Don't know if any of you are following the VDW thread on The Racing Forum but, amongst the reams of garbage and erroneous interpretation, there is a single post that shines out like a beacon over a rubbish tip. I will leave you to figure which one, and whom I suspect its author is, but it is well worth trawling through the pages of junk to arrive at this pearl of wisdom. It is a simple, logical, and effective, summary of the method as it should be, and tells far more about its operation than most of the windbags and self-styled 'experts' will ever understand.
It`s still all rather cryptic though JD unless of course you know what Lee is on about. There are some who have the vdw theory off to a tee, however when it comes to practical race application things often go tits up. Im not suggesting for a minute that is Lee`s problem because clearly it is not, but i dont see how that post can help the layman or anyone else looking to get into vdw. Would you care to decipher it for me John?.
Amongst other things he has given a massive clue, and in quite simple terms, as to WHY CONSISTENCY? Something, for all their fine words on the subject, most of the faux experts haven't even begun to understand let alone put into writing, yet the key to the greater part of SIAO, and a fundament of the whole method.
He gave a numerical picture, which showed,when used correctly, whether a horse was ready to win or being redied to win.How the trainer then placed the horse would determine whether it was a `winner in a race`.There are trainers and there are trainers though. The majority of VDW`s early selections were being raised in class for the prize. The class form horse seldom fails to take that prize when it is big enough, but it must have been been placed to do so. Roushayd filled in the missing blanks regarding how he assessed form, showing us (a) how seemingly inconsistent horses were dealt with and (b)giving us an insight into important aspects of assessing form, such as probability in the layout. Class in his own words is kingpin. And again i quote `that four letter word` `form` is what seems to cause the most confusion.It would appear, to me at least, that class is actually the stumbling block because without an understanding of class in the way VDW defined it, the student will be perplexed as far as form is concerned. What is form if it is not that one performance is better than another.
For instance lets take Roushayd who`s ability rating going into the ONC was approx 230 taken from Systematic Betting wins at 3 yrs 12-39-641 divided by 3 wins = 230. ONC class 170 if Roushayd wins this race his ability rating slumps to 12-39-641-170 divided by 4 wins = 215. Why was this prize big enough?.
Originally posted by walter pigeon: Questions, and i will have a few if this is entered into in the correct spirit:
The class form horse seldom fails to take that prize when it is big enough?.
What does this mean?.
Walter
It simply means what it says: The class (i.e. best) horse in the race will usually win when it is in top form and, of course, placed to win, (In which the prize money is just one consideration).
Originally posted by walter pigeon: For instance lets take Roushayd who`s ability rating going into the ONC was approx 230 taken from Systematic Betting wins at 3 yrs 12-39-641 divided by 3 wins = 230. ONC class 170 if Roushayd wins this race his ability rating slumps to 12-39-641-170 divided by 4 wins = 215. Why was this prize big enough?.
He had been raised considerably in the handicap as a result of his previous season's form and consequently was racing against better horses off a higher mark in the Northern Dancer. VDW obviously felt the form he showed in that race indicated he was on the boil, (There are more reasons than just his improved s/f to think so), and he was then placed to win in lower class. 64k handicaps sren't all that common now, and would have been much rarer then.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: johnd,
Originally posted by walter pigeon: Ive noted that Roushayd never won another race after this however, is this the same reason VDW said that Soba was one to leave alone next season?.
I wouldn't have a clue, as I don't have the formbook for Soba's annus mirabulis and, though it has always intrigued me, I have never felt it necessary to find out.
Ok JD, So as far as time and ability are concerened we need to be looking for horses in both cases who have top figures speed wise & abilty wise from the previous season but also speed wise and top class of race lto in current season?.
Originally posted by walter pigeon: Ok JD, So as far as time and ability are concerened we need to be looking for horses in both cases who have top figures speed wise & abilty wise from the previous season but also speed wise and top class of race lto in current season?.
Walter
Speed figures are, like other ratings, just a guide, and are not essential to the process. Lto race is important, but more for the class of the horse than the class of the race.
PD
If you really do intend to go back to basics, what better place to start than understanding WHY CONSISTENCY ? I'm not really sure that Walter has taken on the importance of understanding that first part of the method, but it is there, on a plate, in the post I referred to. Your namesake could also cheer you up tomorrow, as he looks the proverbial goood thing.
Feck, it`s like a morgue in here am i the only one that bet the horse?. Authorized at 1.51 the place from the 12 draw has a wee squeak in the Arc tomorrow if Dettori does`nt sit too far out of his ground.
made my day .