why would I want to email someone like you?

no thread with selections on from you either

no surprise there then

keep living off the myth Lee, you know you love it

I must have have riled you just to even get you posting on here...have you anything positive to offer instead of trying to score points off a below average punter?

doubt it

all the best anyway

quote:

Originally posted by Gummy:Posted Mon Jan 31 2005 7:09 AM

VDW Discussion is continued on this thread

Happy Birfday 3yo today!

Hi all,

As a brand new member of this forum and still trying to catch up with the reams and reams of info, I am astounded by the different interpretations of the great mans work ( yes, I dont care if he isnt Dutch and the character created is a figment of a horseplayers imagination) I still see him as a great man as the letters, as far as I'm concerned are the work of genius.

JohnD, I believe from reading your posts that you have a similar way of working as I, as way of confirmation could I ask Did you back HARDY EUSTACE in the 2007 AIG Champion Hurdle, LUCARNO in 2007 St Leger DENMAN in the Hennesy and HALCON GENALARDAIS in the last 2 runnings of the Welsh national??, as I believe they are pointers to what VDW mentioned when he said "When you see it you will have the same horses as myself"

Look forward to your reply.

Hi RE, welcome to the forum.
I agree the letters are the work of a genius, I also agree that "You'll have the same horses as myself" is a major pointer to the way he worked.
However, I couldn't comment on my bets for the horses you've put forward, as to do so would rightly be seen as after-timing. I do agree though that a strong case could be made for each horse by anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of what he tried to show us.
Sorry I can't be more specific than that, it's good to see new blood on here and I'll help where I can, maybe you could re-phrase your query so I could answer without upsetting the natives?

JOHN D
There is nothing wrong with a bit of aftertiming, its when certain members do it continuosly and the doubts start to creep in

How about looking forward then?

What is the selection for the Cheltenham Gold Cup?

I shall be opposing the market leaders myself, so i very much doubt if my money will be on a VDW type selection.

sean good look in apposing the class horses in the Gold Cup I think you will need it. May I suggest place betting if you insist on this strategy. May I ask what don't like about the market leaders apart from the prices.

Mostly the prices, Maggsie, and for some "reason" I have it in my head that neither KS or D will stay up the hill ( (that's if they both turn up).

I don't know what I was looking at when I came to this decision!

Anyway, what is the vdw selection? I've a feeling there won't be one till the day after the race, but i could be wrong about that too.

SEAUN

KAUTO STAR

Thanks, Paul.

Would KS be considered a a "value" bet?

SEAUN
In my opinion value is backing more winners than losers and showing a profit.

Sean

With the going an unknown, the first 2 in the betting still to have their prep runs, and the 3rd fav temporarily sidelined, it would be daft to call anything a VDW bet at this stage.
However, if you're genuinely looking for something to place at a big price, you could probably do worse than consider Knowhere,(66/1 with Betfred), who wouldn't be all that far behind the big 3, particularly if you can get 1/4 the odds first 4.

I would tend to agree, Paul. Value comes from a series of events and not from just one result, unless, of course, we just bet Denman in his last two races and called it quits till next year!

Yes, Johnd, it is early for VDW, I suppose. Antepost is always a risk, but the one I backed was Exotic Dancer EW.

JD, i was trawling through the archives this morning and came across this well written post and judging by some recent events i was wondering if your new aquired skills proved to be well founded or not?.

johnd
Member
Posted December 23, 2002 04:23 AM Hide Post
This will be my final posting for some time as must take a break, to hone my newly found skills, away from the distractions of posting on this thread.
Before I go, I will make one last effort to show that VDW's method is much more simple and logical that the analysts would have you believe.
It is my firm view that they not only have it wrong, but got it wrong from the very first race.
Consider all the evidence from this thread, how they took that first race, dissected every word, investigated every horse, from all possible angles, and stil they argue into the night, about a race from almost 25 years ago.
Having made this initial error, they then compounded it by taking each race in turn, and applying their misguided thinking to many other races, often bending and manipulating, to make the pieces fit, their way. Along the way, they also found it necessary to put their own meanings to many of the things VDW imparted, and their own interpretations of phrases such as 'In form', the 'Class/form' horse, etc. etc., and in an effort to justify their misguided thinking, they delved even further into to the finer points of each race, which they still canot agree on, to this day.
The effect of this has snowballed, until any number of members have attached themselves to this line of thought, and they also now contribute to an ever more bewildering mantra.
Is this really what VDW intended when he 'Spelled it all out'?, I think not!
Surely the most damning evidence against them is his own phrase, "Once you find it, you will wonder how on earth you could miss it,, and you will have the same horses as myself".
The essence of this phrase is that there is a simple and logical answer to the whole thing,and it is only by thinking along these lines will the real truth become apparent.
The answer is all there, it is simple, it is logical,and it fits with great ease. It needs no great intelligence to fathom, and it owes its strength to its basis in simple common-sense. Do not allow intellect to guide you away from the truth, but read again "Spells it all out" but instead of breaking it down into fine detail, try to understand THE WHOLE CONCEPT, without letting previous misconceptions lead you astray.
If and when you arrive at the answer, then you will wonder how on earth you could have missed it, and it will easily explain such as the current debate on Pegwell Bay, and you will laugh at the convoluted theories propounded on this thread.
Having been there and done it, I can now see that I had the answer in the palm of my hands so many, many, times, but I just didn't recognise it,and when I finally recognised what is plainly there to see, it considerably changed my understanding of what makes racing tick, and my subsequent understanding of form.
I still have things to learn in the application of the method, but that is simply a matter of trial and error, and I do not foresee it taking very long to perfect. One thing I do know, is that the learning process is going to prove very fruitful.
I will, hopefully, return to this thread in the future, in the meantime, I would urge all those who are not too far down the investigative route to contemplate turning back, please, please, have another look, there is a simple answer!

I wish you well
Johnd

Walter
Thanks for the "well written"; it must have been one of my more lucid days!
Imo, nothing at all has changed from that day, in fact, recent events have only served to prove the perspicacity of that post, and the mistakes of others in believing there was some deep profundity that could only be unearthed by superior intellects studying and cogitating on every other word he wrote.
Yes, I still firmly believe that the key to his method is exposed in that one article and, as he later said,"The whole concept was explained....providing you read and understood what was there".
Wonder how many of the 'gurus' can go back 5 years and still remain true to their original thinking?
For the newer members amongst us I will repeat what I said then; it is all there in that one article, providing you understand the whole concept, and that article, allied to its later enlarging in the Roushayd example, and some knowledge of how horses are trained and placed, will take you a lot further than any amount of studying old form books.

Anyone want to buy 50 old form books -

£100 the lot -

pick up only -

cash on collection -

nice and simple then that suits me

Posted March 03, 2008 09:47 PM Hide Post
Anyone want to buy 50 old form books -

£100 the lot -

pick up only -

cash on collection -



cheers IMP


Must confess Imp i would`nt have known where to start if id bought the form books.I remember Investor came to the conclusion that there was some kind of collateral form thing going on where the ability ratings were concerned but Lee posted at a later date that this was nonsense!.Barney seemed to learn pretty quickly but dont know what happened therafter.We have had a lot of people come and go on here over the years some under different names especially in this part of the forum.Id been looking over other things and was scrolling the pages in the archives when i came across JD`s post which is well written so much so in fact that it had me reading the siao article again.Which was quite annoying as i was in the midsts of doing something else at the time and became so distracted that i put that aside.Im sure i was onto something as well concerning the Roushayd method, you know, the one that vdw said if it had been understood correctly it would have carried us a long way.I was noticing how quickly vdw reduced his fields to leave the contenders.

The main thing I remember from my look at VDW ( via the old gummy forum, btw) was that

it was an efficient way of cutting down to the contenders

( that's provided the assumptions are correct and we are keeping the right ones and rejecting the dross).

Attempts by myself to make it pay were not brilliant. Obviously, VDW supporters will say that the fault was mine, as I didn't know what I was doing. They may be correct.

But, if there really is one, key, simple principle,

a) surely, somebody would have found it and blabbed it by now

or

b) perhaps some folk like to pretend they know, just to prolong the mystery.

Quite frankly, I'm fkd if I know ( which is something they'll never say about themselves).

ps

I thought " Infestor" was a prize pillock, and , if he really knows the way, then I'd eat my left bollock ( I know it's not very big, but, it's the principle that counts).

"Lee" seemed to be more on the ball, but I could never guess what he meant by " what a horse does in the last furlong or so is crucial."

He's right in a way, because that's where the race is won or lost; but wtf does he actually mean?

Sean you know im no expert in vdw i only try to take certain bits from it to help make things a wee bit easier for me thus i could`nt hope to parlez on any level with the scribes.
In this instance my thoughts are that Lee meant along the lines of what was each horse doing at the finish compared to the others that were there!.Take Mr Pointment for example although its transpired he broke a blood vessel on Saturday, he won a 57k race lto at Aintree but how did he do it and against what?.Did he win like a horse that could be doing with another hike up the bhb ratings with more actual weight on his back after beating lungo`s horse (what`s that thing won, chases) in a driving finish in a race which started out with 19 runners and ended with 7?.Saturdays race saw him being raised in class in my view but as i said in reply to Les you cant be that sure as horses will improve and can make a fool of you, i just did`nt think he would, could have been wrong though.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: walter pigeon,