Lee/Guest

Thanks for your thoughts re foreign prize money. It seems we take broadly the same approach.

Hi all, can anyone help me in getting my head around this race.
It's from VDW's article of Jan 85.
"The Class/Form Horse Most Likely To Win"
It covers a three horse race whereby vdw appears to favour Buckbe but states in a later article that one of the factors against Buckbe was her consistency.

Dec 27th 3m grade 2 nov ch class 83 Yld

Dark Hansel 6-11-4 cons 112 sp 10/11f Ablty 16
Buckbe 5-11-2 cons 15F1 sp 7/4 Ablty 27
Catch Phrase 6-11-0 cons 0-PF sp 9/2 Ablty 22

Previous race comments.

C.Phrase.
Dec 7th 2m4f ch class 25 11-5 9/1 chelt yld/sft
Hdwy fell 4 out
Nov 24th 2m4f ch class 39 11-0 7/1 Newb yld
Bad mistake 6th,sn tailed off.P.U. 4 Out

I'm sorry I hav'nt got the form book for Catch Phrases run for the previous season.

Dark Hansel.
Dec 8th 3m1f nov ch class 44 11-11 10-1 Chelt yld
Disp lead till bd mstk 3 out,came again last.
Btn 3/4L.
Nov 22nd 2m4f nov ch class 20 11-6 4/1 Kemp Hvy
Promising yng chaser.Sn prom,went on 2 out.
Won by 2.5L.
Nov 8th 2m nov ch class 18 11-0 3/1 Kemp yld
2nd till left in lead 4 out, came home unchall.
Won by 8L.

Buckbe
Dec 15th 2m4f nov ch class 54 10-8 4/1 Asct gd
Prom,led under press, after 2 out,rider lost irons at last.
Won by 7L.
Nov 30th 3m nov ch class 30 10-7 5/2 Sandown yld
Not fluent fell 6 out.
Nov 16th 2m gd2 nov ch class 99 10-13 4/1 Asct gd
No threat after mstk 1/2 way, btn 21L.

Extract from vdw's article of Jan 85

" The same goes for the first "get out" Dark Hansel in the Feltham Novices Chase.Again Dark Hansel is the lowest rated on "class" of the three runners, 16 as opposed to Buckbe 27 and Catch Phrase 22. True it was one of the form horses and had a pull on handicap, but you can't bet on that. The race was in fact one to leave alone, because there were other factors which did not go in favour of the "class/form"Buckbe.
In the event,Buckbe fell and the second on "class/form" Catch Phrase took the honours. This race does however serve to illustrate it all by showing the folly of backing against the odds on all counts.

From the above data I'd say I wouldn't have a problem with vdw's views on Buckbe, I'd go along with the view that she wasn't consistent in respect of her races on Nov 30th and 16th, although she was consistent as per the numerical picture.
Although winning lto, this performance could be subject to personal interpretation.
As far as Dark Hansel goes, if you believe in ability ratings you would probably side with Buckbe.
As for Catch Phrase, (this is what's giving me a major headache)why would vdw say it was a form horse, 2nd on ability rating, yes, form/horse I don't think so.
If any member would like to reply to this post without saying it's all to do with the "hidden factors" I'd very much appreciate it.
All the best
Chris B

hi, new to this thread dont know much about form or vdw looked at the first 3 races at aintree tomorrow get the first down to lorenzino & freetown but no bet , the second down to lord noellie & seemore the former is taken, 3rd race thrown out early.
mac.

Chris B


The answer to the question of why VDW regarded Catch Phrase as a "class/form" horse turns on two factors:

first, and primarily, how VDW defined "form" for the purpose of identifying the "class/form" horse - which was one of the issues on which VDW was least explicit and, to the extent that it was what he referred to as "that missing link" (para. six of his article of 13/4/85) you are unlikely to find anyone spelling it out. That said, there have been several posts within the last few days which provide major hints;

second, the subsidiary issue of how one treats falls, pulled ups etc - an area where VDW was more explicit (though there remains some room for differences of interpretation) - see his letter of 8/3/79, reprinted in "The Golden Years".

With many, if not all, the historical examples, one needs more than one Form Book to work them through satisfactorily. That is most certainly the case with Catch Phrase.

evening all.

it's taken me 3 weeks to get thro' the first 55 pages and now you're up to 80something!!!!

?from spells it out...

"It can be used methodically as the basic factor and when all other elements line up in support the horse concerned is seldom beaten."

What does he mean by "the horse concerned"...the one that is top on class(ability)?

and if so, is this the holy grail of achieving 80%?

cheers IMP

Reading back over the last few pages I am a bit concerned that people seem to be caught up in the minutae of past examples. Raceform have in the past made numerous printing errors and continue to do in the supposed computer age. Why make assumptions?
Races from VDWs time are worthy of study in that they show examples of class/form horses and can be used to compare with horses possessing similar profiles today but (and its a big but), the same thing cannot be done with the opposition in those races except for the obvious examples. A race is a one-off event and cannot be repeated in exactly the same way. There are examples of Prominent King type horses occuring today but so far I have never seen the opposition in those races with profiles the same as Decent Fellow or Beacon Light. The only reason I can see for this depth of study is in the hope that it will confirm personal theories but I feel that in the context of future racing it is pointless as we are dealing with different probabilities. A one-off event is exactly that. Wasn't probability part of the formula?
regards,

Going through the Aintree races today we can see that in the principle race at 2.35 the class/form horse is Florida Pearl with See More 2nd c/f. Checking the form shows either as possible, but using crosschecks Florida Pearl comes out as the selection.

In the 4.20 Newhall is class/form with Giocomo 2nd c/f, but not enough factors go their way. No selection.

2.00 sees Iris Royal c/f with Freetown 2nd, but again their form shows up doubts. No selection.

3.10 Is a tricky race again with Turgeonev c/f and Dark N Sharp cf2. No surprise to see Dark N Sharp in the winners enclosure but not a betting race for me.

4.50 Has L'Epicurien as c/f but there are flaws again so no selection here.

5.20 Has Classified as c/f with Eternal Spring 2nd c/f. Studying the form shows both out of their depth last time, but given other considerations Classified looks worth a wager.

Florida Pearl and Classified then for me.

Guest

Its a brave call to back Florida Pearl to reverse placings with See More Business on Gold Cup running, but the ORs are in your favour and the courses very different. Not clear cut for me, but good luck.

guest ,
Your thoughts on todays racing were helpful well done.

Guest,

Well done.

Guest

Good call with Florida Pearl, congratulations.

Classified looked a little unwilling in the early part of the race, but towards the business end I was reminded of VDW's comment on Royal Bond. And what a price!

Top class. Well done.

Cheers,

hi Guest,

well done with florida, I bet you have confounded some with the form aspect of this selection.

is this a method or part of the Hidden factors/ ultimate knowledge type selection.

Guest,

Good effort today. It wasn't a surprise that Florida Pearl reversed the form with the conditions they faced today. I didn’t back him though. Amongst other factors there was one negative against See Mores name, which has been touched upon recently, that proved a negative for Balmers Coombe.

I had other arrangements today that meant I had to back Classified at SP prior to leaving this morning, hoping for perhaps 5/2. As it happens I walked through the door just as the race had started and to say that he didn’t look as though he was enjoying himself throughout the race would be an understatement. But, had I have walked in with 2 furlongs to go I would have presumed he’d torn the field apart throughout. The fact that surprised most though had to be the price.

investor,

i would be interested to know if you had old califoria down as a roushayd or rifle brigade type selection.

All - Thanks for any well dones,etc they are appreciated. I hope there were some interesting points raised from the evaluations.

Despite todays success, the opposite side of the coin was hopefully demonstrated with those class/form combos that didn't have the required credentials. Some of these will still go onto win such as Dark N Sharp and numerous winners last Saturday, but there are many that don't either proving to be Iris Royals/Freetowns or worse still. Of course even when all the credentials are there, a risk is still involved. By waiting for all or most of the factors to line up in support of a horse, we are putting the odds in our favour.

IMP - VDW was referring to the top ability horse with the "horse concerned is seldom beaten" scenario. This is the ultimate balance, top on ability and in form with everything else lining up in support. It doesn't happen everyday, but several times a week on average.

Fulham - Sometimes it doesn't look pretty, but as I have often intimated, I am looking to play the odds based on form trends if you like. I rarely if ever consider a selection unlucky in running,etc. If it loses, it loses fair and square in my book. At face value, Eternal Spring looked to have the better form last time, but there were many negatives such as past markets and lack of good winning form. Classified was market leader in all 3 last runs, but not today. Regards FP, I didn't even look at the ORs. The form told us all we needed to know. Interesting also to note the market at Cheltenham in the Gold Cup and also SMBs lack of good winning form. Lord Noelie had little chance in my view and was poor value to boot.

Barney - A bit of both really, with those missing factors showing up the real form. FP was consistent in the right class. Whilst runs are never ignored, they are sometimes excused if the horse was sent to achieve something beyond his capabilities or there were valid other excuses.

Anyway, that was today been and gone. The work all starts again now.

Lee

You`re a bloody hypocrite.

I refer you to you own post on page 73 of this thread dated Mar 27th 01:37pm.

Read the paragraph with the sentence beginning "But I am consistent"

You are inconsistent. Guest will not have to read between the lines to understand the point.

Good Night.

111
.

Statajack,

I was a little surprised to read your post today concerning past races. Whilst I can accept the EXACT same probabilities are unlikely to resurface, I see no other way of trying to understand VDW's teachings.

For the vast majority of people trying to get to grips with his methods then what constitutes a 'form' horse can be quite problematic. Many would not have taken FP as a 'form' horse today after what appeared a couple of bad ones. Granted the ground at Leopardstown and the Cheltenham hill were against him.

The identification of the class/form horse may well be a 'mechanical' procedure but is there a better way to figure it out other than by reference to past races? I ask this question not to be awkward but out of genuine interest. After all if past races are not likely to reveal the answers then I am wasting an awful lot of hours at the moment

Cheers

PS. Congratulations on a good day Guest. Apart from the 2 winners backed, other class/form horses posted ran decent races.

Crock,

I agree with your sentiments and can assure you that you’re not wasting your time by going through the past examples that VDW gave. I would go as far to say that they are more worthy of attention than anything that you’ll get from this thread, be it from Guest or anyone else.

A few have taken much trouble in solving what VDW shared and it is inevitable that there will be some divergence between those that have found success with the methods.

Like Chinese whispers, you are better off hearing it from the originator than from someone half way down the line.

Carry on as you are.

Great analysis,on all races,thanks for putting me off Eternal Spring,as I thought he was the most likely.
You have most certainly answered the sceptics,fair play to Three Legs,for being man enough to acknowledge the fact.