Forgot to put up the VDW attempt;

240 Goodwood

ALKAADHEM 111 gdc
Grand Passion 35 gd
New Morning 31 gd

and way out of it, my selection,
Big Bad Bob, 22 gd.

Right, if we accept this, Alki must win.

My own bets would be Big Bad Bob and New Morning to place.

Thats a cracking post Sean

All power to Gummy for the board, I'm sure many like you are wiser for reading.

I must admit I am only trying to get the lads back with some of the stuff I posted there. They haven't posted though so it looks like it's about done on here.

I don't know why i post on boards at all Sean..apart from a few people everyone seems to know everything so doesn't want to discuss anything in depth..I need in depth to keep me thinking..just can't get it on any of the boards..everyone is very protective of what they know..suppose thats the way it is eh?

If you offer anything that slightly deviates from the "accepted" norm you are perceived as "off your head".

I might get back in to photography and have a break from this..just do "PLAYtime" on the other board (RS)

See you around Sean

you are good chap..hope it comes together for you.

Ectoo,

Having come to this board late, can I ask if you have ever read the VDW literature. By that I mean actually read and thought about the stuff he's trying to impart.

I can't quite work out if your beef is with VDW's writings per se or just the people that post on this thread

The reason I ask is because everybody on here seems to get bogged down with the numerical data which is only a small part of what VDW wrote about. In a way that's understandable, people are always looking to systemise things as it takes the responsibility away from themselves.

I would hazard a guess that if you actually read what VDW said about how trainers place their horses etc then you would find plenty of value in it. Perhaps even agree with most of it

Well, the numbers game was a complete waste of time today, PB; good old British weather!

I realise you know more about this VDW than I do, but I can't help feeling that the old figures are a good starting point - even if just for adverse criticism!
In fact, I'd welcome specific criticism myself, as I might learn something from it.

What I don't think helps - and what probably gets right up Ectoo's nose - is the number of vague " you've no fkn idea and never will have" remarks that seems to end every discussion of the subject.

Ectoo,

you are a legend in your own right on these message boards. I don't pretend to understand, but, from what I've seen you hold your own wherever you go, including the " creme de la creme", TRF.

Agreed, on there, as elsewhere, there are some big-headed, nasty bastds. In fact, I thought they were extremewly nasty to Barry Dennis when he came on there.

Alright, the geezer's backed by some powerful dudes, (D Johnson etc), but I have to admire anyone who operates at the cutting edge.


Now what about other places? Well, I still remember the times you'd come on botb of a Sunday and give them "live" winner after winner!

Again, I have to agree, that place had more than its fair share of tossers.
Point is, though, the old racing game IS made up of a large percentage of dipsticks and/or fkn crooks.
In other words, we can't really expect everyone that's interested to be like W Swinburn or Richie Pershad or whatever.

I sometimes wish they all looked and talked like that ex Mrs Hammond, but, quite frankly, most of the shit we're fed by the media doesn't tell us the half of it, and we don't really know for sure what's going off.
We have to accept it as it is - imperfect but the way things are.

Anyway, come back and have the craic on here. It could be plenty worse!

Aye Piston

It's the people

it seems to breed a culture of followers that i suppose I don't take to, they don't take to me..so..conflict I suppose.

Yes PB I read the literature as it came out, I've also trawled back on here and found lots of other "pamplets".

Most of it is off the cuff and vague imho.

If I say "trainers are important"..does that mean I've addressed it?

If I say "breeding is important"..does that mean I've addressed it?

Can you see what I mean?

Has anyone looked to see how many winners come from either the 3 most consistent or the 3 highest race class l.t.o. as suggested by Lee?.
Personally, id make that a fair starting point for anyone who is restricted for time or cant put in the required effort for one reason or another.
Hell, some of us have young families, auld codgers, & fitba teams to look after .

another good post Sean

made me laugh

I'll have the craic, I'll try and stay sensible, which won't be bloody easy either

Walter

It's going to be a bit harder than that I reckon. After all these pages someone should have surely been down that route.

I hope Investor is ok, not heard owt lately.

Ectoo,

It might appear 'off the cuff' and 'vague' but I can assure you it isn't.

Just because some things sound simplistic doesn't mean they have no value. People often ignore the simplistic basics in their quest 'to be clever'.

By way of an example let me quote you just a couple of articles.

By watching what is done with a horse you learn to know when they are really out to win.

A winning horse is often sent up in class next time out, frequently over a longer distance, and those following winners last time out should treat these with caution.

You will find a large percentage of handicap winners have been raced above their ability before being dropped in class to collect. Horses which show form and then are dropped well in class and perhaps over a shorter distance are worth looking at more than once.

Winners are often put in way over the top next time then dropped in class to collect again.

Or this one:

A little earlier I suggested that the majority of runners in a race are not actually out to win, but being prepared to win. Which are which can be deduced by a knowledge of techniques used to bring horses to the boil and the way in which they are being placed.

Most horses have a specific distance (at given times) and often are raced over a different trip right up until they come to the boil. Often, but by no means always, a horse will be given it's first run over the distance at which it eventually will be sent to win and very often at a similar level (class).

What the horse does will determine what action the trainer takes next and you will see all sorts of variations until he has the horse right.

Racing it over a shorter trip can sharpen it up and in reverse a longer trip can induce stamina. The quality (class) in which it runs also serves to bring them on. Producing a marked improvement can show they are on the boil and ripe for the winners enclosure, but what the trainer does next can provide the clues.

Yes, this all may sound 'off the cuff' but it will pay people huge dividends if they only stopped to absorb this. The training of racehorses (by the good trainers anyway) is no different than it was 20 years ago, despite AW gallops and everything else.

I've followed sprint/stamina preps myself, they can be very interesting I agree. Particularly when the horse runs well in each race. A run at 5f then 7f, not far behind the winner in each race then the "target" race is 6f.

This is an American idea as far as I know.

A lot of what you have posted there is still vague though PB. At the end of the day trainers don't stick to set patterns with all their horses..except maybe 2yo's..which is an area where trainers can get very methodical..like rearing a baby..tried and tested ways that they know will bring a 2yo on. Once the horses get older they develop more individual needs and imho it's harder to pattern read a trainer.

Piston,

VDW was specific with regards knowing when a horse was ready.

Your quotes are, to those that have studied racing to any degree, elementary. We know that trainers run their charges over the wrong distance, in higher class, or in lesser class, but with more weight, to bring them on.

But this happens to the majority of horses every single day – but they're not all poised to win?

Why not add some more?

quote:

Originally posted by Seanrua:
Well, the numbers game was a complete waste of time today, PB; good old British weather!

I realise you know more about this VDW than I do, but I can't help feeling that the old figures are a good starting point - even if just for adverse criticism!

Sean,

It's each to their own but personally I prefer not to use the 'old figures' as a starting point. I'm not saying it's wrong to do that, just personal preference.

At it's heart, VDW's methods are a mix of numerical pictures and trainers intentions and both need to balance. Some will start with the numerical data and then check how it balances with their interpretation of the trainer. It might be coincidence but my results have been much better since I approached it trainer first and then see how my selections fare in the numerical pictures. I work from lists of horses to follow and my first check will be to see if they are ready and placed to win. Only then will I complete the numerical pictures to see how they balance.

As an example, I've not yet looked at any numerical pictures for tomorrow, but these are my early thoughts on the horses in my notebook.

2.45 Goodwood
ALMIZAN
Showed improved form last time and has been steadily dropping down the handicap. Has won at Goodwood before over 14f and 2 miles doesn't seem to be a problem. Looks placed to win to me and I'll undergo the numerical data later to see how he stacks up.

2.55 Newmarket
LET'S ROLL
Showed improved form last time. Needs cut in the ground. Probably still needs dropping a 1b or two.
SAND AND STARS
First run, will probably need the run.
DOVEDON HERO
Look to be on a good mark back to turf. Won well last time over 2 miles but now drops back to 12f. Could well win again over this shorter trip and booking of Spencer looks significant. All in all too many doubts though.

4.10 Haydock
GO TECH
Obvious prep over this 8f trip, better at 10f.
KRUGERRAND
Not in form yet.
NAMROC
Won first time out last season in mdn over 8f, since ran at 10f. Probably needs top of the ground.
INCHLOSS
First run, will probably need a run or two.

4.20 Goodwood
AYLMER ROAD
Need to see more before backing this one.

4.30 Newmarket (Maiden)
DUBAI VENTURE
On my list of possible 3YO handicappers to follow. Stoute's entry in this race last year was nothing startling. One to watch
TREW VENTURE
On my list of possible 3YO handicappers to follow. Doesn't look ready yet. Watching brief.

4.45 Haydock (Maiden)
COUNT KRISTO
On my list of possible 3YO handicappers to follow. Watching brief.

4.55 Goodwood (Maiden)
ANTOINETTE
On my list of possible 3YO handicappers to follow. Watching brief.

5.45 Haydock (Maiden)
EBTIKAAR
On my list of possible 3YO handicappers to follow. Holds derby entry so obviously held in some regard. One to watch.
GIVEN A CHOICE
On my list of possible 3YO handicappers to follow. With the amount of 9/10/11f maidens tomorrow, Given probably thought he might find an 'easy' one at Haydock. Doesn't look that way. Watching brief.

7.50 Bath (Maiden)
HOUSE MARTIN
On my list of possible 3YO handicappers to follow. Watching brief.

So out of all the races tomorrow, the only one I'm remotely interested in betting is ALMIZAN at Goodwood. I'll now do the numerical pictures for this race and pull it apart tonight. I'm concentrating my energies on just the one race instead of compiling numerical data for a dozen races.

Each to their own but it works for me

quote:

Originally posted by Lee:
Piston,

VDW was specific with regards knowing when a horse was ready.

Your quotes are, to those that have studied racing to any degree, elementary. We know that trainers run their charges over the wrong distance, in higher class, or in lesser class, but with more weight, to bring them on.

But this happens to the majority of horses every single day – but they're not all poised to win?

Why not add some more?

Lee,
Of course not all horses are poised to win. I thought that was elementary from the passages quoted. You say VDW was specific with regards to knowing when a horse was ready and we know he looked for improvement in higher class. In the case of Roushayd he demonstrated that with speed figures but (as I'm sure you are aware) there are other ways.

Why not add some more yourself?

PB,

I take it you figure that ALMIZAN is from the same 'stable' as Roushayd?

Lee,

I thought I'd made it clear, I don't consider Almizan is anything yet.

Once I've looked at the form in depth, I'll decide.

All I've said is it's the only race I intend to pull apart tonight. That will tell me what (if anything) Almizan is.

my apologies,

just with you mentioning Roushayd in your last post, and seeing as ALMIZAN had improved his speed figure last time, in higher class, I thought you may be implying they were of the same. My mistake.

Lee,

On the face of it, Almizan improved in higher class last time. But obviously we need to check if that was just an illusion or not. If not an illusion, there is no doubt he very well handicapped at present.

I'll try and post an update later or tomorrow when I've studied the race in more detail.

Perhaps you would like to offer your thoughts

He shouldn't be backed

is it a secret Lee?

what

why it shouldn't be backed