As a lot of people have no easy access to form books of 20-30 years ago how about pointing to a recent example to which the same considerations apply?

Hedgehog

A very good posting. Well, thought out and presented, using ALL the factors as suggested by vdw. I think it is VERY important that they are all used. I stated in an other posting I thought Rapscallion was a vdw winner, and for me by far the strongest on the day.

Marchwood.

If you started the ball rolling, by giving your reasons why you thought Prominent King was a good bet, no one would say you are asking others to do the work. I have studied this race for hours, and I can't see on the face of it how vdw came to his conclusion. Finally I have found an answer (or think I have) it took a lot of time and hard work. I am not prepared to just give the answer away, but if anyone can come up with a logical reason why Prominent King, I am more happy to discuss it. I still can't see he was a certainty, but I will admit he was in with a far better chance than it first appears!! I am not asking anyone to give a full answer just pinpoint the key race/races for the main contenders.

Guest.

You are obviously well versed in vdw. You say what good is ability and class without form, surely that is why vdw waited until all the elements lined up. I wonder if you will respond to Epiglotis's request, and give a recent example of vdw in action. It would be a pity if you where a member of the read the book brigade. I do hope not.

Regards

I am fortunate enough to have some of the relevant Form Books, and Guest is absolutely right when he says that, with careful research, the race won by Prominent King is capable of yielding up important lessons in form evaluation. As indeed are numerous other examples I've studied.

But despite having looked at his examples over many years, one still leaves me very uncertain - one of VDW's earliest, the race won by Rifle Brigade.

On the face of it, this should be a reasonably easy race to understand. A five runner, three year old handicap early in 1978, so all the form of the horses concerned is in the 1977 and 1978 Form Books. All five runners had several runs in 1977, and from an assessment of these five I've had no particular difficulty in narrowing the field to two, with Rifle Brigade clearly the more likely on the strength of two good runs (a win and a second) over 1m as a 2yo, one at York, a demanding track.

But then I am left with the following puzzle. Granted that Rifle Brigade was, on its 2yo form, the most likely "winner in the race", in the 1978 race for which VDW gave it as his selection it was running for the first time as a three year old, and over a distance (1.5m) significantly longer than any it had tackled as a 2yo.

Elsewhere, for example in his article of 10 October 1981, VDW draws attention to the fact that year after year some 2yos don't do as well at 3 as might have been expected, and gives some clues which help identify some of these "disappointers". But nowhere (as far as I know) has he given any pointers that enable one to be confident that (a) a horse is fit on its first run of the season or (b) will be able to manage a never before attempted trip. Both seemingly necessary to understand how he made Rifle Brigade an "outstanding bet" (VDW's article of 1/6/78).

Now, VDW may well have been working with trainers' patterns (some being more adept than others at readying a horse for its first run), or on breeding (is a horse breed to stay). But both may work "on average", but seem inadequate to give the degree of confidence required for an individual selection, especially one he described as "an outstanding bet".

If Guest or any other contributor has studied the Rifle Brigade race, and come to a satisfactory understanding of it, I would be very grateful for any pointers that might help me solve what I have found a long term "headache" in VDW study.

No doubt many will think I'm mad worrying over a minor race run 23 years ago, but I work on the assumption that VDW never wrote anything without purpose, and I remain keen to discover his purpose in the Rifle Brigade example.

well done you cant put it any clearer than that

There are many factors to consider when weighing up form and as VDW said himself , the initial numerical pictures do not by any means cover all desirable aspects. However they do narrow ones field of vision to areas packed with winners.

Hedgehog appears to be heading in the right direction and both horses “filtered” in his article were indeed the class/form horses in their races. For me only Ranville was a certainty with Rapscallion a very likely winner but not a certainty. However finding the class/form horse requires the knowledge of what constitutes form. Consistency is not form , neither is having one of the 5 most recent runs or even being in the forecast.

I mentioned that VDW pointed us to whole cards of form horses and it was worth investigating them. For the benefit of those without the relevant form books I can tell you that at Wetherby today (Weds) leaving out the bumper , 4 of the 6 races were won by a form horse but only one race went to the class/form horse.

It has been said that anyone using VDWs methods were unlikely to come to the same conclusions as the man himself. Well , he clearly stated that when everything became clear and understood and the missing ingredients were found we would all have the same horses as himself. Basically this mean’t that everything was based on easily viewed facts that could be seen by everyone , providing they knew what to look for.

Fulham says he is puzzled by Rifle Brigade. I would say firstly , Fulham , that it is perfectly logical to me that you should worry about these old VDW selections. You are bang on correct that he never wrote anything just for the sake of it and there were many double or hidden meanings there to be seen. Keep looking and learning from them. Assuming you are accepting Rifle Brigade as the class/form horse consider this. If the champion miler took on an 80 rated mile handicapper over 1m 4f you wouldn’t expect any surprises. An extreme example maybe but worth thinking about with regards to class and form.

I agree it is well worth people posting how they viewed certain VDW examples but I also concur with Mtoto with regards to just posting the correct answers for the world and his wife to see. VDWs methods were and still are very powerful tools and whilst they can’t be learn’t overnight they are basically simple but logical.

One recent class/form example can be seen with Aspirant Dancer on Tuesday. Just one of many good things provided by the very generous VDW who put across his logic in such a way that only those who put in the effort would understand the full concept.

Hello all,

Marchwood, Mtoto, Barney - thank you for your kind words. I think the race evaluations just fell out that way. The 2 horses were very clearly good things.

All - for Ranville and Rapscallion LTO Class would not have helped. Has anyone views on this? Also I have looked for other clear examples and the best I can find so far is 5th October Newmarket 1.50 Mubtaker Won 15-8. Am I on the right track?

Thanks again
All the best
hedgehog

Hello Guest,
I'm truly not with it this morning!

Thanks for your kind words as well.

Can you given recent examples for Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays? These are the only papers I get.

Thanks again
All the best
hedgehog

Hello everyone

On the matter of the Prominent King evaluation, the first race mentioned by VDW, I have gone back over my past records etc., and have decided that as it seems such a complicated matter, I will make it the subject of this week's article!

It will hopefully be up by Sunday evening as usual
subject to gummy having enough time!

Keep this thread going, I think we are all learning something!

Marchwood

Guest

I was interested in your comment re class, and can see its potential applicability. But having reviewed my material on Rifle Brigade and his opponents on 15 April 1978 I still find myself puzzled.

Looking at the 1977 form of all five, none seems a potential star (or indeed proved himself to be in 1978), but Rifle Brigade certainly put in the best performances over 1m and, especially at their respective handicap marks, I would have had no hesitation in backing him to win over a mile at the tail end of the 1977 season.

But VDW was clearly prepared to to go well beyond that. Despite not being sure that RB was fully fit, or absolutely certain that he would be effective over the extra distance, VDW must have seen enough in the 1977 performances over 1m of the five contenders to think that RB would nevertheless easily have the measure of the others over 1.5 miles, first time out in 1978. After all, he referred to RB as an "outstanding" bet.

Having looked carefully at the 1977 form, including the performances of other horses in the 1m races, I just can't see what VDW evidently could. If you or anyone else can, and are prepared to give a further clue, it would be very much appreciated.

Hello All,

After a little light reading last night I came away with the following tale.

I'm a trainer and I have this particular horse in my yard. Last year it's form wasn't exciting in fact it's best run was a 4th place. But I have faith that it can win races.

I got it ready for its first run of the season and it ran the best form of its life coming second to a good handicapper.

Now I have a couple of questions to answer. How good is this horse? Is it Conditions/Very good handicapper material or good handicapper or a moderate handicapper thats been flattered by it proximity to a good horse (good enough that is to later win again). I think I'm a canny enough trainer to be able to place the horse to advantage so long as I KNOW how good it is.Also I have the question of its race fitness?

I sit back and think about these problems and the solution I find is to put the horse into a moderate handicap. I've chosen to run it in a moderate handicap because, like Sun Tzu, I think it's a good idea to run my horse against lower class opposition and give it the best chance of success.

Because of the 2nd first time out the horse has earned a moderate to high handicap mark. Putting the horse in a moderate handicap will ensure a high weight which I can use to bring on the horse's fitness. Also the result of the race will go a long way to telling me how good the horse is.

If it's no where to be seen then it's a moderate handicapper and I can use the race as part of an exercise to get the Handicapper to reduce its mark to something I can win from.

If it's thereabouts I think its probably a good handicapper. And I may get lucky and have a few points shaved off its mark.

Finally if it wins or comes close I'll know it's a very good horse. However I have a problem with this eventuality. A good performance will confirm to the Handicapper that "he" is correct and will make placing the horse a bit problematic.

The horse shoulders it heavy burden well, again coming second after giving 19lbs to the winner.

So now I have a very good, race fit horse that I'm sure can win.

How do I place it? Not another moderate race, I can win more money than that.
What about a good handicap? Why give weight away to other horses that may be previous winners. Why take the risk.
No, I'll put it in a conditions race. Because its still a maiden I'm sure of a good weight. No conditions penalties for previous wins. Also I'll be able to run the horse at essentially level weights which gives it a big advantage given its last good run under a burden.

I choose a race at the same distance as its last good run were it will carry 17lb less. In fact it's the only horse I send to that course that day. Why send others when I KNOW I'm going to win with this one?

And the rest is history.

Am I close?

All the best
hedgehog

Spot on I reckon. But it runs in the tenth race of the day and 4 solid favs have already won so it loses anyway. The trainer is mystified by the horses 'poor performance'. If only it had run in the 2:30 not 3:30. (I'm a glutton for punishment)

you guys ought to put in more work ! Just a couple of points (in addition to Racemans!)

How many pro - gamblers use VDW ?
Wasnt it a method rather than a system (and allied with temperement) would mean that not everyone would come to the same selection anyway. Plus isnt the enjoyable part the discussion and that would go if everyone could find the so called answer.
He said stick to the higher value races - fair enough and it makes sense but does that mean you never have a bet on any other types of races using other nethods of selection.
Do you consider value when you have decided on a selection ?
As a matter of interest how long does it take to assess say a 12 runner race and get (or not) a selection


I agree with a lot of what he said I just think its to labour intensive for me

i have never heard of rifle brigade until this week so i am just theorising.

questions i would ask in difficult cases like that

how old is it

was it leggy and under developed

did its parents show marked improvemet from one year to the next, or were they significantly better at new distance.

do any brothers or sisters show similar marked age/distance improvements.

if its classVform the answer may lie here

Hedgehog, that was one of the best posts on the reasons why Prominent King was such a good bet that I have read in a long time. You have shown a shrewd understanding of the inner workings of a trainers mind. Very impressive. Lets see if Marchwood can follow that up.

M.o.M

Hedgehog

An interesting and persuasive account, though I have to say it leaves me with a doubt or two. However, I rest confident that Marchwood's article, if its as original and stimulating as his other posts, will resolve these.

Hello All,

I'm sorry but I'm having problems with my email. I can't seem to get in!

Sorry, if this is an inconvienience for a while.

All the best
hedgehog

Hedgehog

You, without any shadow of doubt, have taken any wind I had left in my sails, totally away - great stuff. How many horses do you have in your stable!

Still one or two of you might still like to read the theoretical side of the story (if that is what it is!).

A small question for FULHAM - are you an old Cottager with the wind blowing into the ground
off of old Father Thames. If so, please own up to it! We might both be the long lost fans of Jimmy Hill amongst others?

regards
Marchwood

Hello All,

MuchofMuchness, Fulham and especially Marchwood - Thank you for the kind words.

Marchwood - I for one am really looking forward to your article. I'm sure it will be a great read.

Thanks again
All the best
hedgehog

Hi Marchwood,

Not quite old enough to remember Jimmy Hill as a player, but yes, a regular at the Hammersmith end since the days of the great Johnny Haynes, Tosh Chamberlain, Tony Macedo, Jimmy Langley etc.

Dear Hedgehog,
The Trainers tale article was excellent. Well done,
Yours
Swish