F chester
Ultimate conclusion
Percentages

Bugger it for now
Going to let me fireworks off

placed 32 BETS of which 29 won
Bets not horses
He dutched

Are we wasting our time with G. Hall ?

TC,

You may be right with that thought. However anything that makes us go back and look at races in detail can't be a bad thing.

Was he just a lucky bugger? I have no idea, but he did find the winner of the 4 races VDW confirmed. Only one of which was fairly straight forward. Baronet's race there was a choice of 4/5, 2 of them had form closely tied and no obvious reason to choose Baronet. Swiss Maid was taking on a horse that had already beaten her, plus other consistent horses. Buckskin also had raced against its closest market rival and again other consistent horses where in the race.

By going back over these races it confirmed for me that all 8 work the way I think VDW worked. Key or no key is that a coincidence?

VDW talked about class enough for it not to be the hidden factor. Form or form reading may be the missing item, or then again a way of measuring form may be the factor.

Boozer,

The second numerical picture, is that the method used to find Pegwell Bay? Prominent King would have been one of the first eliminated using that picture!

Be Lucky

Mtoto

Prominant king?
Dont know
Perhaps as it was the only race worth bothering with on the day due to the weather and abandonments
He may have made it fit

I agree John

McCrirrick might get away with it

JIB,

I just can't understand why you bother to read the thread if you feel so strongly against it.

The burning question has to be where would you like us to keep our heads. Perhaps you would be happier if we kept them where the majority of punters do. Firmly up their ar*es.

You don't like/use the methods fair enough. I don't like to base my selections on stats, I don't keep on you are talking rubbish. I don't care what a horses father, brother, etc has done I am only looking at THIS horse. The same for the record of the trainer, jockey on a particular course, the question is can the horse act on the course?

You've had your say on consistency, and like a lot of your ideas it just doesn't stand up to examination. You have said in the past there are some good ideas in the VDW thinking. Why not just leave it at that? Go away and start your own thread, you can rest assured I for one wouldn't come and shout you down. Even when I don't agree with you. Failing that why not come up with some positive thoughts, or even try to logically put VDW down. That would be hard as you don't know how it works, and can't be bothered to find out. Your main argument seems to be racing has changed, it has, and VDW said it would. He said we must change with it. Before you can change you have to know what you are changing from. In saying that the basics will never change, the horse runs in the races. The trainer has to place the horse and try to win as much as possible for the owners, and himself. The good trainer will have changed with the times, the good horses will still win the best races. Good consistent horses still win at good prices. What's the problem? Where am I going wrong? What part of the methods should I ignore? Class, form, working out what the trainer is trying to do?

Pity Terry Ramsden hadn't heard of or used VDW, he may not have lost his millions. Maybe he was following stats, you never know.

Be Lucky

Mtoto,

I presume you are a grown man, if so, dont you feel a little ridiculous rushing off in search of missing keys to solving horseraces?

If you really knew anything about racing you would know the concept was an ill-meant fallacy, whose only purpose served to inflict a feeling of inferiority and insecurity on otherwise capable punters.

The fact that you are a self-employed defender of this claptrap only serves to remind us that there are always volunteers to drag the obscure into the mainstream, just as London parks are frequented by sandwich men anouncing that the 'End' is nigh. The object you achieve with this nonsense is much the same, namely underhanded moral intimidation.

For heavens sake get a grip on reality and try to give some responsible leadership to this subject! If you genuinely believe in this toothfairy business spit it out, but dont come moralising to me about how to behave because the day I decieve fellow members of this forum I will retire from its boards feeling the shame I deserve for doing so.

Touchez!

Ye fearful saints fresh courage take, The clouds you so much dread Are big with mercy and shall break, With blessings on your head.

Wm Cowper

JIB,

Think you will find I didn't come to you, you came on to a VDW thread. Would be interested how you think I have intimidated anyone. Intimidation seems to be more in your line, if you don't believe in something just shout it down. Don't bother to try and understand it, it's wrong, I say so. I'm right, your wrong.

How am I misleading any capable punters? What have I or VDW said that is misleading? I do think VDW works and have said so many times. I have tried to explain how I see and work it. I don't go on other threads pushing it down anyone's throat, as far as I'm concerned you can take it or leave it. I try to answer any questions asked by those with an interest, my thinking doesn't please all VDW fans, tough.

I don't agree with VDW about weight and have said so. I have asked you and anyone else to explain where and why you disagree with the VDW thinking, and there is no sensible dialogue forth coming. It is you that seems to be on a mission, to save people from the evils of VDW. Just explain if you can where the CAPABLE punters will go wrong by using these methods. Explain why using form, class and temperament, is obscure to the sensible punter!!

No, I don't feel ridiculous researching a subject before I use, or talk about it. Don't you think it would be ridiculous to slag anything off before you had? It appears not.

Mtoto,

"Think you will find I didn't come to you, you came on to a VDW thread"

Does the thread 'belong' to anyone?

"Intimidation seems to be more in your line, if you don't believe in something just shout it down. Don't bother to try and understand it, it's wrong, I say so. I'm right, your wrong."

If you feel intimidated by me could you please explain in what way. (I have explained why the lie of the 'missing key' is intimidating). How do I manage to shout on a forum?

"How am I misleading any capable punters? What have I or VDW said that is misleading? I do think VDW works and have said so many times. I try to answer any questions asked by those with an interest, my thinking doesn't please all VDW fans, tough."

If you believe in the 'missing key' then answer the questions of those that are interested in it. If you dont or wont or cant you are misleading people. Whether VDW is misleading or not is a matter of personal opinion, in my case the varied and incompatable opinions of its supporters, makes the answer self evident.

" I don't agree with VDW about weight and have said so. I have asked you and anyone else to explain where and why you disagree with the VDW thinking, and there is no sensible dialogue forth coming."

I have given my ideas on weight and VDWology all over this thread, if you dont find them sensible enough that is your problem, but if I may be so bold, the fault probably lies in your reading comprehension skills. If you do a 'search' you can start rereading them.

" Explain why using form, class and temperament, is obscure to the sensible punter!!"

Where have I ever written this accusation? (I thought you were the fan of sensible dialogue
?)

Weight -

It is the Trainer - not the Handicapper who decides the weight that a horse will carry !!

I have read this , but am not sure if it was a VDW statement ??

However, - proven today and over a number of recent races by JIB and Ectoos "Compression Theories"

Back to Trainer Intentions ???

Where does this leave the "Consistancy Ratings" ??

the compression of weights to suit one horse discards the need to look at recent form.

think like the trainer..you want a horse to carry a certain weight in a class it can win in..even better if it is actually carrying less weight due to the weights being compressed down by his other runner.

so you have the race lined up..the horse is readied over a period of 3 weeks at home..previous form figures are now irrelevant because you know there is intent to win.

Lets say that the horse shows itself to be not spot on a day or so before the race..then pull out the top weight..or pull the horse itself.

This is just an angle that spots intent..and knowing intent will get you on good value selections..far better than following a horse that every punter and his mother thinks will win..the 111 horse or 121 horse.

It's logical really, probably not much place for it on a VDW thread as it involves predicting the future when we know it's more fun to talk of the past

Ectoo, TC,

Have you seen A2s PC Haslam thread?

More overwhelming evidence that form means nothing in the face of trainer intent.

Its not surprising really, as apart from some VDWers, a human being tends to be more intelligent than a horse.

Blackcat/Jib
IMHO there is a link, it was never 'missing'; VDW indicated as much, and even told us where to look for it.
It is no magic formula, either, just pure common sense, (Although extremely potent if used correctly), and is in fact referred to daily by racing professionals, both in the press and on racing TV.
I am not about to reveal what I think it is, nor am I being deliberately enigmatic to appear smarter than others, but I would be very surprised were it not the same one that G Hall discovered.
Am I getting 80% winners from it, the answer is no, but that is a reflection on me, not on the method. I will say though that I can see it working week in, week out, in the better races, and it is only my bumbling incompetence that prevents me from doing so. Hopefully that will change in due course; whether it does or not, that is unlikely to change my view that there is much more to VDW than many give him credit for, that will always be the case.

Bc
No reflection on your goodself, but I must admit I had a wry smile when I saw your interpretation of the key.
Knowing from where it came (A former member of this thread who thought he had so much knowlege that decided not to contribute to this thread, but to hide it away to discuss with other, likewise, deluded souls, on a private forum), it pleases me no end to see that he is exposed as the dreamer I always thought him to be.

Ectoo
VDW knew far more about understanding a trainers intentions than you could probably even contemplate, but that is to be expected from one who has given him but a cursory look, and then dismissed him.

give over John D..your statement to me there is indeed a sad one and absolutely laughable..lol

I'd get some help mate, you have a fantasy obsession with an imaginary friend.

VDW is simplistic, profitless and aimed at the those that needed a helping hand when they first looked at racing.

Move on and think for yourself or before long you will find yourself sticking pictures of dutchmen that look like Colin Davey up all over your bedroom wall.

You've been had and the joke has run for 25 years.

How many horses do you really think where entered in the Nov Hcp without the expectation of winning at time of entry? 24 runners went to post so at least 75% of these trainers had expectations/intent of winning. Intent, this is nowhere near enough to find the winner. If the horse hasn't the class or form intent is nearly worthless.

Why do you think a consistent horse is any more unlikely to be laid out for a big race? Today's winner was consistent, he also had a significant jockey booking and he was still a good price. Was the fact he was laid out for the race the important fact? Was the fact he had the form and class to win it not the important thing? Did it matter that he had changed stables recently, and the present trainer possibly wouldn't have entered him or even prepared him for the race? The important item is the horse, he had all the factors in the form book, down to the course requirements (a flat course)

Is it coincidence this horse had the same profile as the winner of the Erin and Mr Hall's winners? I don't think so. Do I put this down as another VDW winner? Most certainly. I did I back it, yes? Why didn't I post it on this board, because it could easily be found by anyone how had bother to look at my previous postings?

I will enclose a copy of an e-mail I sent to a hard working member of this forum. This is not to prove I selected the horse it is more to show help is given to anyone who needs/wants it. I'm happy to say this person also found the winner by himself.

Hi,

Over all I don't like the racing today. The few I quite like the look of the prices are too tight. The one race that does look worth looking at The November Hcp is a poor class field racing for fair money. I get the field down to 3 Carte Diamond, Turbo, and Bendarshaan. In a bit of a quandary want to wait to see what the going and draw is like. CD has changed stables and owner, owner is a tipster if he puts his horse up the price will go. That's the one I like most, T. Balding will certainly be trying to go out on a winner, and he could. Johnston has blinkers on B for the first time and has him down to a winning mark. CD is my first shout but may just leave the race if the price goes. Would want around 10/1.

Ectoo,

Sorry to disappoint you but only some of the time is spent looking at old races.

Be Lucky

the 100/1 shot that won the big race a few weeks under similar compression tactics wasn't too consistent though.

i only deal in before the race stuff Mtoto.

there is a difference between trainer intent and trainer hope..a lot of trainers enter horses and hope for a win..especially in big races.

Boozer, it must have been Statajack that gave the pointer to the 2nd numerical picture.
I think i had a stab at it in as much as i took any horses placings in the b/f/c from it`s last 3 races against the finishing positions in same.
I was told at the time by Fulham that it did not work with the old examples so did`nt explore it any further as i took him at his word.

Oh dear. What have I started?

I posted this up because I thought it might help a few people. Gulp.

Sorry.

Johnd
You may have a key. But IF you read the post carefully in conjunction with the book, I can not see, using a process of elimination, how Mr. Hall's Key can be anything else other than race type.

Didn't quite understand the wry smile/former member comment. I joined a forum with a chap whose real name is Alan. But I think it is a different Alan to the one you're thinking of, and not a former member of this forum either. Mtoto joined too and can back that up I believe. He suggested looking at the letters before Mr Hall's post. That's all. Seemed obvious, so I did it. The "interpretation" at the head of this thread is fully mine - right or wrong.

Good Luck everyone. Let's all play nicely!