John

Fulham and integrity aren't words that sit together comfortably in my vocabulary, though I could see why he would latch onto you if you were able to give him a winner before the race.
Good luck to you in your liaison, but never expose your back to him.

I am fairly certain I can see where you are coming from with Little Flora, and congratulate you on the result, but though it may have been VDW inspired, I can say with some certainty that it wouldn't have been an actual VDW selection, on a number of grounds.
One thing you must grasp, though it pleases me more than a little that Fulham apparently hasn't, is that the method is essentially very simple, and that trainer's intentions are much more readily identified than they would have been in this case, when or if the method is fully understood.
It's a pity you have hitched your wagon to the wrong star, had fewer done that in the past, this forum would be much further forward than it is at the moment, but I bear you no personal ill-will, quite the opposite in fact, and, as I owe a debt to this forum, am willing to contribute to furher discussion of the method - maybe even post a few selections - with the obvious caveat that I am aware this website is read by more than its membership.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: johnd,

Good to see life here again,Jonhd,how did Cheltenham go for you?I am a little dissapointed that I forgot to keep posting my selections for the entire meeting,I suppose the lack of activity here and the buzz of the festival sidetracked my thoughts from the forum,to be honest all my wagers were already selected pre cheltenham,but obviously with the ground concerns it would be folly to bet too far in advance.

Good Morning
Has anybody been in touch with Mtoto lately?

hi boozer,not me anyway,

Hi Boozer,

I'm in touch with him.

Email me

johngringo@click21.com.br

Ive been looking through the archive thread the last few days & noticed that GR of Lincs has a mention.
It was JD who put up this guys list of winners for the forum, GR claimed that they were all winner in a race types.
To save you all searching here are his wagers.

24/08/96 Goodwood / Wildwood Flower

24/08/96 Goodwood - Mark Of Esteem

24/08/96 Newmarket - Whittle Rock

26/08/96 Newcastle - Orchestra Stall

26/08/96 Newcastle - Hagwah

30/08/96 Sandown - Select Few

30/08/96 Sandown - Chris`s Lad

30/08/96 Sandown - Squire Corrie

31/08/96 Sandown - Crowded Avenue

31/08 96 Sandown - Ninia

There were 2 losers which were`nt named, the advantage with these horses are that the form is available on the Racing Post website.
Only began to look at them myself so it`s early doors, anyone-else fancy having a go at them?.

Might have time to check these out tomorrow Walt,Have you noticed anything matching up?

Here is the full text of the letter from GR. Apologies if it comes out disjointed, my computer skills aren't all they should be.

THE FLYING DUTCHMAN saga rages on but in all the argument, has anyone ever asked why?
Mikel the Greek (Forum. August 24)says in his letter: "It is difficult to believe it is more than 18 years since C. Van der Wheil came to the attention of Forumites".
The answer as to why it has gone on so long could well bring the light to those still struggling. VDW rightly became a LEGEND because he gave us all a unique education in the art of finding winners. He busted the scene wide open by revealing more than most of us could possibly comprehend, but even his most fervent critics can't say other than he told the same story throughout.
Not once did he alter what he said, not once did he bend the formula to fit his argument, not once did he shy away from an awkward question. There were plenty of mugs who tried to be clever
but they were always put politely in their place by a man whose brain was on a much superior level. Everything he said he PROVED to us time and again but we were too thick to understand.
He didn't just tell us what to do, he showed us by way of illustrations, and not just an odd race but whole cards.
Look at Chapters 5 and 6, Form-Class-Evaluation and Speed Figures in his book. Although he is showing you when it is right to back a particular horse, e.g. ROUSHAYD and DESERT ORCHID he goes through all
their races-using his formula and every time it shows up and proves
the winner of each race.
Surely we all ought to have been millionaires and had every bookie on his knees begging for mercy by the end of the season? But it didn't happen. The punters just got more exasperated and the bookies went out and bought new RollsRoyces.
Don't misunderstand me. I was as bad and perhaps a lot worse than most. 1 went through years of frustration and bloody minded-ness which almost cost me everything.
It's not like that anymore, and I now have had nearly 5 years getting VDW's 85 per cent just like he said we should. What changed it all was an ultimatum from my wife, supported by both sides of the family, "PACK UP GAMBLING OR THIS MARRIAGE IS OVER".
A hard thing to do, but the racing papers were stopped and I didn't bet anymore.My life, or existence was endless painting and decorating, gardening or shopping when not at work.
One day, year or two later, I was rummaging round in the cupboard reserved for my treasures and came across Van der Wheil's book and collection of things he wrote.
I weakened rapidly. Secretly I read through everything he'd said and I could see how it should work.
The following week I bought my racing papers and slid off to work things out.The next day I could hardly believe my eyes when: I saw the five horses I'd picked out had won. I did the same for about three weeks and hardly ever picked a loser.
Inevitably I started putting money on and eventually had quite a pile and decided I had-better come clean to my wife.Handing her a large brown envelope full of notes I told her I had a confession to make. She said "I know, you've been betting on the horses these last four or five months". When she opened the envelope her mouth dropped and I was off the hook.
I gave up ordinary work three years ago. I stick to the better race tracks and believe it or not I love HANDICAPS. Two-year-olds, maiden, amateur races etc. I don't bother with and I leave EPSOM and LINGFIELD alone.
All I do is follow Van der Wheil's formula and look for the winner IN the race not of the race. Last week following Mick The Greek's letter my bets for Saturday August 24 at Goodwood were:

WILDWOOD FLOWER(SP S/I),
MARK OF ESTEEM (11/4) Newmarket:
WHITTLE ROCK (12/I) and one loser.

Holiday Monday August 26, Newcastle:

ORCHESTRa STALL (5/1).
HAG WAH (6/1)

Friday August 30, Sandown

SELECT FEW (13/2),
CHRIS'S LAD (10/I),
SQUIRE CORRIE (11/2).

Saturday August 31, Sandown:

CROWDED AVENUE (7/1),
NINIA (20/1) and one loser.

I think Mikel the Greek has this business of a winner IN a race all wrong. Van der Wheil was on a level far above the rest of us and understood racing inside out, resulting in him giving us more than we could cope with. Finding a Winner IN a race didn't mean backing two to get one winner. All my bets as shown above were winners IN a race.
You can't get it right every time but I don't do bad. For those who don't do well try packing up racing for a couple of years and then
start again THE. RIGHT WAY. It worked for me and you can't lose because you ain't getting it RIGHT now.

G.R., Lincolnshire.

Oh, and to save you time, from memory all except Select Few follow the Roushayd formula.

There are things that match up with some then not others for me at the moment Rab.
JD states they can be explained by the Roushayd method but you get a different version of that method from different people, depends on who you talk to.
Most of them are coming from the top 4 class races lto, some of them are coming from grade 1 tracks.
I remember one former member stating that Roushayd had run in a race comparable to his ability rating in the Northern Dancer at Epsom before being dropped to collect.
Then there is the statement that winners are often raced way above their ability after a win before being dropped to collect again.

Thinking out loud here, there seems to be an awful lot of bets there from GR of Lincs over a short period for them to be Roushayd types.
Am i right in thinking that Roushayd was top on ability in his race & apart from Clifton Chapel (who had run down the field 12th in the Derby) came from the highest class race lto?.

quote:

Originally posted by walter pigeon:
Thinking out loud here, there seems to be an awful lot of bets there from GR of Lincs over a short period for them to be Roushayd types.

Not really,Walter, considering it is the busiest time of the year with plenty of decent racing, Bank Holiday and night racing to boot.

wp
In Roushayd's previous race the Northern Dancer at Epsom,he was top on ability and was also coming from the highest class last time out,he finished 6th incidentally.

In the race prior to the Northern Dancer dated 14th May at Newbury.
VDW describes in his own words that Merce Cunningham was the most likely winner but not a certainty, by virtue of factors which should have been picked upon - higher class horses in the field - distance and of course the possible spanner in the works - Ibn Bey with class 984 his final race last season.
I`ll be looking a little closer at GR`s horses again later on this evening but in light of the above it would seem that a high ability rating was a stonewall pre-requisite for this method.

yes it may well have been,but for the consistency method that would not have been the case.

Walter

There are no stonewall pre-requisites, ability or otherwise.
Check out Quest For Fame, 4th highest on lto class, but "the only horses at the races".

johnd
quest for fame was like all others in his race going up in class(obviously)

That`s what was meant earlier by different people have different views on the Roushayd method.
Would you agree that VDW would have had Roushayd listed from 2 yrs?.

quote:

Originally posted by walter pigeon:

Would you agree that VDW would have had Roushayd listed from 2 yrs?.

Not necessarily!
That VDW made lists is beyond doubt. That Roushayd would have come to his attention, whether on a list or not, (Bearing in mind he spent most summers abroad), is also reasonably certain.
He could have shown his reasons for Roushayd's selection,and his earlier form, without the deailed analysis of his previous races.
That he chose to do it the way he did indicates there was a very good reason for doing so, something he confirmed at a later date with these words:
"Regarding 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"
May I suggest that it unless one thoroughly understands that example, and can clearly reconcile it with what he said in SIAO, then their view may be in error?

Roushayd was on his 2 to 3 yr old list of that there is no doubt.
What i am not so sure about is vdw`s dismissal of Merce Cunningham who had also marked his card lto the reason given there were higher class horses in the field amongst a few others.
If this is the case then where does this leave the assumption that Mr Gr of Lincs winners were found via this method?.
Was the siao article not about consistency John i thought the latter was introduced to combat the former?.
Lee said as much did he not?.
He stated that obviously the Roushayds may also be one of the most consistent though.
Talking of Lee do you remember that Double Vodka he put up a few years back would you say this fitted with GR of lincs take on things?.