rab - I noticed how badly Harchibald ran today !

-

go back to the bottom of page 92 for the march suggestion !

tc

quote:

Originally posted by epiglotis:
Johnd:
In west Africa early European adventurers were puzzled by spoked circles of sticks that they occasionally encountered. It turned out that these were laid by chimps who then sat waiting for the fire to start. As Lasker suggests, the Barney/Fulham style of fitting a candidate selection to a VDW example (look at the 3:30, isn't there a PK? etc) lacks any kindling spark. It also relies on the assumption that VDW's examples cover all possible winners, Fulham's own observation that only 16% of races are won by VDW class/form horses in itself not only proves this untrue but suggests that most of the runners in a given race will have unknown winning capacities, in short, the "ape VDW" method of the experts can again be seen to hinder rather than help the selector.

Epi
Another little quote, which sums up the situation far more eloquently than I ever could:

"I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." -Tolstoy

johnd -

I assume that Tolstoy is refering to both Fullham and Guest,

-

as well as Chairman Mao, and Pol Pot !

tc

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

Didn't Tolstoy mean VDW? Maybe I missed the point of Johnd's post.

Noted TC,
You can take nothing away from HE with 3 runs and 3 wins,
But I'll stick with BI for now,

Good luck

130L Manic is worth a small interest as she could well be placed to win.

Private Be 320T will win.

Pirate Flagship 350T has been placed to win.

hi all just got back from my hols hope everyone had a good & successful xmas & i hope not 2 much has changed on here
wont be in much next cpl of days we have family round 2moro to celebrate xmas then on sat going to a new years eve party speak to you all soon plus have to catch up on what people have been posting
HAPPY NEW YEAR to you all
Larry

A small but interesting dutch in the 330L: Doctor Dennis, St Ivian, Young Mick, Global Achiever looks like 5/2 will be available on the exchanges.

A much more predictable dutch in the 300L and a resultingly small price: Mythical Charm, Stagnite, Cayman Breeze, High Rhythm, Park Star.

quote:

Originally posted by Tuppenycat:
johnd -

I assume that Tolstoy is refering to both Fullham and Guest,

tc

Tc
The reference applies to many who think the answers lay in a great complexity rather than a few simple truths.
The following link,(If it works? ) lifted from another forum, highlights much the same problem

quote:

http://www.cia.gov/csi/books/19104/art8.html

JIB -

Just to make an interesting Treble with your 2 -

Presenting Express in the 2.50.

-

Smack your hand, TC - VDW sez no fancy bets like trebles !

The prices of mine have colapsed and I didnt get on before they fell.

TC Well Done!

down to you now JIB

Now that had you worried JIB

-

Pity the Pirate is a NR in the last.

NR

Interesting -

With the NR - They treated the bet as a Double, and paid out just over 4/1

JIB,

Please to see you have at least started to read the literature, and as previously said by yourself they will be used to try discredit VDW.

The first arguement seems to be the first method suggested to narrow the field is some how not worthy because of the statment "but one of many ways". Doesn't VDW go on to show some of these other ways. He explains how the forecast isnt that important by taking horses from outside that area. He also gives examples where consistency isnt a governing factor. When explaining anything one has to start somewhere and that's just what he has done found a starting point. If he had said the ONLY way that would then be a different. matter.

Your next complaint is he didn't settle on the lowest rated consistent horse. Doesn't that show while he is looking for a consistent horse it doesn't mean just take the most consistent horse. While consistency is important it isn't any good by it's self. You then go on to show the need for the form books (whatever some may say). Of the five horses VDW rated there are not two winners of their last race there is only one. It is excusable as not having the form books how where you to know. With the f/books you could see the figures given beside the five horses can't be their c/rating or if they are VDW can't even add up as 4 out of the 5 are incorrect.

Your last point about the c/rating being a x check to confirm his form reading in a way is feasible but the rating isn't the important factor. To be the selection with this method it is one of many factor all of which need to be in place. Yes the horse must be consistent but that isn't the main reason for backing it. How/why do you think the selection is found using " traditional " form reading. VDW clearly states the selection is found using his ratings it was joint top on one method and just top on the other. There are 4/5 different form lines to my mind none making the selection a stand out bet. He also didn't use the forecast as a guide as Beacon Light was the clear forecast favourite at evens. It has already been shown that the first two in the forecast produce approximately 50% of the winners.

Be Lucky

Mtoto - nice to see you back in your "True Home"

quote:

VDW clearly states the selection is found using his ratings it was joint top on one method and just top on the other.

-

Ratings, - ignored by the rest of the "High Priests" !!

-

What were they , and how did he use them ??

-

"MY" selection today used "ratings" - and as JIB stated, most of the rest was just there to re-enforce what they told me .

-

Join in again, and give us all - the benifit of your experience .

-

tc

Mtoto,

Yes its good to see you back.

As regards your reply to my post first let me say that I assumed that both Beacon Light and Mr Kildaire had wlto because what pass as their CRs are only 3 each. VDW states that as Mr Kildaire had only two figs he added on the last one again, surely then both horses must have wlto?

If those numbers after each horses' name are not the CRs then something v funny is going on as the table is immediately preceded by the injunction to add up the last three form figs
and immediately followed by the explanation of Mr Kildaires' rating. If as you say the form books give lie to the presumed CR then I would be even more wary of the CR.

As for consistency in itself, we differ because you look upon it from the outside, I have searched for it from within. To you it exists because you can see common traits amongst winners. To me it doesnt exist because it is only disguised coincidence.

However for all our differences we both know that in itself it decides nothing, as it is only as a statistic that it contributes to the chances of winner finding rather than some secret function of a horses physiology. If you can accept that it functions principally as a statistic (and only occasionally as an indication of a horses' robust psychology) then our arguments are only generated by our inarticulate ability to express ourselves.

And if indeed you see Consistency as principally a statistical tool and VDW did the same then the greater lesson to be derived from this exercise is about the use of statistics to gain the winning strip not least because consistency is only "one of many" such devices.

For those of you with promiscuous VDW tastes I would like to explain that a 'tob' is also a v rude Brasilian word for an arsehole.

Prime Contender 1220L is nailed and bolted (2/1 taken).