Investor,

Cheers for that, I had thought it was the ground that undone him, and in hindsight he was up in class and distance with more weight, which horses CVDW told us to treat with caution. Silly me.

Pkboy
I have asked this question before a good while back and was bombarded with an array of differing views.In your research of vdw's methods,Do you believe he waited for a market to be formed before striking a bet,Or do you feel he would have gone ahead irrespective of where a particular horse had ended up in the live market.I can't help but feel (judging by some of his comments) That he wouldn't have played blind or ante post.Any comments.

P.S
I hope you didn't do your brains.

I think it's quite clear that the 1:35 at Kempton today is a "VDW race" and equally clear that Made In Japan is the horse thrown up by the system.

Investor,

I think I shall use this thread to keep a 'score' of all consistent horses.

Of course if I did I think it would a rather unpleasant experience for you and your ilk. But if you insist in crowing like a Leeds Utd supporter everytime your team gets a corner and a 'consistent' horse goes in, then I shall feel obliged to draw attention those that dont.

.....

Kempton abandoned.

What kind of weather are you having? Only three meetings on Boxing Day, crazy.

Jib
And i will bite back like a shark,A GREAT WHITE.The thing is john,Of the consistent horses that win or lose for that matter.You haven't the slightest idea which would come in for support using these methods,How could you have.It could only be pure guesswork.It would be interesting to see what list you have compiled at the moment and giving your opinion on what YOU consider a good thing.

"You haven't the slightest idea which would come in for support using these methods,How could you have.It could only be pure guesswork."

Investor,

From the amount you put up before racing it would seem you are in the same boat. You only manage to find them after they've crossed the finishing-line.

"It would be interesting to see what list you have compiled", I disagree, it would be dead boring. Dont you ever get tempted to talk about something different?
"Consistent horses win"
"no, constistent horses lose"
"No, they win"
"No, they lose"
ad ****ing nauseum.

jib
oh, of course i do Put these in your pipe

Main race Ayr JAZZ D'ESTRUVAL W 6/4 (123)
2nd main race leop ROYAL PARADISE w 11/4 (113)

Week after week after week

Investor: I take it you're joking about JAZZ D'ESTRUVAL, only two horses in the race had worse figures, furthermore the winner's figures were from hurdles and this was a chase. If this was a VDW selection then for sure Azertyuiop was also one yesterday.

jib
i think listing all consistent losers would be a waste of your time,i am as frustrated with the argument as you,it just would be nice to see some of the consistent horses that win races listed before the event dont you agree?

investor
that proves no point whatsoever,jib could probably post up at least as many consistent losers today,i understand they might not have been good enough to carry your money,but post them up pre race anyway?
just post them up and say they were not quite good enough,eg,3-20 mount hillaby,4-20 cheese and biscuits were almost good enough to carry my money today.
if you think a horse is good enough to be a bet,say so

Greg/Epiglotis
The point of all this is to put thae misapprehension that cosistent horses don't win races.Which is complete nonsense,Jib put up Marcel the other week when it lost at 1/3.It wouldn't have been backed anyway.Nevertheless it came out again quite quickly and won.I agree that as many consstent horses lose as do win but vdw gave us certain races to concentrate on.It isn't just the cons rating that win a race it's the form or ability that has constituted to those figures that will put you onto the better propositions.

Epi
I was just proving a point (yet again) i wouldn't have backed that horse,But it doesn't detract from the fact that it was consistent.Azertiyoup had good consistent form but was no good thing yesterday.

Wolverhampton 2:45, Parkview Love is an important horse for VDW theory. How about some discussion?

Epi
i take it the horse has won.I have absolutely no idea wether it has or not.You see when i chose to follow these methods it involves getting the form together for the races in question.Which i started doing when i fetched my racing post at 6.30 this morning and spent the best part of 3 hours looking at kempton,Ayr and Leopardstown.Kempton was called off,But the evaluation has to be done.So i'm sorry i can't help it takes a good deal of time to get things together and would be a pointless exercise on this paricular occasion.

Investor,

Please do not invent quotes from me.

I have never said consistent horses dont win, I am saying that not enough consistent horses win for the trait to be worthwhile following.

As regards your top class races I refer you to part of my post on 02-12-04 timed at 03:56 pm:

"In top class races there are far more consistent horses in their composition so that while normal probability indicates that a consistent horse is more likely to be the winner of the contest, it also makes it far harder to say which one (before the race)."

Jib
Fair enough,Well why don't you stop putting stupid comments when horses like Marcel get turned over at 1/3.Also i might like to suggest the form books and researching the horses then you would get a clearer idea of WHICH one is worthy of support.Crystal balls don't work with these methods.

Parkview Love finished 11th of 13 yet according to the "ability rating" it was more than three times as good as any of the other runners.

investor
mount hillaby w5-1
cheese and biscuits n/r

maybe if you didnt spend 3hrs on the jumps this morning,you could have found a winner in the donkey derbies?