quote:

I simply added the rejoinder that is also as well to learn how they are placed.

JohnD,

I welcome any realistic discussion on VDW, and if you had mentioned Roushayd when discussing BC's selection I would have wholeheartedly agreed.That could have lead into the remark about how they are placed, as at least it was mentioned in SB.

Be Lucky

Hi Mtoto,

I have been looking in on the board once a week(on Sunday Mornings) and I must say I am astounded by the latest load of shite that you are trying to ram down peoples throats without having the faintest clue what you are writing about.

Firstly that BL is the c/f horse and secondly that SIAO is useless from a VDW analysis point of view.

I will address the latter firstly as it may well lead you to understand the former later.

Spells it all out leads users of VDW's methods along a path usefull enough; in that by a correct interpretation of the method as laid out in the Erin analysis and with suitable extrapulation of the information gleaned will enable you to calculate VDW's ratings for oneself.

If you then apply the attributes kindly shown by VDW in the SIAO article then you will come to find that BL is well out of it. Something that you are trying to prove for yourself. How then will dismissing the whole article, which is imperative to fully understand the requirements needed to ascertain a racing certainty, or even a consistent horse, out of hand lead you to establish VDW's rating(sic)criteria?

As a recent example of the power of VDW's methods a recent example.

Sunday 18th May

310R

The three starred horses down the card are

LAA RAYB
JEWELLED DAGGER
COLLATERAL DAMAGE

sort by class/ability then it is not surprising to find that these filled the first four places home.

The same consistent analysis in Saturdays Lockinge, but this time using the method as indicated in Systematic betting to pinpoint the consistent horses showed Creachadoir as the selection, of course he could not backed under the circumstances, but VDW did state that he only backed less than 20% of those he thought would win.

Interested party's KEEP LOOKING.


ALL THE BEST

Vanman

I have been looking in on the board once a week

Barney,

I glad you said looking, because it is obvious you haven't been READING the posts.

Firstly that BL is the c/f horse and secondly that SIAO is useless from a VDW analysis point of view.

Can you please show me were I have said BL is the c/form horse? As for SIAO being usless, if the suggestions in the article are followed the only logical conclusion is that BL would have been the selection. Look at the facts, consistent and in the forecast. Top on ability as explained in the article, and for sure would have had the backing of at least two other sets of ratings. In his own words VDW says...........This can be time, handicap ratings, form ratings, etc, but always keep in mind they are a guide. Can you show/guess which of those suggested ratings wouldn't have had BL top, let alone well out of it?

I notice you mention the Lockinge, you and JohnD hopefully will notice I rated that race using what I believe are one of VDW's undisclosed "other" ratings. I would like to point out to you SIAO or trying to understand it played absolutely no part in solving that puzzle. For that matter neither did the Erin, the Erin only confirmed it for me. JohnD hopefully will note I don't use the ratings as the be all, and only use them for a guide as I couldn't have backed the top rated with your money let alone mine.

Anyway glad to see you are still in the "rudest" of health. Perhaps one day you will realise just because someone has different views/ideas to yourself doesn't mean they are talking shit.

Be Lucky

Mtoto


"Can you show/guess which of those suggested ratings wouldn't have had BL top, let alone well out of it?"

All of those "suggested ratings" would, more than likely given his SP, have had BL as top. So I would be foolish to attempt to indicate a failure on that side of things as part of VDW's analysis.
What I could show, without "guessing", is precisely how VDW came to the conclusion that BL was well out of it using HIS ratings, and not a transposition of some other commercially, or even freely, available ones.

This is the principle reason you are struggling.

By using the attributes as determined by VDW and being in a position to both Quantify and Qualify, on a frequent basis, I feel I am one of perhaps only a few people who is qualified to state you are talking "Shit" When 1) you state that SIAO is of little value and 2)BL would be the selection using the criteria given in spells it all out.

The post in general is not to enlighten YOU, but perhaps to encourage one or two not to be taken in by the "shite" you "misguidedly write"

ALL THE BEST

Vanman

What I could show, without "guessing", is precisely how VDW came to the conclusion that BL was well out of it using HIS ratings, and not a transposition of some other commercially, or even freely, available ones.

Barney,

The operative word being could. We both know you won't, you will say I'm not giving away my secrets. I on the other hand think you haven't a clue how his other ratings work. In SIAO clearly said/suggests the ratings mentioned, and at no time explained his ratings in SIAO or anywhere else. The discussion is about the worth of SIAO and what it explains.

The post in general is not to enlighten YOU, but perhaps to encourage one or two not to be taken in by the "shite" you "misguidedly write"

If the above is true wouldn't it be of more use to these other folk if you at least tried to explain exactly where/what in SIAO exposes BL and shows he wouldn't/couldn't have been the selection? VDW said............Always mark off the four highest ability ratings and three most consistent from the forecast. In the illustrations this is done with an asterisk ("¢*).

On completing this first instruction BL would be top of the list, He then says...Always start appraisals by looking at the horse with the highest ability rating and check how it balances with the other data. Here the other data is the other ratings, and you agreed using any combination of the ratings suggested by VDW in the article BL would most likely be top. He then says...To confirm what the figures say it is necessary to study the form of all concerned, taking particular note of class in which they ran, the course they ran on, the pace and going of the respective races, distances won or beaten by and most important, how they performed in the later stages of each race. As I have often said I think BL ran one of his best races at Sandown. However I maybe in the minority about that, but without knowing BL was beaten in the Erin, not many if anyone would have found fault with that run. I take it there is something that stands out from that run that you think VDW would have looked at that says this horse fails, and you would see it before the of, would you like to give a hint? That would go along way to prove I'm writing shit.

Be Lucky

mtoto

One consideration I gave to your recent posts are that they were so stupid that they where designed to elicit a response.

WELL YOU GOT ONE.


ALL THE BEST

Vanman

* were

quote:

Originally posted by Mtoto:

quote:

I simply added the rejoinder that is also as well to learn how they are placed.

JohnD,

I welcome any realistic discussion on VDW, and if you had mentioned Roushayd when discussing BC's selection I would have wholeheartedly agreed.That could have lead into the remark about how they are placed, as at least it was mentioned in SB.

Be Lucky

Mtoto

Hard to have a realistic discussion when one of the parties is not realistic?
SIAO was the most revealing thing that VDW ever wrote, and he implored us, time and time again, to go back to it as it contained THE KEY to his method, even pointed to where it lay, yet you claim it's VDW for dummies.
You don't think then, that that all important sentence was telling us anything about how horses are raced and placed, or that the following sentence was entirely connected to the same subject?
Plain to see, imo, who the real dummy is in all this?

Mon now you guys stop it your going all phsycadellical on us again, there were a few on Laa Rayb on Sunday at Ripon but if it was anything to do with vdw then it was purely coincidental.Take my advice loosen up and take some time out to ponder the more important things in life like if man really landed on the moon in the 60`s why`s he not been back?, why dont seagulls land in trees?, why is Rod Stewart not Scottish?, take a chill pill and mellow, it`ll all come out in the wash.

Big Wheels Electric Light Orchestra

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS2RVFgPkAE

Like the intellectually challenged barney I also pop in here now and again, if nothing else than for a good laugh. Looking at the last few posts from barney and mtoto I can understand why this board must be one of the worst on the net. What a come down. It would be sad if it was not so pathetic.

Ahhhh........the halcyon days Eh of sensible VDW discussion.LOL


JImmy,,,,,Three legs,,,,,,,,EPiglotis,,,,,,JIB



Dont let a poor argument get in the way of putting viewers int gallery.

Still pisballing about with the basketball jimmy?


As soon as a l;ittle row goes by there is a band waggin to jump on eh Jimmy.....same old same old same old same same same old.


see you sunday.


All the best

Vanman

Walter

Maybe I shouldn't get so annoyed, but VDW's method is something close to my heart in which I can see so much good, and to have it rubbished by someone so entrenched in his own myopic view does nothing, either for this forum or for its member's understanding of the method.
Bear in mind that this person chose to join a clandestine group to keep discussion away from this website, the same group that, because of their ultimate failure to understand the simple message in VDW's work eventually chose to discredit both the man and his work yet, in the same way they have with their pretended success, failed to offer any tangible form of proof.
This forum, and probably they themselves, would be so much more forward without their negativity and selfishness, but they prefer their assumed (and mistaken) elitism to any actual progress.
Far from SIAO being VDW for dummys the man actually gave us IN ONE SENTENCE a better way to read form, not only simply and specifically, but even highlighted amongst it the most important consideration, yet these clowns spend years searching elsewhere and making up their own stories.
I have yet to see, despite the attempts of such as Mtoto and Vincent to discredit it, any offering anywhere that tells so much so succinctly, and I defy them, or anyone else, to produce one.
They won't, because they can't; they don't understand it so they malign it, snd they'll continue to assume that they're right and he is wrong while all the while missing what is right under their noses, and holding back others in the same negative process.
Is there any wonder I get vexed?

Arkle, Desert Orchid, Red Rum, Best Mate

Far from SIAO being VDW for dummys the man actually gave us IN ONE SENTENCE a better way to read form, not only simply and specifically, but even highlighted amongst it the most important consideration, yet these clowns spend years searching elsewhere and making up their own stories.

JohnD,

I will ask you the same question as I asked Barney. If this article is so wonderful how/where does it expose BL? What part of this sentence shows before the of BL CAN'T/ISN'T the selection. If PK was the only selection that failed to be found using it, I think I could just about accept that, but there are far to many. Agreed some of these selections can be found by reading and understand other parts of the literature, but not with any help from SIAO.

As said before I think SIAO only muddies the waters, it makes it look as if following a few simple rules (guide lines if you prefer) and the method can be cracked. Worse than that it tries to hide the importance of the other ratings.

If a straw poll was taken from the folk that have even heard about VDW I would bet the SIAO article is his best know piece of work. As it stands it doesn't work and this is one if not the main reason VDW not taken seriously. You talk about elitism, don't you think standing up and saying I understand and believe this piece of work,(that most of you plebs don't understand or/and CAN'T make work), is the important article is elitist?

Be Lucky

MTOTO
There is no way johnd will answer that question because he knows nothing, just look at the horses he has mentioned recently he is not even close.

Mtoto

From memory; course, pace, going, how he performed in closing stages + how he was placed relative to class. The rest you'll have to figure for yourself.

Paul
Are you being sardonic?

Have I got this right, johnd?

You say vdw took account of "PACE".
?

I had not realised that, so, thank you.

Do you know how he measure pace, please? I think it is a very important factor myself - that's why i'm interested.

The other factors I've heard before ( so many times), though, of course, I have never found anything definitive and concise as to their meaning.

We did try thrashing out " performance in closing stages" several times, but I regret to say I saw nothing universal that could be used as a regular pointer.
That said, " ran on well" is still an old favourite of mine, but I haven't a clue what the author of the vdw fiction had to say about that!

From memory; course, pace, going, how he performed in closing stages + how he was placed relative to class. The rest you'll have to figure for yourself.

JohnD,

Sorry but the question was USING these factors, where/how did BL fail? I have said looking at these requirments I can't see how he did. In the past I have explained why I think BL passed, and am quite happy to repeat the reasons. What I would like to see are your/anyones reasons for thinking he didn't. It may help if you read again Garstonf's analysis of BL's form/last race...............Is BL out of form? Let's examine the evidence. Ran in a high class race last time out which produced by far the best speed figure of the day. Beaten 1l, whilst giving weight, to a horse that finished the previous season as the second highest Haig rated horse in the country. Finished 15l in front, whilst giving almost a stone, to a horse that 14 days earlier had won the most valuable race at a meeting at Kempton which also produced by far the best speed figure at that meeting. Raceform comment for Beacon Light was ˜ran on well'. Timeform states that he ran well. So yes, definitely out of form! Seriously though, if anyone thinks the above shows a horse to be out of form then I would really like to see their version of a horse that is in form.

So using the ideas/suggestion put forward in SIAO BL is a form horse, highest on that ability rating, consistent and in the forecast. Using any/all of the methods suggested for the additional ratings he would have been the selection. Anyone who thinks SIAO works HAS BEEN SOLD A PUP. Now have a look at Baronet, the same story!

Be Lucky

Mtoto

So using the ideas/suggestion put forward in SIAO BL is a form horse, highest on that ability rating, consistent and in the forecast. Using any/all of the methods suggested for the additional ratings he would have been the selection.

But they are all ratings, and that isn't how the final selection is made, as he made abundantly clear in SIAO.
Only when one learns to use the method as intended will they be able to properly justify such as PK, Baronet, Roushayd, Brashee, Sergeyev, etc by actually reading and understanding the form, rather than relying solely on ratings. Trouble is, like yourself, many have taken the selections and tried to make their method fit, whereas the logical way is surely to find the method first?

It may help if you read again Garstonf's analysis of BL's form/last race...............Is BL out of form? Let's examine the evidence. Ran in a high class race last time out which produced by far the best speed figure of the day. Beaten 1l, whilst giving weight, to a horse that finished the previous season as the second highest Haig rated horse in the country. Finished 15l in front, whilst giving almost a stone, to a horse that 14 days earlier had won the most valuable race at a meeting at Kempton which also produced by far the best speed figure at that meeting. Raceform comment for Beacon Light was ˜ran on well'. Timeform states that he ran well.

I have read Gartsonf's analysis, and yours above and, like many others they depend entirely on collateral form. Apart from one brief reference much later in his SIAO article, VDW never mentioned collateral form, certainly not at all in the area where he said the key to his method lay.

Sorry but the question was USING these factors, where/how did BL fail? I have said looking at these requirments I can't see how he did. In the past I have explained why I think BL passed, and am quite happy to repeat the reasons. What I would like to see are your/anyones reasons for thinking he didn't.

Yeah, right!
You p*ss off to form a secret society, and you want me to tell you how it works?
Ask Fulham!