance. This served to perpetuate the "mystique" of the (alleged) person.

3) The whole thing was invented to sell more newpapers. (Same as Stewart Simpson- Always Back Winners).

4) Stop being so gullible and wishing that someone's going to drop a magic formula into your lap- life's not like that.

5) If you spend your time learning your trade of studying form properly, you'll find the profitable results that you seek.

6) Remember, strike rate is directly linked to odds, the magical VDW system of 80% winners at the sort of prices quoted DOES NOT EXIST.

7) I know that this will be hard to swallow, but I doubt if you spent as much time reading the articles and attempting to interpret them as I did. FORGET IT AND GET ON WITH YOUR LIFE - IF YOU DON'T, YOU'LL STILL BE LOOKING IN TEN YEARS TIME AND NO FURTHER FORWARD !!!

8) No person by the name of Che van der Wheil has ever been on the electoral register in Market Harborough.

Hello Pazuzu

Welcome and goodbye! I fully accept you are allowed your own opinions but unless you can come up with something better for us to get our teeth and our leisure time into, then goodbye. What you
are saying is repeated time and time again and it is a bandwagon that those without better ideas choose to ride on! If you have your own ideas then might I suggest you start a thread of your own and let us all in on the secrets!

Foreign Nationals by the way are not included on
the electoral register at least at that time!

Epiglotis

Your suggestion about the amount of runners and the odds, used to cut the race down to size is very good. In fact as I don't trust the forecast it is the method I would use. If I decided to work in that way. I also agree with your thinking on the horses with the most recent run. Have you any thoughts on the consistency and ability factors?

Pazuzu.

Two things come to mind after reading your post. In item 5 you say studying form is the only way, the only thing with that is, it is only one of the elements vdw suggested using. Surely if the form is backed up with class and proven ability that makes it stronger. The other thing, is the attitude, if I can't do it, it doesn't work. I hesitate to ask but how are you at flying an aeroplane or brain surgery? Your argument isn't very logical.

Swish.

If you have a good look at PP's Saturday selection I think you will enjoy it. When I rated this race it was my second rated, it came joint top on 2 elements but failed on overall form.

Marchwood

I have received your consistency ratings. In some ways they are better than the basic vdw method, but they still take the form figures at face value. I was looking at something that used the fact that a high % of winners finish within 5 lengths of the winner in their last race. This taken with the % of winners that won their last race must be a more reliable figure, than form figures taken at face value.

Regards

At present I have no original thoughts on the approach to consistency or ability. Should anything occur to me I will post it for your consideration.

Marchwood.

I have just read your latest article and would like to respond.

Your concern over the ability rating is unwarranted IF you follow the vdw formula and use ALL the elements. The horse with the high ability rating is NOT the selection, if it FAILS on consistency.

Mr Anderson's ability rating formula is a slight improvement on the basic vdw one,but it fails because he to is still taking form figures at face value i.e. 2 horses run in the same class of race one is beaten 5 lengths (2nd) the other is beaten 2 lengths (6th) and the second is still awarded more points for running the better? race. It may be better if the points where awarded for lengths beaten, not position in race. If you use this method you must be wary of the horse that is continually placed, but seldom wins. There are quite a few horses that fall into this category. As the aim is to win, these horses should be avoided.

I was trying to show you that by using your commercial ratings you had formulated a very good ABILITY rating. This backed up your consistency rating so that it did not stand alone. I would suggest THAT is more like vdw, he used the other ratings to confirm the strength of his consistency and ability ratings. He said many times it is not one rating, but when they fall in line and back each other up.

Regards

Hello all,

This is not relevant to the current discussion, which I think is very interesting, but relates to a previous post.

If you are looking for the form for Prominent King, 18/02/1978 Leopardstown you can get this from the British Library. You can get them on 020 7412 7000 or write for a photocopying estimate to

Attention of Public Services
British Library
Newspaper Library
Collingdale Avenue
London
NW9 5HE

giving details of the material you want photocopied.

All the best
hedgehog

Don't you get it ???

THE GUY DIDN'T EXIST !!!!!

The whole thing is a hoax and you are wasting your life searching for that which cannot be found.

I realise that the truth hurts, but I'm just trying to help you people who obviously haven't the intelligence to grasp the obvious.

If the answer was there, it would be in the public domain by now.

To quote one of your contributors "Thank you and goodbye" - There's just no helping some people and none so blind as those that cannot see.

Pazuzu

If you were more familiar with the body of VDW's works than you seem to be, you would know that he never suggested that there was a "magic formula" to be discovered. That is not, of course, to deny that some have researched his work with that end in view.

VDW was really about learning how to read form, and through spending time and effort exploring his examples (such as the Erin Foods Champion Hurdle, referred to in other posts), that is just what some of us have tried to do, not without some success.

In one sense, it is almost totally irrelevant whether or not there was actually an individual named Van der Wheil who lived in Market Harborough at the time of the VDW letters to the Sporting Chronicle Handicap Book. What is relevant is that someone of rare ability to read the form book, not just at face value but in depth, was good enough to pass some of what he (or she) had learned to those prepared to put in the time and effort to learn through the examples given.

If its not for you - fine; you'll be in company with many others, most of whom are looking for the illusory "quick fix" of a simple system or successful tipster who, with little effort on their part, will put them on the fast road to riches. Others (who have perhaps had some experience of searching for that fast road, its attendant frustrations) find something attractive in the ability to "do it oneself", and not a few are deeply grateful to VDW (or whoever s/he was) for assistance in that regard.

Without wishing to rock too many boats (or cradles) , can I suggest that those interested in the methods of VDW who are determined to find the answers , should invest in the relevant form books for the early examples that VDW gave and cock a deaf ear to the hecklers and doom merchants.

Regardless of what the majority think , the methods he gave will consistently provide endless winners but only when you come to understand what our friend what was really telling us. Personally I do find it a little surprising that so many are still hung up on the numerical picture and continually trying to take things at face value. You have to consider ALL the factors before coming to a conclusion. The initial consistency and ability ratings were just ways to narrow the field.

The fact is all this takes time , something few seem prepared to put in. Forget about consistently finding winners just by scanning the cards for 15 mins or using some quick fix system. It takes a long determined effort to decipher the full story and continued time and effort to stay on top of the game and it is for those reasons that the answers are not in the public domain. Why would anyone just announce their findings to all and sundry ?

When you can understand fully just why Prominent King was a good thing by VDWs methods , then you will be well on your way.

As to VDWs letters and articles they are there to be deciphered. He never wrote anything just for the hell of it. There was much to be found between the lines. In fact his Prominent King letter packed more useful gems into it than any of the lengthy systems threads to be found all over the net.

Hello all,
Some time ago Marchwood posted an email from a friend about the 4 races on 26th October 2001.

Here is how I evaluated them. Let me know you thoughts.

I have used the 5 most recent runs because I think this is useful. I included ability and highest winning class because I know these make good filters.

If memory serves both Newbury and Doncaster have Soft going in the Racing Post

2.40 Newbury Class C(90) H'c 2m

First 5 in the betting forecast
Ranville, Follow Lammtarra, Homelife, Argamia,
Proper Squire

5 Most Recent Runs
Xellance(13), Spy Knoll(13), Follow Lammtarra(13),
Argamia(15), Ranville(23)

3 Most Consistent from first 5 in betting forecast
Ranville(3), Argamia(9), Homelife(11)

Top 4 Ability
Ranville(47), Homelife(47), Tensile(39), Fletcher(38), Three Lions(37), Spy Knoll(37)

3 Highest Winning Class
Ranville(75), Homelife(67), Fletcher(47)

Common to all lists
Ranville

Form evaluation for Ranville
3/10 Newcastle Class E(29) H'c 2M
Won by 7L carrying 9-12(Ex5), now has 9-3 to carry, Ridden to lead over 2 out, Ran on strongly final furlong

26/9 Chester Class D(75) H'c 2M
Won by 3L carrying 8-6, Drew clear inside final furlong, eased close home

Likes to win


Supporting Evidence
Distance winner
Carrying less weight then last win
Won in better class than all other runners
1 point from Topspeed peak
Won on similar going

Result Ranville 2-1


3.10 Newbury Class A GIII(203) Stakes 7F

First 5 in the betting forecast
Millennium Dragon, Rapscallion, Twilight Blues, Rajab, Pieter Brueghel

5 Most Recent Runs
Advance Party(7), Lascombes(13), Rapscallion(13),
Pieter Brueghel(20), Samhari(20), Millennium Dragon(22), Twilight Blues(35)

3 Most Consistent from first 5 in betting forecast
Rapscallion(3), Millennium Dragon(4), Twilight Blues(8)

Top 4 Ability
Advance Party(154), Whitbarrow(153), Rapscallion(88), Irish Vale(74)

3 Highest Winning Class
Whitbarrow(300), Advance Party(270), Rapscallion(143)

Common to all lists
Rapscallion

Form evaluation for Rapscallion
13/10 Ascot Class B(87) Stakes 7F
Won by shd carrying 8-11, now carrying 8-9,
Driven and edged left final furlong, Headed last 100y, Rallied to lead last stride

30/9 Ascot Class B(143) Stakes 7F
Won by shd carrying 8-11,
Stayed on under pressure to chase leader final furlong, Ran on gamely to lead last strides

Likes to win


Supporting Evidence
Distance winner
Carrying less weight then last win
Won on similar going

Result Rapscallion 7-2


3.40 Newbury Class B(102) H'c 6F

First 5 in the betting forecast
Marsad, Seven No Trumps, Andreyev, Gaelic Storm,
Certain Justice

5 Most Recent Runs
Now Look Here(6), Tedburrow(7), Bouncing Bowdler(12), Andreyev(13), Seven No Trumps(13), Certain Justice(15), Yorkies Boy(15)

3 Most Consistent from first 5 in betting forecast
Certain Justice(9), Seven No Trumps(15), Marsad(16)

Top 4 Ability
Palanzo(189), Muchea(171), Bouncing Bowdler(166),
Marsad(122)

3 Highest Winning Class
Muchea(450), Gaelic Storm(394), Tedburrow(325),
Palanzo(325)

Common to all lists
None

Result Seven No Trumps 11-2


3.15 Doncaster Class B(196) Stakes 6F

First 5 in the betting forecast
EC Lady, Marjurita, Dudleys Delight, One for Us,
Captain Venti

5 Most Recent Runs
Enjoy the Buzz(4), Katy O'Hara(4), Mystic Witch(4), Primarosa(4), Just Michael(8), Mandown(13),
Neptunes Gift(17), Sherazade(18)

3 Most Consistent from first 5 in betting forecast
Marjurita(8), One for Us(12), EC Lady(15)

Top 4 Ability
Marjurita(42), King Harson(35), Dudleys Delight(35), EC Lady(30), Beateous(29), Captain Venti(29)

3 Highest Winning Class
Dudleys Delight(47), Marjurita(42), King Harson(35)

Common to all lists
None

Result King Harson 16-1

In each case at least 2 of the filters have trapped the winner.

Do you think this is too derivative?

All the best
hedgehog

To our welcome Guest and Hedgehog

An excellent post and one that I hope those who want to have a dig either read and take note or start up their own thread on another subject and leave us digging in the sand.

Hedgehog has gone into all the pros and cons of the races that were covered and there is a pattern but we should never be looking for a winner in every race but as has been said, by the man that did not exist, if there is a winner in the race. That is why the Doncaster race with a 16/1 winner was ignored.

Many people that say the 85/90% strike rate is not possible are probably right when looking at the way they make selections. But with multiple
betting and VDW methodology maybe therin lies the answer. We should also not forget, VDW, was not just one single method.

Prominent King we are now told by our Guest,( I seem to think he has said this before somewhere) is the worth looking at for an answer - then what about us giving our views on this? I will probably be accused of trying to get someone else to unravel the key for me!

Marchwood

The main problem for many seems to be the question of form.

What is a form horse ?

The answer is not as difficult as you would think , but you have to be prepared to put aside old ingrained dogma and change the way you evaluate form.

Did anyone bother to check the cards that VDW gave on Boxing Day 1986 featuring winners who were form horses? All six races at Kempton were won by form horses and 14 from 18 at Market Rasen , Huntingdon and Sedgfield on the same day.

What use is ability or class if the animal is out of form ?

If you go back to the letter featuring Prominent King and read it carefully you will find many signposts towards the relevant factors to consider. Do not be put off by it’s apparent lack of detail. It is all there , between the lines if you like , but you have to approach the task in a certain manner.

As mentioned before though , you do need the relevant form books. Again , this is yet another reason that the puzzle is largely unsolved. As the years pass , nearly 24 now , the chances of others picking up the gauntlet fades likewise.