Johd
Le passed by, Another for the bin.

Hope you enjoy the malt!!

Can one ask a question on this thread?
What did VDW say with regards to days las run?

Warrington

It didn't seem to play a vital part in VDW's evaluations - he gave examples such as Battlement, where it was seen as a bet and it was having its first outing of the season. He does mention "days since last run" as a factor in letter 24 of The Golden Years - entitled "Speed Is No Use Without Form", where he suggests "another of many ways to reduce the field". Stage 2 of the process he outlines is to "select in days, the five most recent runs" - not strictly days since last run I know.

In short it doesn't seem to be a major factor, and it would seem that it would fall under the category of taking the trainer on trust, if the horse is genuinely placed to win (why would the trainer place it to win if he felt it wasn't ready to go). I think that VDW would be more interested in analysing why a horse has been given a break etc. - is it coming back from injury? Does it go best after being freshened up? What is the real target?

As usual for VDW its all as clear as very thick mud!!

Hope this of some help to you anyway.

As a by the way - I'm no expert by any stretch of imagination, I've got all the VDW booklets and remain interested, and would love to think that it really does work, but am now sceptical as to how achievable it really is.

At the time I was a bit annoyed with JIB (sorry JIB) etc for keep having a go at Guest & co. But as time has gone on I really do take his point about the 80% thread - it was spectacular in highlighting that there was no-one consistently picking winners - surely the whole point behind VDW.

I also see the same things happening again on the other VDW board - the "these are the ones to look at today" scenario, and when they win they were there to be "hammered", and if they don't win they "were left".

I really do get the feeling (and hope) that Lee might be the exception to the above. Personally I haven't got the time or stamina do what Lee is saying is necessary to succeed the VDW way - I've got the booklets, will keep getting them out from time to time, and will hope that a ha'penny drops (have now accepted that it won't be a full penny) - just keeping my head above water betting wise (via a VDW like method) would do for me.

Well that's filled half an hour or so - got that off my chest - work here I come.

Good question Warrington.

I'll start the ball rolling, though I am hardly apt to set the page alight with my novice status.

I quote from p13 of "The Golden Years of VDW" where a letter from Forensis Strepitus of Herne Bay, printed 13 April 1978, made a reference in respect of this.

"In a generalised sense, form figures can be misleading, for they can indicate improving or declining form, so further data is required to support form figures, such as whether the last outing was RECENT form, race distance, state of going, speed figure, and the number of runners, etc"

VDW seems to address this in his letter printed 1 June 1978:

"METHODMAKER comments on my contribution with the suggestion that I appear to accept previous form figures without question ....He omitted to mention that I stated, with regards to the numerical picture; 'This can be very illuminating and show, SUBJECT TO OTHER CONSIDERATIONS, the good betting propositions'"

Then in a letter printed on 23 August 1979, VDW shows a way to reduce the field which specifically refers to recent runs. He uses the "Cobnut Selling Handicap 3-Y-O" at Newmarket. 2 August 1979 as an example. VDW gave 3 stages in which to reduce the field:

"Stage one. From the last two placings of each horse, mark all those with Form figures 1 to 4

Stage two.Select in days, the five most recent runs

Stage three. Select from above the three most consistent by adding together the last three placings of the respective horses."

No doubt, those with more knowledge of VDW, will be able to give more appropriate examples.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Trojan,

Well done Pitmatic - we must have been typing at the same time - my cinnamon whirl and coffee slowed me down somewhat.

Yes, that is an interesting question.

I'm no expert, but in the Roushayd example VDW states that recent form is more reliable, but that with first runs you do have to note what each horse has previously done in other years. Part of the answer to time away from the course may be to do with VDW's suggestion that he knew when a horse was poised and ready to win. It seems logical when a horse is ready to win that you would strike while the iron was hot. If a horse was missing suitable engagements for no apparent reason it could be due to a setback. Some horses run well after a break, some may need a couple of recent runs to get them ready. As these methods seem to be about logical deduction, I feel this must have been factored in somewhere.

Pitmatic,

Just to point out Battlement wasn't having his first run of the season. In fact, the fact that he was fit may have been the deciding factor in him being the selection over Move Off top on ability. Move Off had won the race the year before so could perform well when fresh, but he had also missed several months from the end of the previous season. Injury?

It is little things like this that show why the old form books are important. Without them how do we know what else was consistent in the race, fit. in or out of form, etc. That said form books don't tell the whole story and the racing papers of the time are also a big help.

Days since a run doesn't seem to be a big factor as many/some of his selections were first time out. I do think it was something he did keep an eye on when making his final decision, but it was one of many things.

Be Lucky

VDW suggested on a couple of occasions that ˜days since last run' was as good as any way to narrow down the field. When narrowing down the Cobnut Selling Handicap he suggested marking off the five most recent runs from the field. He also put forward a very simple method that entailed selecting the 3 horses from the first 5 in the live betting (live show), which had been off the course for the shortest time.

However, this is just another simple positive statistical based factor that he used to help narrow down the field, nothing more, nothing less.

In order to be a selection the horse in question didn't have to be amongst the 3 most consistent, neither have the highest ability rating, or have recorded an improved speed figure last time out in higher class etc; nor was there a requirement for the horse to have run a certain number of days ago!

well

all that leaves i suppose

is its price lto !

Warrington
As the above posts imply, there is no hard and fast rule on days since a previous run.
However VDW did give us guidelines, not all of them based on arithmetic.
You may find the following of some use in this respect.
In Racing in my System, he advised us "If you want to know where the bus is going, ask the driver" and went on to say:
"A little earlier I suggested that the majority of horses were not actually out to win, but being prepared to win.Which are which, can be deduced by knowledge of techniques used to bring horses to the boil and the way they are being placed"
I could point to numerous recent examples of why this should be paramount, but rather than risk being accused of aftertiming, I will give 2 examples from my own recent posts.
In the Aon chase, Celestial Gold followed up his Hennessey victory by an 11 week rest, and Strong Flow, another Hennessey winner, was having only his second start since returning from injury. I would suggest that both ran in this 29k race with more than one eye on the future, and that, in a truly run 3m, with both horses fully tuned, Farmer Jack wouldn't see them for dust.
Similarly with Hardy Eustace, he has had 3 races this season, none of them in suitable circumstances, and his trainer freely admits that he won't be 100% until Cheltenham.
Let those that wish to play about with the figures, unless,IMO, this vital part of VDW is taken on board, they will always fall short of the full truth.

Interesting point, johnD.

Isn't this one of JIB's specialist areas?

Ask a simple question and what do you get. Nowt concrete.
So as is usual yes maybe perhaps, but that is racing.
Me stick to Max, Cabbie, Cyber and a few more that seem to have a positive mind.
Will think of another some time.

That was a very good post Johnd. Thanks.

Warrington - if you want something concrete, stick to 28 days. It serves me well.

BlackCat

Hi Eric

Warrington
In the article previous to the one above, VDW also wrote: "Most punters haven't a clue what's going on, but those who know the game can't be fooled so easily".
With all due respect, 'most punters' still don't recognise what is staring them in the face, and as a consequence, carry on with their search for the 'infallible system?', many VDW'ers amongst them.

The great trouble with vdwology is that it appeals to desperate get rich quick losers who think there is some magic formula to finding winners.

Time after endless time this and other threads have demonstrated that the reasons given after the race for horse A winning have absolutely no relevance, not even getting close, when applied to a forthcoming race and identifying horse B.

Consistancy, recent good form, do provide winners but the layers have known that since Godolphin was a foal.

I think you have to watch the trainer and try and see if the horse is coming to hand, I use sire stats, trainer/course stats, time since a win and above all try to get a realistic view of the horses true class.


VDW was right about class but the ability rating is trash and the consistancy rating the equiovalent of all those prisoners walking round that pillar in Midnight Express!

But above all get real people! There is no golden key!

Phi was just one of my leg-pulls

Me thinks that the answer is that no one knows the answer. Least of all VDW as is shown by the replies all hedged like a lawyer?
But thanks just trying to ginger up the board.

You? It was YOU!!!! lol

I think trainers have far to many different methods and ideas for such a key to exist,
I could go on about jockeys,different going,fallers etc but the list would be endless on things that stop a horse winning