Dug this up from my files re- Beacon Light by Hedgehog might be basic to some but it seems to make sense.


hedgehog
Member
Posted March 26, 2002 08:51 PM Hide Post
Hello All,

Fulham - I know you are more knowledgeable than I but Beacons Light was finding each race more difficult as it decreased in class.
Surely if the horse was simply maintaining its fitness level the task at hand would have become easier as it dropped in class.
Why the trainer should make BL look so good prior to the Erin is beyond me. He must have been aware of BL's dropping form. Why else drop it in class? Surely running in races of comparable or higher class prior to the Erin would have been better preparation.
"Train hard, Fight easy" I believe Marshall Zimarov said.
Anyway that's my view. I fully expect to be corrected.

All the best
hedgehog.

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

JohnD,

I'm trying to get you to explain why you think SIAO works. Why/how does BL fail when the method VDW gives so CLEARLY .........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. Taking these requirment individually or as a combination I can't see where he fails. His form stands up to the closest inspection. I say it is a waste of time and am quite happy to explain why, why do you think you can say it does, without any explanation?

Ask Fulham,

If you read back through the old posts you will find I have not only asked, Fulham, but the likes of Guest as well. Their answers are just another reason I think SIAO is a waste of time and muddies the waters. They like you have choosen to believe what has been written and accepted it. In Fulham's case he has accepted it even though he can't really make BL a none form horse. He appears to put it down to some idiosyncrasy in the way VDW views form, as BL MUST be a none form horse or he would be the c/form horse. This seems to be based on the three drops in class and a lose in the last race. Can this really be correct as PK and Baronet also have this trait, so reasons NOT to include them have to be found. Many hours have been spent trying to work out why they are selections and BL isn't, not only wasted time but a false idea of how VDW looked at form. Waters well and truly muddied!!

How about looking at the BL problem from the idea BL WAS an inform, form horse. On these ratings you are trying so hard to devalue they show EVEN at his best it isn't as good as PK's best? He comes out in front of BL, AND HAS THE CONDITIONS TO SUIT but it the ratings that show he is the better horse. They are used as VDW said....Several times I have expressed the view that ratings should be looked upon as a guide only and not the ultimate means of selection. For me this means you don't just take the top rated on face value but check the conditions are in its favour.

For me the thing that makes the VDW work stand out is his ratings. They were, and still are as far as I can see unrivalled when it comes to judging ability.

Be Lucky

Mtoto
Just found this on my computer forgot I had it hope it helps

Letters
Letter No 8
In response to G.Hall (16-2-78) perhaps the following will provide food for thought.
It is not a system, but one of many ways to narrow the field and at the same time put
the odds in your favour. I suggest that two factors can be coupled together to leave
three horses for consideration.
First, consistent horses win a high percentage of races. Second, the first five in the
betting forecast in non-handicaps and the first six in handicaps, produce a high
percentage of winners. If we add the last three placings of the respective horses in the
betting forecast together, we have a numerical picture. This can be very illuminating
and show, subject to other considerations, the good betting propositions. A high
percentage of winners come from the three lowest figures. Leaving out sellers and
novice handicaps it often traps the winner in all races on the card.
As I write the only race in my paper which was 'on' - the Erin Foods Champion.
Hurdle at Leopardstown broke down as under - * is used to indicate the three-
probables.
Decent Fellow............. 7
Beacon Light............... 3*
Monksfield................. 16
Prominent King........... 5*
Mr Kildare ................... 3*
Mr Kildare had only two placings so the last placing was added on.
Using two methods of rating all five horses,
I found that the three starred horses
came out best. Both methods showed Beacon Light well out of it and his last race had
been a hard one against Sea Pigeon so I was left with Prominent King and Mr Kildare.
12
Prominent King had the edge by one method and was level using the other. Checking
the form. Prominent King was coming out of handicap company where he shouldered a
massive 12-7 last time out going under by five lengths to Drumgora also in this race on
171b worse terms.
Mr Kildare, an odds-on winner last time out not against much opposition, was set to
carry 51b more. Prominent King coming out of handicap company with 151b less to
carry and on the same course looked a good proposition. It duly obliged at 6-1, Mr
Kildare following him home at 5-1.
With a sensible staking plan, the method works well for me. But remember, you do
not HAVE to have a bet, but when you do, load the odds in your favour. In conclusion,
may I say to G.Hall that we are all novices, it is just that some have been so for longer.

have fun

Thanks, Michael. Very interesting.

Did BL finish third, btw?

7th beaten over 5 lenghts !

Michael,

Thanks for putting up VDW's letter on the Erin. To be honest I did think about doing it, but as JohnD was the only person getting involved initially I didn't see the point. Then Barney joined in, but both of them would know the Erin letter of by heart.

What I'm trying to show is if the Erin is analysed using the criteria set out in SIAO, PK would never have been considered. Fact, he wasn't in the lowest three for consistency form the forecast, he was 4th lowest. Fact, he wasn't in the highest four for consistency, he was a poor 7th. BL was top with a rating of 47, against PK's rating of 17.

JohnD reply is although VDW said mark of the top four he doesn't say the selection must come from the top four. I agree it doesn't say it must, but when the a/rating was introduced VDW advised sticking to the top few.

So in BL we have a horse that fits the mechanical requirements as laid out in SIAO. + he is also backed up by the other data when any of the suggested other ratings are used. Here VDW said..........This can be time, handicap ratings, form ratings, etc, but always keep in mind they are a guide. So BL MUST still be in the running using SIAO. JohnD is then suggesting using the factors VDW said use when assesing form some how BL fails. I can't see how this can be a fact, where is the flaw in his form?

In truth BL fails because as VDW says he is well out of it on the back up ratings. So how can SIAO be of any use when if the suggested ratings are used they fail to have the same result as the ratings used in the Erin?

JohnD says they are only rating and the form is the important factor. So forget about BL being well of it out on the ratings and compare the form of BL and PK using the factors suggested by VDW.........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. When I use these I can make both in form form horses, but BL has the stronger form.

So for me the whole thing boils down to the importance of those ratings. Anything that tries to deflect that importance muddies the water and is a waste of time. All of that doesn't even take into consideration using the guide lines of lowest three in the forecast and top four on ability steers you away from many of the selections. An article written to try to show the virtues of a rating I don't think VDW used himself. Why introduce this rating? Simply to make sense of the formula the one that say ability + capability. VDW was using another ability rating/measure, one he wasn't prepared to explain.

Be Lucky

Form cycles are what
racing is all about, that and class". This must be important. "Marry the (two) and you will know what trainers are up to".

John D

Could you PM me please, thanks

reom

Woops

I do not have pm permissions, I am in the chat room if anyone fancies it?

Kind Regards

reom

Do we have a chat room? how did you manage to get into it reom?.

Hi Walter

Top left hand corner of this page is a button with go on it. Hover over that and then proceed to the chatroom link.

Kind Regards

reom

quote:

Originally posted by walter pigeon:
Form cycles are what
racing is all about, that and class". This must be important. "Marry the (two) and you will know what trainers are up to".

Very true Walter, though I think the original quote was by 'Win of Brighton', or some such?
Michael Stoute has no peers when it comes to readying one for a decent prize, and the appropriately named Flawed Genius (3.05H) looks a masterclass in racing and placing such a horse.

reom

I don't believe the pm facility has ever worked on this board. Stick your email address up and I'll contact you over the next few days.

Today, I'm looking at some each way Stimulation. (250N).

Les mentioned that horse to us last night in the chat room John it was good to get on there again thought it was closed up years ago.
These 3yr old races are generally difficult for me to get a handle on as most of them are unexposed types and open to any amount of improvement that`s why i usually let them pass till later on.
Aye it was Win Of Brighton that said that John, i understand it was a contribution of his that was the reason vdw posted to the forum.
They had a wee fallout after that and words were exchanged the usual i know sooo much more than you type oh thing so dont you go pissing in MY pool, bunch oh jessies.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIFUm70n0fU

Go on then John ive followed your and les`s advice and bet Flawed Genius win and place at 7.00 & 2.52 good luck.

Well done bc nice place bet.

Thanks Walt. I backed it 4/1 each-way, so a small loss on the day. Soon get that back!!

Thought you were going place only by your post bc.

Right enuff e/w.

quote:

Originally posted by walter pigeon:
Go on then John ive followed your and les`s advice and bet Flawed Genius win and place at 7.00 & 2.52 good luck.

Unlucky as it turned out Walter, though there'll be another day with this one.