Lee

I agree with you about Love from Verona.

The key to the class/form horse lies, I think, in recognising the sleight of hand VDW used in the sixth para. of his article of 13/4/1985. He names the four examples illustrated in his "Spells it all out" article, then in the following sentence refers to the five races. (Though I suppose "five" might have been another careless error, like the several in his Prominent King letter - carelessness on his, or the printer's, part.)

The Wild Gamble race was not, of course illustrated in the "Spells it all out" article. And while the winner was there to be found, unlike Little Owl, Sunset Cristo, Gay Chance, Kenlis (and Wing and a Prayer, Canny Danny and Cool Gin) it was not the class/form horse. (More like the recent race with Flagship Uberalles 2nd c/f horse to Edredon Bleu, at a very much lower level of class!)

[This message was edited by Fulham on April 01, 2002 at 11:05 PM.]

As promised here is an extract from a letter by VDW to Tony Peach that some of you may not have seen before. Given the speculation as to the thinking behind the book Systematic Betting, it is worth reproducing here to help clarify some points.

Extract from letter received February 1996.

"When I first began to write for Sports Forum it was clear that to splash the whole lot in front of your readers would be a pointless exercise and only by adding bits as time went by could it be hoped a doubtful, critical and sometimes abrasive readership would eventually see the light.

I had intended to give away everything in due time, but you will recall telling me you had decided to call a halt to discussions of my methods in your column. This was fine by me, but only a fraction had been revealed at that time.

Later I was asked to write 'Systematic Betting' a title I didn't like, but never argued over. In fact I wrote two versions. You will remember I received words of warning at the time and as you know they came true.

I took the cautious step of only advancing my methods slightly and as it turned out it's as well I did. Needless to say when the request for a second book came I turned it down.

The first book included my methods of sorting a card out, but has nothing to do with what had previously been explained. Perhaps one day I'll write another book and include it.

Regards your mention of the Old Newton Cup. It would seem the object of the exercise was lost, which is a pity and a waste of my efforts - because had it been understood it would have carried your readers a long way.

Regards the evaluation of Travado and Rivage Bleu mentioned in my letter - (which was 'You (Tony Peach) tried to draw me on a couple of issues, namely my remark previously that anyone knowing what they were doing could go to the races knowing they would win, and going back quite a few years to Prominent King in the Erin Foods Champion Hurdle at Leopardstown. I noted Channel 4 were covering racing at Huntingdon and Cheltenham on Tuesday 21st of Nov, so went through the cards just to give an example. At the principal meeting Huntingdon you could have had a field day, but the best bet of the day provided Travado in the 2.45. At Cheltenham the best bet and second best for the day was Rivage Bleu in the 2.25. Rivage Bleu and Prominent King were both horses without a winning class rating, but in each case the trainer 'told you the horse was really OUT TO WIN'.)

You will recall that during a conversation I mentioned that anyone who knows the game could go racing with the certainty of winning. This is done quite differently from anything I have shown to date. They were just examples of what you would go to bet when you know how."

Dear Guest,
I appreciated that post of VDW's letter. Thank you. (please don't try and read between the lines like Bensam. I mean what I say),
Yours
Swish

Chris B,

As VDW said, there are many ways to narrow down the field and what he gave us in black and white was a procedure for doing just that. It’s what he didn’t give us in black and white that is crucial in order to assess form in the way he did.

Fulham,

May I ask, in your opinion, if Wild Gamble wasn’t the class form horse, which one was?

Lee

Balmers Coombe.

Swish - No problem, my pleasure. I'm not always trying to read between the lines (lol).

Fulham - The passage you mentioned that listed the class/form horses from Spells It All Out obviously had a printing error and all 5 selections were the class/form horses. Remember, these re prints of VDWs letters are bound to have the odd printing error,etc. A bit annoying I know, but everyones human.

Guest

Its not just a question of a possible misprint in the 13/4/85 article: its also the fact that the Wild Gamble race on 7/3/81 was not spelt out like the other four examples in the "Spells it all out" article.

I agree with you that Wild Gamble was a class/form horse in the race on 7/3/81 - just as Flagship Uberalles was in the Queen Mother Champion Chase. But I'm suggesting that he was not the top class/form horse (ie as you made Edredon Bleu in the QMCC). Do we differ on that?

I shall also be interested in Lee's view, given that I have replied unambiguously to his question on this matter.

[This message was edited by Fulham on April 02, 2002 at 10:28 AM.]

[This message was edited by Fulham on April 02, 2002 at 10:29 AM.]

Fulham,

I’ve been trying to reply to your post for the best part of the morning but for some reason my connection is very slow on the Gummy site? It’s ok elsewhere though.

Anyhow, I agree with your comments regarding Wild Gamble/Balmers Coombe. From my records Balmers Coombe was top on ability winning a class 30 Novice Chase last time out, and so made him top on class/form.

I have to admit to not having picked up on the point you highlight in ‘the missing link article’, and whilst I know there were many misprints/mistakes throughout the letters and articles, the jury is still out on this one. The fact that VDW repeats ‘every illustration’ says to me that he was trying to get a point across. One can accept errors/misprints in numerical text, but to miss out the name of a horse ie. Wild Gamble surely begs the question, was it missed out deliberately. It certainly fits with my way of thinking anyhow.

Thanks Lee. Very helpful and I think it means we've the same understanding as how VDW identified his "class/form" horses. And I fully agree with you that, from VDW's angle, neither Beacon Light nor Decent Fellow was a "class/form" horse in relation to the 1978 Erin.

Hello All,

hope you and yours are well and happy.

I start this at 1435 so by the time I've finished the first mentioned race will have been won or lost.

2.40 Warwick
In forms horses are Shampooed? and Mumaris.
My selection is Mumaris.

3.10 Warwick
In form horses are Mr Christie and Oxidor.
My selection is Oxidor

3.40 Warwick
In form horses are Jet Files, Churchtown Glen, Mrs Dangle and Shepherds Rest.
My selection is Churchtown Glen.

3.20 Uttoxeter
In form horses Montayral.
I think this horse has been skillfully placed.
Selection Montayral.

3.50 Uttoxeter
In form horses are Burundi, Barren Lands and Dare.
Only the first two are comfortable at this level.
Selection Barren Lands

5.20 Uttoxeter
In form horses are Got News For You and Keen To Last. Only the latter is comfortable at this level.
Selection Keen To Last

All the best
hedgehog

Hi all

Just an enquirey really, When you get your c/f horse do you do it yourself or do you use the r/p postdata to cut down the amount of time looking for them,I think i already know the answer,It's probably D I Y incase they overlook something a formulite might consider relevent to the horse but i thought i'd ask anyway.

Fulham/Lee - Balmers Coombe did indeed have an ability rating of 30 due to it's one and only win last time at 66/1 over just 2 miles. He seemingly turned in a much improved effort beating Devils Brig (gave 4lb) and Desert Hero, the former a shock winner himself when winning his only chase. Wild Gamble had an ability rating of 12 and had won his last 2 chases, the latter with a penalty over the distance. When you look at what Balmers had done previously, there had to be some serious doubts raised about his apparant form. Remember we don't take things at face value, we are always crosschecking. Take a look at Maceo at Kelso the other week. seemingly the class(ability)/form horse but not the case when the form was studied.

Michael - I think the answer to your question is that any form book will do. Just make sure you have as much info to hand as possible. I am never swayed in my analysis by newspaper tipsters and form summaries. Ratings are a different matter though and should be used as a guide but not the decider.

ALL

Any idea where i can get hold of a copy of systematic betting from.

Guest

Thanks for reply,another question now,sorry but on a previous post by Maggsy they stated that the form books needed for checking VDW races was from 1971-1990 is that flat and jumps or a mixture of both,and what are the best one's to get first.
The only VDW books that i have at the moment are THE GOLDEN YEARS and BETTING THE VDW WAY do i need to get all of the VDW library or just certain ones,I notice on one or two posts Jock Bingham has been mentioned as well would i need his books also, The reason i ask is that when some of the posts mention past races i can't pass judgement on them all i can do is read remarks by other people so when i get them i'll be able to go back and cross check,
PS
When you find the c/f horse do you get better results with A and B races than you do with lower grades.

Thanks again.

Further to my comments on VDW's letter, do you know what these "words of warning were" and why did he turn down the offer of a second book?
Yours
Swish

Guest

Thanks for your reply. It may be that the apparent difference between us is not really a substantive one at all, but merely a difference in the order in which we tackle things.

I work on the basis that the class/form horse is the one, among those in form, with the highest VDW ability rating. Although calculating the ability rating is almost always straightforward, sorting out which horses are in form can be problematic, as indeed VDW suggested in the final sentence of the eighth para. of his article of 26/1/85.

Without giving too much away, sometimes it is necessary to make a positive decision to ignore what ON FACE VALUE seems a disappointing last run: VDW's example of Gay Chance was one such. (And I reached the same judgement as you in deciding to ignore Caqui d'Or's last run in 2001 in assessing a recent race.)

However, where a horse wins its last race before the one under consideration - Balmer Coombe for example - I assume its "in form" from a VDW perspective (after all, no horse can realistically do much better than win its race, whatever the circumstances, though sometimes of course the easy/difficulty of winning is itself highly significant).

So for me, Balmer Coombe was therefore the class/form horse in the Wild Gamble race, although I absolutely agree with you that his win was rather suspect (certainly out of character with his history). But, for me, Balmer Coombe disappears as a factor almost immediately the cross-checks and form scrutiny begin. (As indeed did Maceo in the recent race to which you refer, where Through the Rye was for me a pretty clear selection, Magic Combination being so out of form and not a class/form horse despite his history.)

From your last post, it seems to me that you are probably undertaking more cross-checking and form scrutiny than me before you determine your class/form horse. I don't take form at face value (eg Gay Chance and Caqui d'Or) when sorting out the class/form horse, but seemingly go into things less thoroughly than you at that stage, "catching up", as it were, when I get to the cross-checks and form review stage. Hopefully, we reach the same judgements at the end of our respective processes: I presume from your post that you agree that Wild Gamble was the selection in the VDW example, and we certainly both agree that Maceo was not (remotely) the selection in the recent race.

A much more interesting day's racing today than yesterday, and much more manageable than Monday's!

Fulham - I agree with much of your last posting and it is very much the case that some class/form horses can be tricky to isolate as VDW said within the article regarding Righthand Man,Stray Shot,etc.

Something you have highlighted with Wild Gamble is the basic point that VDW did not go into details on this one, as he also neglected to do with others such as Ekbalco, Justafancy and further back with those such as Lyphards Wish, Battlement,etc. That is, I believe, because here were races that involved some really in depth balancing between class and form and to go into depth on them in print would be almost impossible without highlighting certain unseen factors.

If we take a horses last 3 runs, which is all we usually need to consider when establishing form, there are certain things to look for in the case of horses such as Wild Gamble. Somehow he managed to show dramatic improvement first time up from his poor form of the previous year, one in a hunter chase, and win a class 30 Novice chase at Kempton. Often, when the form is an improvement on previous runs we can safely take the horse to be in form, but there are alarm signals to look out for. The starting price of 66/1 is a big minus for me though not a conclusive negative. What did he beat and how is the next question. The form was also at the minimum trip. If you look at a horse such as Bonny Gold within the class/form exercise given for Stray Shot/Zamandra, we can see a horse improving with each run before winning prior to the race under examination. So BG was a form horse, but on closer inpsection not good enough to wager on. Consistency was just one factor against in that case.

Swish - As I understand it, the words of warning were from Tony peach, who didn't think it was the right thing to write a book for Raceform, who were just looking to exploit the popularity of VDWs letters. From what has been said, I would say there was a shortfall in returns for VDW and even though he didn't need the money, he wouldn't have appreciated others cashing in on his methods. It is a grey area, but I'm sure VDW was uncomfortable with the whole thing really, judging by his comments.

Michael - To evaluate all of VDWs selections you do need many flat and NH form books which can be picked up for around a fiver a throw. You need to see a horses whole career for a full undertaking.

Guest

Agreed. (And in order not to confuse others, you clearly mean Balmer's Coombe, not Wild Gamble, in the first sentence of your third para.)

Perhaps I could seek your view on a technical question regarding ability ratings. Do you take the value of overseas races at face value, or discount somewhat for higher prize money levels? Sometimes I feel a horse's ability rating is artificially inflated by a win or two in Italy, Germany and most commonly France, where for races of seemingly comparable standard the prize money is often greater. Its my practice to take "foreign" prize money at face value but bear it in mind in the overall assessment, but I'd be very interested to hear whether you adopt a different approach.

Regards.

Guest,

I agree with what you have said regarding Wild Gamble. I was fortunate enough to have a lot of my records given to me, some while ago now, and whilst there are a lot of examples that I’ve gone over 100% with a fine tooth combe there are those, Wild Gamble being one of them, that only got minor attention at the time. It was a major advantage to have a lot of information available from the start, but nothing can compensate for your own research.

Fulham,

Prize money abroad is certainly higher when compared to similar race types in the UK. When looking at the top class horses that now compete around the world I consider their ability rating to be a true guide to their class. However, when looking at the lower class horses that spend most of their time racing in any one country, be it Ireland, France, or wherever then I tend to be more cautious. Assessment of form for these types should pose no problems though, as everything is relative to the particular country in which it runs. So if the class horse in a race was one that spends most of its time competing in Ireland, and it is also a form horse then I would certainly be look at it more than once.

Fulham - Thanks for highlighting the mistake re Wild Gamble. I did of course mean Balmers Coombe.

Re Foreign prizemoney,etc - Like Lee, I err on the side of caution and make a decision based on further form study. We often see ex French hurdlers over here in Novice chases with high ability ratings based on one or two wins. Caution is needed, but it really depends on the opposition as always.

I'm hoping to post some pre race thoughts over the Aintree meeting.